Charlie Gibson's Weird Castro Lede

Huffington Post   |  Rachel Sklar   |   February 20, 2008 03:51 PM

Read More: Castro, Castro Resigns, Castro Steps Down, Charlie Gibson, Charlie Gibson Fidel Castro, Fidel Castro, Fidel Castro Resigns, Perez Hilton, Perez Hilton Fidel Castro, Raul Castro, Breaking Media News
digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

Well! Yesterday was a big day, what with the Wisconsin, Hawaii and Washington primaries, but the news cycle spiked with an unexpected story that hit around 3 a.m.: The resignation of Fidel Castro as president of Cuba. You may recall that last summer was marked with a spate of "Castro's dead" rumors, bubbling up in Miami over a few Fridays in August and sending celeb-blogger Perez Hilton into a tizzy, wherein he asserted up and down that his super-secret sources had double-confirmed that Castro was, in fact, muerte and it made the front page of the Wall Street Journal. Castro briefly surfaced again in September, enjoying the writerly flourishes of Alan Greenspan, and otherwise receded, tracksuit-clad, into the background, until the inevitable news that would send Miami into bedlam and finally validate Perez as a credible news source.

That was the background with which I fired up ABC "World News" yesterday, as anchor Charlie Gibson launched into the Castro resignation as his top story like so:

"Everyone knew the day was coming, but still it was a shock when we learned that Fidel Castro, a dominant figure in Cuba for almost fifty years, is giving up power."

Ummm, excuse me? No. Not to put too fine a point on it, but everyone has been waiting for him to DIE. This was an anticlimactic piece of almost non-news, greeted with thoughtful consideration in the morning but sort of dismissed by afternoon as not really changing much, especially after power had already been transferred to Raoul and after Castro DeathWatches™ every Friday in August. The big news, frankly, was that there was a Castro announcement that didn't involve him being dead. For God's sake, even Miami didn't care.

That's all, really, it just struck me as odd. But, otherwise congratulations on a great week!

Related:
Hey! It's Friday! Is Castro Dead Again? [ETP]
Castro Dead: Truth or Perez? [ETP]
Castro Lives! Cuban Dictator Is Alive and Well and Reading Alan Greenspan [ETP]

Related in Perez:
Smoke & Mirrors [Perez Hilton]
Is Castro Dead??? [Perez Hilton]
Still Dead [Perez Hilton]


 
Comments
5
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- ProfessorDuh I'm a Fan of ProfessorDuh 229 fans permalink
photo

Fidel Castro's resignation is called "history." It may surprise you to learn that some people are interested in history, even in the United States of Amnesia.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:27 PM on 02/21/2008
- westseattle I'm a Fan of westseattle 11 fans permalink

You deleting challenging posts, now Rachel?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:58 PM on 02/21/2008
- westseattle I'm a Fan of westseattle 11 fans permalink

Is that why there's only one comment on your blog?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 PM on 02/21/2008
- westseattle I'm a Fan of westseattle 11 fans permalink

Sorry, Rachel, but a historic figure like Castro resigning IS major news, not a "piece of almost non-news". Let alone the impact in the rest of the western hemisphere, but even here given Castro's long legacy against the U.S. this is huge news. Now, I'm calling you out on this because I have been extremely dissappointed with your appearances on MSNBC. From earlier in the week being unobjective in your commentary against Barack Obama's use of someone else's words without equal acknowledgment of Hillary Clinton's own borrowed words (Yes We Can, I'm fired up and ready to go, etc.). To now, where I see you agree totally with Pat Buchanan. To make that worse, you didn't even answer the question you were asked. The was, what the story about McCain says about his connection to lobbyists being contrary to his campaign message of impeccable integrity. Failing to answer the question makes it appear you, like Buchanan, were trying to protect McCain. So, to support Clinton one day and McCain the next shows that perhaps you have something against Barack Obama. I'm curious what that might be. At the least, you should ask how you can justify taking positions so contrary to the organization you are paid to represent.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:33 PM on 02/21/2008
- totalliberal I'm a Fan of totalliberal 69 fans permalink
photo

Rachel, I'm sending you an electric nit-picker. It should be there when you get home.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:48 AM on 02/21/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect