Posted on 04/05/2006 11:38:40 AM PDT by abb
Readers across the country woke up this morning to prominently placed stories in the Washington Post, New York Times, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, Philadelphia Inquirer and New York Daily News, among others, announcing the “breaking” news -- yet again -- that Katie Couric is likely to leave NBC's Today in order to take the news anchor job at CBS.
But that's not really news. For the past several weeks, every move, every offer, every sneeze by any of the parties involved has been leaked (usually anonymously) to the press, which has chronicled the story with the sort of gusto generally reserved only for missing white women and potentially pregnant celebrities.
It's difficult to pick out one specific story from the avalanche of coverage of the past few weeks, as, frankly, reading the same thing over and over has given us a bad case of Couric fatigue. (For the cookie-cutter latest about the possible move, just randomly pick a link from Romenesko's list on the issue today -- they're basically identical, anyway.) Each piece rounds up the same tired facts: Couric joined the Today show in 1991, she's under contract to NBC though the end of May, her current deal bars her from formal talks with another network until the beginning of that month but NBC execs have decided to allow her representatives to discuss offers from possible suitors, anyway. There's no deal yet, but CBS seems to be leading the sweepstakes; Couric would replace Bob Schieffer, who replaced Dan Rather in March 2005 as anchor of the network's evening newscast. Toss in the speculation that Meredith Vieira, co-host of ABC's The View, has reportedly been offered Couric's slot on Today should she resign, and you have the ingredients that make up this particular media spectacle.
Sure, there's some sort of story here; there are, after all, about 25 million people watching one of the network news broadcasts every night. But how much navel-gazing is enough? Being a media monitor, we understand the fun -- and occasional value -- there is in exercises like this, but the constant drumbeat of Couric non-news, rumor and speculation has officially entered the realm of the absurd. The story hasn't moved forward much in weeks, yet critics and media writers continue to fill airtime and column inches war-gaming the possible scenarios.
Let's face it: The news is the news, whether it's Brian Williams, Bob Schieffer or Katie Couric reading from the teleprompter to those lucky souls who somehow manage to make it home from work early enough to catch the 6:30 p.m. news. Let's not forget that anchors aren't generally the grunts out in the field breaking stories and banging on doors trying to get the big scoop -- that's what the reporters on their staffs are for. The job of the anchor is to figure out which story should get air time, and which shouldn't. You could put just about any charismatic talking head with some modicum of news sense in the chair and let them follow the teleprompter's instructions, and people would tune in.
We're sure Couric would do a fine job as CBS' news anchor, and would mix the hard news with those feel-good stories from the heartland, pieces about “special” kids, hype about the latest health scare and the rest of the lot that pays the electric bills for the network news divisions. CBS would probably even get a ratings bump out of the deal.
But we can't shake the feeling that all of this really matters only to the media writers who love to speculate about these things and the editors who employ them.
Ummm, except the writer said she'd do a fine job, and that See BS will get a ratings bump. These are the dying gasps of CBS News - they know Katie as a rabid partisan and are trying to cling to the leftist market share. Like leftists, their numbers are dwindling. They could use some management talent over there at CBS.
Methinks there exists the possiblity that Moonves may just want a new girlfriend....
So let me see if I got this straight: The MSM thinks the fact that a fawning, leftist, bloviating fool leaving a job at one leftist "news" outlet and moving to another where she will continue to be a fawning, leftist, bloviating fool is newsworthy, is that it!!??
Wow!! I'm not missing much by not watching any of this crapola on TV, am I?
From what I have seen of Catie, she doesn't seem to be very bright.
IMO CBS just tossed a lot of money down the toilet. They should have thrown Katie in too.
Since when was not being too bright a disqualifier for a news anchor?
Hey, he's on to something.. The Today Show should pick up Britney Spears or, maybe Paris Hilton.
Then she's going to lead CBS news even lower in the ratings than the depths Rather plumbed.
She's shrill, uninformed and bitchy. Like Rather, only a chick.
LOL! Good point.
Now CBS can enjoy her awkward flirting during interviews. Lucky them!
True, but she knows how to get what she wants. Katie ran Deborah Norville down like Robert Mitchum runnin' from revenuers to get the job in the first place. (While Deborah was on maternity leave.)
Rosie O'Donnell to host NBC's evening news broadcast...
Oprah says "no" to ABC.
Larry King offers to wear lipstick if he can keep his time slot.
< /sarc >
Is that show still on?
She'll have good insight into the workings of Queen Hillary's mind.
I can't wait to see her for the 2008 Presidential Election coverage - you thought Dan Rather was bad!!
Has her comp package been revealed?
I hope she learns some of those down home folksy saying that SeeBS viewers have grown to expect.
"Teetotally meetmortally!" - Dan Rather 2004.
I thought Laura Ingraham's fiance bolted when he learned she had cancer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.