Posted on 09/12/2008 1:03:36 PM PDT by MindBender26
The Rumblings In The Jungle – Journalists Turn On Charlie Gibson.
The phone lines are again rumbling in New York and Washington. The overriding question: Et Tu, Charlie?
I have spoken with a number of old TV journalist friends in last 12 hours. The haze of amazement hanging over the network newsroom is palatable. It’s as if old truths have been proven wrong, old friends abandoned their dearest comrades, and we all awakened up to find out that 2 + 2 really does equals 7.
Charlie Gibson’s (well, he has been “Charlie” for years, but since he apparently is not the man we all thought we knew, perhaps we should drop the familiarity.)
Let’s start again.
Charles Gibson’s interview of Sarah Palin last night was an embarrassment to ABC, journalism in general, television news in particular, and most importantly, to Mr. Gibson himself. It was not an interview. It was a debate, a sucker-punch, loaded debate where one side got to choose the questions, interrupt the other side, and then in conclusion, score the debate and give the audience their slanted interpretation of what it all meant.
The supposed interview was nothing more than a coast-to-coast, satellite-fed game of “gotcha.” ABC could have provided a valuable service to voters. Ms Palin is a newcomer to the national political scene and a realistic attempt to learn her views on important issues would have been very valuable. But last night there was little attempt to elicit Ms Palin’s beliefs on the problems of our time. The “interview” was dominated by loaded questions and sneers of disbelief whenever the Governor dared to give an answer not blessed by the New York-Washington liberal news cabal. Mr. Gibson acted more like a district attorney cross-examining a hostile witness than, dare I use the term, a “journalist” who understood America wanted to hear about Governor Palin’s positions, not his.
A polite note to Mr. Gibson: This was supposed to be an interview, not “Law and Order,” or, as it turned out, “Low and Disorderly.”
Witnesses in the network newsrooms say the reaction to the interview’s airing was akin to the televised reading of the O.J. Simpson verdict. Back then, many African-Americans cheered, while many Whites shook their heads in disbelief.
Last night, the ever-so-hip young producers and news writers, (the ones fresh from the Ivy League thought factories,) cheered; Good Old Mr. Gibson was putting her in her place! How dare this…. this…. this small state governor…. a Republican at that…. how could she ever think she is good enough to be on a national ticket! How could she ever hope to compete against the likes of such Washington Power Moguls such as Obama, Biden, and Clinton, (either Clinton, take your pick.)
Ms Palin, that Governor, that hunter, that right-to-life that weirdo, (psssst… did you know her daughter is pregnant,) well, she had the gall to try for national office without the approval of the national news media…. or as they see themselves…. the People Who Matter.
At ABC, the adolescent smirks ran as high as Sarah Palin’s approval ratings in Alaska.
But there were some who refused to join the chorus. The old guys, (yes, most were guys back then,) the guys who remember how it was years ago were upset and disappointed. These are the ones who remember when facts counted, not the reporter’s opinion.
You see, back about 50 years ago, many reporters were liberals, but a different kind of liberal. Many would take great pains to remove any liberal bias from their stories. The few conservatives, well, we too would ensure our story cut it down the middle, without conservative or liberal bias. We had all learned that in Washington there is plenty of blame, inefficiency, graft and crime to go around. You don’t have to just single out one side of the political scale. The idea was to craft your story so the reader, listener or viewer couldn’t tell which side of the political spectrum you were on. As one of the old Morrow Gang said, “I try to balance my pieces so I get an equal amount of derogatory mail from both sides. When the raving lunatic hate mail is split evenly between the liberals and conservatives, I know I am going a good job.”
That’s all changed now. Back when I started in TV, we would joke that the term “Investigative Journalist” was redundant; that all journalists were expected to be able to conduct a fair and impartial investigation, and we were expected to do so on a regular basis.
Today, it’s all “advocacy journalism.” Reporters think their stories shouldn’t just give viewers the facts. They take steps to color their pieces so viewers act in a certain way. Is the typical reporter now willing to slant a story to help their cause or candidate? Absolutely. If fact, if their story fails to promote their beliefs over others, they see it as a failure.
Which brings us all back to Charl….. make that Mr. Gibson. According to the old rules, Mr. Gibson should have asked the questions, waited for the answers, then let us, the Great Unwashed make up our minds as to who is best qualified. But now we now all know that there is no doubt; Ms. Palin is unqualified. Charles Gibson’s sneer says so.
Up until last night, Charlie Gibson was thought of as the “nicest guy in television.” Tonight, the quiet feelings among some are “Charlie, we hardly knew ya.”
Many of the older guys are not so much angry as they are disappointed. One from CBS was tempted to send Mr. Gibson an e-mail that began, “Dear Dan,”
The old Charlie Gibson was a great guy. We will miss him.
Gibson is a biased jackass. Sarah is qualified to be President. She earned it. Gibson is not qualified to be a reporter. He is where he is as part of a quota system (affirmative action) or political correctness, not because of any great talent.
“Goodbye Charlie”
Charlie Gibson, once a journalist , now a political hack............
Now there is an idea!
(forward him the full Lincoln/God quote)
It immediately tells readers they will be practicing “advocacy journalism” and deteriorates from there.
That was nice. What is the source?
Well written. You may be getting older but haven’t lost the skills.
Thought of freelancing for WSJ or similar publication?
they are all competitors. When they play Barack Obama’s softball questions to Sarah’s . backstroke Charlie too bad she gave you ratings.
I watched him years ago when he played second fiddle to Joan Lunden.
She's not running for that job though. The thought is she would step in in the event of an incapacitation of the POTUS. In reality she is a ticket balancing agent who a nominee will pick to score votes from a constituency or state. Happens all the time.
I wouldn't vote for her as POTUS with her current resume. If she had 1.5-2 terms as governor under her belt then I would most certainly consider her. Her positions on issues work for me but I would like to see more from her. I don't buy the foreign policy BS. I want a proven executive in the job because that's what POTUS is, the ultimate CEO job.
And didn’t you all like the artifice of Charlie wearing his glasses Ben Franklin style while wiggling his feet in annoyance? What an arrogant, condescending little prig!
They started out by trashing Bush and calling him a murderer and railing about how many billions of dollars were being wasted in Iraq. They would have none of my defenses of him and said he was the sorriest excuse for a Christian they had ever seen.
Then, the conversation started to get interesting. They both told me how badly they wanted Hillary! to win this time and how disappointed they were with her loss. Finally, they told me how much they love Sarah Palin -- so much so, that they will now vote for John McCain.
They were also outraged at the way Gibson handled the interview and said there's no way he would have done that if it were a man he was interviewing.
I know this is only two people, and it occurred in reliably red Indiana, but if it is happening here, I am sure it is happening other places as well.
I know I’m repeating myself, but.......
In defense of poor Charlie, he really is like a third-stringer. He’s 65 and got the job he currently has only after one guy died and the next one almost did.
Welcome to the 21st Century.
Where the MSM has been replaced by editors and players from scripted reality television.
That’s pretty much it now, isn’t it?
Smug, sneering, sexist, condescending elitist
Until Peter Jennings died, Charlie was probably destined to be a game show host.
MindBender26. Good enough for me.
Great insider post.
Thanks.
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.