 |
|
|
|
| Tim Russert Was A Failure As A Journalist |
| When a person dies, there is a tendency to laud his or her achievements, no matter how meagre they were. We are seeing that currently with Tim Russert, who died yesterday. But the truth is that Russert was a mediocre journalist who had a vitally important duty to perform at a critical moment in history. Unfortunately, he wasn't up to the task. On important stories, like 9/11, Iraqi WMD and the stolen election of 2004, Russert proved he was the wrong man for the job, preferring safe sentimentality and subject-friendly interviews to serious journalistic investigation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure that I would use the word "failure" to describe Tim Russert's work, but I do think
that he was a mediocre journalist and I am disturbed by the media's propensity for adoration and
exaggeration, whenever a prominent public figure dies. Most of the coverage on Russert's work and
life focused on truly elusive and vague statements, about how happy he was, how much he enjoyed his
work and his family and how whenever any of his co-workers saw him, he was always smiling. It is
perfectly fine to mention all of this, but would it not be more appropriate in an eulogy given by
friends or family at his memorial service? Guests on shows like Larry King Live tend to eulogize
following the death of any prominent individual. I would much prefer to see television personalities
discuss his contribution to US journalism instead.
I agree that Russert was a pleasant journalist over all, in that he usually went out of his way to
make his guest feel relatively comfortable, even when he/she was engulfed by controversy. Yet I
often felt that he did not ask some of the most obvious questions, or did not pursue them with
adequate vigour when as a journalist he would have been called to expose the failings or at least
the shortcomings of elected officials. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If he ever had any credibility, he threw it away after 2001, being a willing lapdog to the fascist
regime instead of a watchdog guarding the public. He threw the biggest softball questions at the
most powerful figures in Washington, then said, "I should have done that better."
A feeble excuse does not excuse a lousy effort. A real journalist would ask tough questions
to begin with. A real journalist would have gone after those people a second time and asked tough
questions.
The only time he asked tough questions was when opponents of the regime were on the show, and those
were not proper questions, they were loaded to make the interviewee look bad.
Any proper and worthwhile journalist knew the invasion of Afghanistan was under false pretenses, and
the occupation of Iraq was to steal oil. But Russert, like most yellow-backed yellow "journalists"
in the US, beat the war drums and supported the invasions without question.
Instead, Russert the Potato Head asked fluff questions and people pretended he was doing
"journalism". He may have died on Friday, but his career and worth died in 2001.
As for the question of "good taste" that whiners will inevitably ask (we can already see that in
the "against" side), is silence over complicity in an illegal war and a million innocent
civilians dead "good taste"? Is the media ignoring the deaths of seven US soldiers (at
least) in two days after Russert's death "good taste"?
A dead person should not be immune from factual examination of their actions, especially those who
have participated in and facilitated a series of war crimes and crimes against humanity. |
| |
 K9  15 Jun 2008 07:30
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
He was a player/coach. He ran the show on nbc and played the game asking the tough questions most
of those bozos will never do, especially the guys on CNN. I applaud him. No one never knew who he
supported. Lou Dobbs on the other hand. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Tim Russert was a great journalist. He deserves credit for the great things he did, and starting
debates like this is not the answer. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Granted, some of Tim Russert's stories may have been a little schmultzy. But that should not
categorize him as a Failure. A "serious" journalist reports on what they feel the people need to
hear. If, during times of great strife, he chose (or was handed) stories of a more light-hearted
nature, he carried his interviews with grace and authority. He had, for memory, taken on difficult
questions/topics as well. When everyone is "up in arms" over a topic and every other journalist is
speaking or writing on the topic, sometimes a break can be refreshing. Do you remember the CONSTANT
news stories out of Iraq? It was good that we had excellent coverage of the things going on over
there. But, after weeks and weeks of "news" on old stories, I needed to shut off the box for a
while. Tim Russert, not only took on some tough interviews, but also gave us refreshing renewal
every once in a while. His length of career alone should I've testament to his successful career. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If people in the business thought what you thought then why was he still with work???
People loved him, I didn't know his name but remembered his face. For that to be true, he must have
held a job for quite some time because I don't watch a lot of TV. In my opinion he was as good as
any other. I don't know enough about his job or that profession to be a fair judge though.
I enjoy reading your posts Hidell but this one could have waited a week or two couldn't it? I just
think it's disrespecting him to have our negative opinions out so soon. You didn't mean to be
disrespectful - I'm guessing that you just weren't thinking. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 For and Against Recent Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sign In
