Posted on 06/09/2004 7:51:51 AM PDT by kattracks
Journalists who bashed and trashed Ronald Reagan during the 1980s are biting their tongues this week amidst the outpouring of love and affection towards the GOP icon from a grateful nation.But the cease fire won't last long, judging by the comments of major network new anchors Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings yesterday.
Rather told the Philadelphia Inquirer the week-long commemoration of Reagan's life was journalistic overkill and hinted that he was anxious to return to stories he thought were more important, like the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
"Even though everybody is respectful and wants to pay homage to the president, life does go on," he groused. "There is other news, like the reality of Iraq. It got very short shrift this weekend."
The CBS newsman blamed "herd journalism" for the media's fixation on Reagan.
NBC's Tom Brokaw suggested that the media's current presentation of the Reagan legacy was far too positive, noting, that while he "was a beloved American leader . . . at the same time our journalistic obligation is to put his whole life and his political career in context."
He told the Inquirer that a single day's worth of tribute to Reagan would have been enough. After that, it was time to examine "scandals" like "Iran-contra [and] his failure to recognize early on the AIDS epidemic."
ABC's Peter Jennings concurred, telling the Inquirer, "If we waited for the president to be buried before doing a critical analysis, the world would move on quite a bit."
Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz seemed to agree that the focus on Reagan was too much, noting during an online chat on Tuesday, "Nixon got two or three days of very heavy coverage, but nothing like this weeklong, nonstop extravaganza."
"If you were too young to remember Reagan and just tuned in since Saturday," he contended, "you'd have very little idea that he was a controversial figure with legions of detractors as well as admirers."
Longtime Reagan watcher and Post reporter Lou Cannon said Reagan critics could look forward to new ammunition to use against their nemesis.
In a separate online chat, Cannon said that still-sealed documents on Reagan's presidency will be released in the coming years, noting, "and what is revealed in these documents may again change our opinions."
I'm surprised they've even waited this long.
they haven't waited at all, they have been doing this ever since he left office - and it appears they will have another go at revisionist history even after his death.
Obviously, Howard does not grasp the historical significance of this great man.
Yes, there is other news. There is good news from Iraq that never gets reported by these guys. They only report the bad news, the same bad news over and over again. So what they are saying about Reagan is BS from their pie holes.
They say the victors write the history, but in these times, that no longer seems to be the case. The media writes it, and if it needs changing still more, they rewrite it. Disgusting.
History will rewrite it once and for all, in spite of the liberal spinmeisters (aka gasbags).
Rather told the Philadelphia Inquirer the week-long commemoration of Reagan's life was journalistic overkill and hinted that he was anxious to return to stories he thought were more important, like the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
Yeah, after all Dan, this prison scandal has ONLY been in the news for a month now, and I don't thnik you have reported on ALL the angles yet! It deserves MUCH more reporting than our former 2 term president deserves!! (sarcasm/off)
That's a pretty weird statement when for the last three weeks whenever I click on CSPAN - John Kerry is giving yet another speech.
They have literally signed over to covering ALL the Kerry campaign...
But the old guard networks can't handle a week of pre-funeral Reagan.
Get stuffed boys - your days are over anyway - time for your swan song out the door!
Hope springs eternal for these clymers. Dream on.
ABC's Peter Jennings concurred, telling the Inquirer, "If we waited for the president to be buried before doing a critical analysis, the world would move on quite a bit."And, peeetaah, what would be wrong with that?
This could work out to conservatives advantage. There are reports that people are growing increasingly skeptical of the "mainstream" media, and Reagan is very well liked. This could be the straw that breaks the camel's back, and hopefully we have waves of people rejecting the left wing media, also voting more conservatively as a backlash.
They haven't waited. On Mon night Larry King was highlighting Iran-Contra excerpts when he would go to commercial. Not just a few seconds but extended propaganda hit pieces that lasted a minute or so before the commercials would start. Weird. In a snippet on MSNBC I believe on Monday also, the female anchor (didn't catch her name) was asking someone whether Iran-Contra destroyed his Presidency. Not tarnished but destroyed.
Pray for W and Saint Nancy
Their already doing it...watching msnbc this am and they were interviewing a man that was paying his respects and he was saying how he didn't like RR as a pres....When asked why.He went through a whole laundry list of talking points.
I thought "move on" was the mantra for these guys. Oh, that's right, we only "move on" when we want to get Democrat troubles and peccadilloes off the front page.
idiots.. liberal press are insensitive idiots.
Rather and CBS won't show the video of when Saddam was in charge of Ah-boo Grabber prison. It was shown to the Senators and offered to all the news media outlets. CBS and the rest passed on a the video copies. I guess CBS likes porn pictures more than they desire to show Saddam cutting off limbs, tongues and heads while reading the Koran.
Besides, these guys have not waited. They have been slamming Reagan in all their reports since the day he died...with all the Iran-Contra crap and the "cashing in on the Presidency after he left office" and on and on... They are only waiting for him to be in the ground before they really bare their fangs and spit venom. For now, they are just slithering.
Do they do that with John F. Kennedy?
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.