journalists like Russert needed
By Jeremy Boyer
More than a year ago, a group of liberal members of Congress, including New York's own Maurice Hinchey, held a press conference to present their analysis that Sunday television talk shows were favoring conservative voices.
I came across a story on that event on the Web site politico.com, a well-visited online source of news and opinion related to the workings of Washington politics. I had been searching for information about the late Tim Russert, the longtime host of NBC's “Meet the Press.”
“Meet the Press” was one of the programs cited by the lawmakers for being unfair to liberals. What struck me most, however, was the long list of reader comments posted below the story.
Many of the opinions expressed centered in on Russert, and they could not have been more divided. Liberals were blasting him for being too nice to the Bush Administration. Conservatives said he was an obvious liberal (he worked for Democratic elected officials before going into journalism, you know).
To me, the debate spoke volumes about Russert's impact. First of all, he was probably the most named of the Sunday interviewers, which tells you that he certainly drew an audience. But the blasting he took from both the left and right spoke to some qualities that for Russert, were more than a marketing slogan - he truly worked to be fair and balanced.
His “Meet the Press” interviews stood out because he wasn't afraid to ask tough questions, but also because he gave the interview subject time to answer the questions. Too often these days, political TV hosts like to cut people off. They like to ask long questions aimed more at making themselves sound smart or clever than at getting actual information.
For Russert, the goal was always to give the viewer as much of a complete story as possible.
Sadly, we're seeing fewer Washington journalists like Russert these days. The formula now for so many in the media is to pick a side (i.e. pick an audience). This one is the favorite of liberals. That one is loved by conservatives.
I'm afraid many media organizations are looking at the idea of being truly balanced as bad for business. If you anger people on both ends of the political spectrum, you risk losing everyone.
My hope stems from the reaction to Russert's death. It wasn't surprising to hear all the accolades he's received over the past week, but I didn't expect the volume of discussion about his impact.
Maybe that will convince some TV executives that there is still a market for Russert-style journalism.
Executive editor Jeremy Boyer's columns can be reached at
253-5311 ext. 231 or jeremy.boyer@lee.net
More than a year ago, a group of liberal members of Congress, including New York's own Maurice Hinchey, held a press conference to present their analysis that Sunday television talk shows were favoring conservative voices.
I came across a story on that event on the Web site politico.com, a well-visited online source of news and opinion related to the workings of Washington politics. I had been searching for information about the late Tim Russert, the longtime host of NBC's “Meet the Press.”
“Meet the Press” was one of the programs cited by the lawmakers for being unfair to liberals. What struck me most, however, was the long list of reader comments posted below the story.
Many of the opinions expressed centered in on Russert, and they could not have been more divided. Liberals were blasting him for being too nice to the Bush Administration. Conservatives said he was an obvious liberal (he worked for Democratic elected officials before going into journalism, you know).
To me, the debate spoke volumes about Russert's impact. First of all, he was probably the most named of the Sunday interviewers, which tells you that he certainly drew an audience. But the blasting he took from both the left and right spoke to some qualities that for Russert, were more than a marketing slogan - he truly worked to be fair and balanced.
His “Meet the Press” interviews stood out because he wasn't afraid to ask tough questions, but also because he gave the interview subject time to answer the questions. Too often these days, political TV hosts like to cut people off. They like to ask long questions aimed more at making themselves sound smart or clever than at getting actual information.
For Russert, the goal was always to give the viewer as much of a complete story as possible.
Sadly, we're seeing fewer Washington journalists like Russert these days. The formula now for so many in the media is to pick a side (i.e. pick an audience). This one is the favorite of liberals. That one is loved by conservatives.
I'm afraid many media organizations are looking at the idea of being truly balanced as bad for business. If you anger people on both ends of the political spectrum, you risk losing everyone.
My hope stems from the reaction to Russert's death. It wasn't surprising to hear all the accolades he's received over the past week, but I didn't expect the volume of discussion about his impact.
Maybe that will convince some TV executives that there is still a market for Russert-style journalism.
Executive editor Jeremy Boyer's columns can be reached at
253-5311 ext. 231 or jeremy.boyer@lee.net
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are No comments posted.