Posted on 04/15/2006 5:27:53 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
April 15, 2006
Different day, different Today show anchor, different attitude. As we documented here yesterday, when Katie Couric hosted a segment on the matter of the retired generals calling for Donald Rumsfeld's ouster, she chose as her guest one of the generals calling for Rumsfeld's head. Her most notable contributions to the discussion were to invite her guest to take a shot at Pres. Bush as long as he was at it, and to ask why he didn't come out sooner with his criticism so he could have 'shaped public opinion far earlier.'
This morning it was Lester Holt's turn in the Today show host seat. Now, it might just be in the normal course of the news cycle that his guest was a former general who is opposed to Rumsfeld's departure. But there was no mistaking Holt's even-handed treatment of the issues, in stark contrast with Couric's cheerleading for the Rumsfeld-must-go crowd.
Holt set the tone with his introduction of retired U.S. Army general and an NBC analyst Wayne Downing: "To be clear from the outset he is not one of those generals calling for Rumsfeld's resignation."
Holt began with a two-part question. The first part put the fundamental issue in neutral terms, the second, interestingly, questioned the appropriateness of the generals' actions:
"Is the criticism of Rumsfeld valid, and is it appropriate for these retired flag-ranked officers to be calling for his resignation?"
Downing began by acknowledging "we all know mistakes were made after we started this war. I think there's no doubt about that and certainly that's something that retired guys and active duty guys talk about."
But then: "the second question, though, is a key thing. Is it appropriate to raise these issues in a public form by retired generals? I don't think it is. My comment to these generals is 'at ease'. At ease means, let's shut up, let's be quiet. This thing is serving no purpose. You have a stated thing calling for Rumsfeld to resign, that's not the issue. I mean, they know that Secretary Rumsfeld is not going to resign. He's not a quitter. They also know that this president is not going to fire him because that's not the president's style. He's intensely loyal to those who served him and who serve him like Rumsfeld does. The issues are other things."
Holt did press the matter in these terms: "Let's talk about those issues, though, because we know there have been missteps in this war, and many people would think, here are some officers who are directly involved in the war. Shouldn't we be valuing their input? Do they not bring something to the table that you may not hear in the usual partisan channels?"
Downing: "Lester, this is not the forum, the public press is not the forum because they know what they have called for is not going to happen."
Downing then made his most intriguing comments, implying that a number of the Rumsfeld critics have ulterior motives:
"One of these guys is writing a book. One or more of them have political aspirations. One of them has had his favorite program, the program that he worked on for the last three or four years while he was in the military, skewered by Secretary Rumsfeld. Others were not promoted for one reason or another."
Rather than attacking Downing's allegations, Holt recapitulated them: "So you're saying they could have axes to grind?"
Holt later offered up on his own a theory suggesting that the generals' criticism might have been motivated by something other than disagreement with Rumsfeld's military tactics: "General . . when Secretary Rumsfeld came into office as Defense Secretary, he came in forcing a new culture essentially saying the Cold War is over. We need a leaner, meaner, more lethal force. He brought that to Afghanistan. He brought that to Iraq with not the success that perhaps not the success that he expected. Is part of what we're seeing perhaps a sense of toes that were stepped on and a sense of folks who did not want to see those cultural shifts?"
Downing: "Well, not necessarily with these particular six generals. I think there are others that felt that way and there is some resistance to Secretary Rumsfeld because he has forced people to change and people don't want to change. I think it's very appropriate."
Concluded Downing: "He's done a lot of things right. There have been mistakes, Lester, but this whole thing of bringing this into a public forum, putting it all over the press, it serves the military profession not well nor do I think it serves the country well."
Holt's performance this morning was typical of his standards of down-the-middle journalism that others at Today and NBC would do well to emulate.
Today Show/NewsBusters ping.
Today Show/NewsBusters ping.
Nice report; when will they fire Holt? His even handedness is unacceptable by the NBC management....
Katie is doing just fine shilling for the left. If you want to go far in this business, you must be a complete leftist whore.
My pleasure - thanks for your interest and welcome to the list.
And that semblance of objective interviewing is why someone like Lester does not qualify as a weekday anchor when people are actually watching the Today show.
We can't have it both ways folks.
I can hardly believe this actually aired. Thanks for helping by posting.
For once, it was my real-not-twisted pleasure to post something about the Today show!
WTG Lester. Reading the interview was refreshing. When the press is so clearly biased (as with Ms. Couric) I tend to discount any critisism because the bias is so clear. This is dangerous- even with policies I support and believe in- there is always room to improve and learn. Without reasonable critisism that process can't happen.
IF there were more interviews like this both sides might find themselves educated and informed rather than threatening to throw the tv out the window.
I don't know where Lester Holt stands politically. It's to his credit that I can say that. I don't know how he gets away with it at that network, except that he's so good in all the other aspects of the job too. Maybe he's a lib off the air but has the ability to display fairness when on the job (i.e. "professional").
LOL...I had to look twice. Thought it might be scrappleface!
Wayne Downing gives greater context by examining the possible motives of those calling for Rumsfeld's head.
Yet, he does not come close to providing the context given by a typical FreeRepublic thread on these contradictory, Monday morning Generalizers.
Thanks for witnessing Main Stream Propaganda's obituary.
Its becoming more clear each and every day that the MSM now has to "Create" news rather than just report....
Great job bringing us the Today info. Last night I worked and heard many of the patient's TVs on CNN. It was none stop get Rummy analysis. The lies were maddening. But, to most of those who watch, this was the truth. The constant comparisons to McNamara from Johnson's Vietnam is all they heard.
What you are saying may very well have merit, but the thread is basically about a fair interview by a member of the MSM. The distinction being that the MSM claims to be "unbiased", but clearly shows a strong liberal bias. Whereas FR is clearly a conservative site and does not claim otherwise.
I just sent Lester an e-mail commending his interview.
Excellent!
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.