Tucker To Journalist That Got Power Fired: "It's A Little Much Being Lectured On Journalistic Ethics By Someone From The Scotsman"

WOW: Today Tucker Carlson welcomed (er, "welcomed") British journalist Gerri Peev — aka "The Scot Heard 'Round The World" thanks to today's incendiary piece in The Scotsman wherein she quoted Barack Obama advisor Samantha Powers calling Hillary Clinton a "monster" — and the two mixed it up but good.

Tucker began from the presumption that Peev had deliberately printed a comment that was off the record; Peev maintained that anything was fair game after the parties had agreed to start and the tape recorder was rolling. Tucker thought Powers' request for clemency ought to have been good enough; Peev sniffed: "Are you really that acquiescent in the United States?" Then cameth the smackdown from Tucker: "Since journalistic standards in Great Britain are so much dramatically lower than they are here, it's a little much being lectured on journalistic ethics by a reporter from The Scotsman."

Due to satellite delay, the audience got a chance to react (i.e. mouth dropping open) before Peev did; watch for her arch "Really!" as Tucker keeps talking/insulting her. Responded Peev: "If this is the first time that candid remarks have been published about what one campaign team thinks of the other candidate, then I would argue that your journalists aren't doing a very good job of getting to the truth." Ouch.

Watch it and squirm along with the rest of us below:

On MSNBC Friday, Tucker Carlson had it out with the journalist behind the Hillary is a "monster" story over journalistic ethics. http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1446831610http://www.brightcove.com/channel.jsp?channel=1178199204

Full interview at MSNBC here.

Comments

[mistlesuede]

I normally don't watch Tucker, so it was a stroke of luck that I caught the interview. Tucker was great. I couldn't believe he was actually asking her the questions I would have liked to. What an arrogant bitch. The press complains about why there are so many conditions for them to be allowed a good interview. Off the record means OFF THE RECORD. Show some respect or get out of the business . She got what she deserved from Tucker.
Tucker, I might actually watch your show again if you do more good work!

[Bilboo]

Off the record means OFF THE RECORD if it's agreed to ahead of time.

That not just some warped ethics in Scotland -- it's standard here in America too, for any reporter with even basic knowledge of the craft. It's straight from Journalism 101.

Evidently Tucker Carlson has no such knowledge, and neither do his more dim-bulbed viewers. Perhaps the viewers can't be expected to know any better, but Carlson ought to if he's going to play a journalist on TV.

[IndyStacey]

You can't unring a bell and you can't go off the record after making an inappropriate remark. I'm an Obama supporter and I was sad to see to see Power resign. But in the heat of the moment, she made a mistake. The reporter did nothing wrong here.

[mtrav]

All you tax return idiots should lay off, have you released yours yet?

[marignymitch]

The salient point for me was Carlson's support for the subordination of the news media to those in power. We have to be nice to them, he says, otherwise they won't talk to us. What garbage! We are in deep trouble as a nation thanks to the hot, new stenography school of journalism.

Speaking of garbage, I do find it funny that Carlson thinks he's qualified to judge the standards of UK media, or any media for that matter.

[GeorgeKaplan]

Smearing the reporter at the Scotsman will not work. The fact is that Samantha Powers said the wrong thing, She now has to take responsibility for what she said. Obama fired her. He could have stood up for her - he did not. I conclude that she did not please Obama.

She did a dumb thing - she smeared the opposing candidate in front of a journalist and than AFTER the fact she asked the reporter that it be off the record. That's putting the cart before the horse.

[realpolitic]

Tucker Carlson lecturing someone on journalistic ethics is like an assassin lecturing on morals.

[Enid]

Works for the US goverment.
Monkey see monkey do.

[NorthernCross]

Foreign journalists can do what they want, i suppose. But really, it's about the American election season. This is nobody's business but our own. Outsiders don't like it when we but into their affairs, so maybe they should be willing to set an example by butting out of ours!

[Nofsdad]

But we butt into theirs anyway, don't we?

[rh654]

I for one am in the camp that at this point Hillary Clinton is being a Monster in the way she is willing to run this campaign and the tactics that her and her campaign have pulled to win at any cost.

For God Sakes - she has said on more than one occassion that John McCain has more experience than Obama does - that from a Democrat who is behind in the race for the nomination.

Is Hillary Clinton a Monster? Perhaps so.

Is Hillary Clinton trying to win the 2008 Joe Lieberman Turn-Coat Award - absolutley Yes.

[realpolitic]

One sees how loaded Tucker's questions are, he says: "'I wonder if you would explain the relationship between the press and those in power when you go out of the way to hurt them..." This reporter did not go out of his way to hurt anyone. She only transcribed the remarks told to her by an Obama supporter. Secondly, is Tucker saying he will not print any remark an interview subject tells him to at some later date in order to guarantee access? What good is an interview at all then? Thirdly, who is Tucker to lecture anyone on journlistic standards when his show consists of one unsupported ad hominen attack after another? Tucker has achieved something I thought impossible- he is as awful and biased as any pundit on Fox. He is an emotionally stunted little child with a microphone to play with. Someone take it away, please!

[thnk4self]

Off the record by the interviewee is *off the record.* This person is not a journalist if she excuses her breach of ethics.

I would like to know what is up with the Brits and their Commonwealth members inserting themselves into US primary elections process. First the Bush friendly Harper Canadians and now this tabloid from Scotland (!). Both, coincidentally or not, actively going after Obama. Is the Administration sending signals to like-minded (what a scary mind) and co-dependent allies in Canada and Britain?

We declared out independence 232 years ago. Here's some advice: get over it, and oh yeah, take care of your teeth. :-)

[SeekerOne]

The Scotsman is a conservative newspaper. The Canadian government is conservative. Rush Limbaugh pimps for Hillary. Just seems like a pattern because I'm biased, right?

[realpolitic]

What pattern do you suggest? The stars at night have a pattern if you look at them in a certain way or the clouds for that matter.

[NotaBeliever]

She stated it the way I learned it. If a conversation is to be "off the record", that is agreed upon BEFORE the conversation begins. You don't get mulligans in high-stakes politics and any reporter who thinks you do is seriously naive.
But the candidates are still playing softball if calling Senator Clinton a monster and comparing Senator Obama to Rove is worthy of comment. When the swiftboats come on the attack from the real opposition, we'll see exactly how soft those ball are.

[colddoseofsumthin]

i think the real headline here should read: "Tucker Carson Apparently Employed"

[xrayman]

Oh boo hoo, the Obama campaign is learning it can't get away with everything. Welcome to the world of adult politics.

Just because Obama is supported by children doesn't mean that the world has to act all "wide-eyed" like children.

[OxyCon]

Just what does a "B list" partisan hack pundit like Tucker Carlson know about "journalistic standards"?
Other than the fact that he works for the biggest joke "news" network, MSNBC, in the business?

[EditMe]

Power is absolutely right. You agree in advance what is on and off the record. If you allow people to say whatever they want and then withdraw it after the fact, it becomes impossible to control and the lines get terribly blurred. It is accepted journalistic practice that you MUST say "off the record" before making the comment. There shouldn't even be a debate on that.