NEW YORK, NY - SEPTEMBER 07: Matt Lauer looks on as democratic presidential nominee former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during the NBC News Commander-in-Chief Forum on September 7, 2016 in New York City. Hillary Clinton and republican presidential nominee Donald Trump are participating in the NBC News Commander-in-Chief Forum. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Critics from all over the political spectrum and many journalists blasted the "Today" show host for being out of his element during the broadcast.
Lauer was criticized for his questions, his lack of follow-ups and not fact-checking either candidate, among other things.
Clinton supporters were livid that he spent a long time asking her about her emails and didn't challenge Trump when the Republican nominee falsely that claimed he opposed the Iraq war.
Numerous news organizations, including BuzzFeed and PolitiFact, have reported that Trump did support the Iraq war in 2002.
Trump has said that he was against invading Iraq from the beginning, citing an Esquire article that was published the year after the war began.
"How can someone like (Matt Lauer) not set the record straight on Trump's bogus claim of being against the war in Iraq?" wrote Washington Post's fact checker Glenn Kessler.
"I hate media-on-media violence, but Trump's support for the invasion of Iraq has been rather well documented. No Lauer follow-up?" Yahoo News' Olivier Knox tweeted.
While Trump supporters claimed that Lauer disrespected their candidate, other viewers said the host repeatedly interrupted Clinton and never once interrupted Trump.
New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote that the forum was "an embarrassment to journalism."
As The New York Times pointed out, other moderators could run into similar issues when the formal presidential debates begin later this month, especially with Trump.
"Mr. Trump, with his Houdini-like ability to squirm out of direct answers, is a particularly tough subject for interviewers, who will be forced to determine on the fly when to interrupt with a prime-time fact check," wrote The New York Times' Michael M. Grynbaum.