Raleigh Observer comments on lack of time for Edwards in CNN debate...

[AP]

Two issues this article doesn't address are (1) the relative amounts of time the candidates receive, and (2) what I believe is the media's intention to frame the debates as attacks on certain candidates, and that they implicitly reward attacking by giving the people who attacked time to air their greivances from the previous week at the debates.

http://www.newsobserver.com/edwards/coverage/story/2958054p-2712572c.html

Viewers recently got yet another chance to tune in to a Democratic debate and assess whether Sen. John Edwards has what it takes to lead the free world -- unless they made some poorly timed trips to the refrigerator. During CNN's hour-and-a-half broadcast from Phoenix on Oct. 9, Edwards appeared on screen for a grand total of eight minutes. And though he delivered what aides considered his strongest performance to date, very little of what Edwards said could be found in newspaper reports the next day.
...
The candidates have been hampered both by the field's size -- answers are often limited to a minute or less to give everyone a chance -- and by news coverage that focuses on one-liners and the latest ambushes of the front-runners.

The main story line that emerged from the Phoenix debate, for example, was the number of candidates ganging up on retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark for seemingly inconsistent statements on Iraq and his past praise of Republican presidents. A poll released earlier that day showed Clark to be the most popular of the Democratic candidates nationally.
...
"What you need to do is have a line or quip or insight that's so striking or original or entertaining that it's going to leave a lasting impression -- or you have to attack," Barnett said. "When I'm doing these preps, I spend an enormous amount of time working on the quotable quotes. Most debates are remembered only for those things."