Brian Williams Rips Reuters For Hyping Mars Story

Brian Williams has donned his media critic hat once again, this time taking Reuters to task for hyping the story about Mars' ability to sustain human life. He writes in his Daily Nightly blog post:

The headline on the Reuters News Agency wire story this afternoon was fairly declarative: SCIENTISTS SAY MARTIAN SOIL COULD SUPPORT LIFE. Alrighty then.

This on a day when the Supreme Court defined the Second Amendment for us, and Goldman Sachs put out a "sell" rating on General Motors. That's General Motors. That's a first.

In April, Williams took to the Daily Nightly to complain about what he perceived as the New York Times' lack of focus and to praise Peggy Noonan for Pulitzer-worthy reporting.

Comments

[tomanjeri]

Mr. Williams, the possibility of life on another Planet is FAR more important than your GM stock or Scalia's incoherent ramblings (and right wing blog plagiarism).

[MetalCanuck]

This CFR puppet shouldn't be ripping anyone.

[HangInThere]

Even more irrelevant than Williams' statement is the REPORTING of Williams' statement.

... And even less important than THAT is someone's COMMENTING on the unimportance of all this. {That includes this comment, of course!}

[LibDrummer]

And this follow up remark too!

See how quickly this gets out of hand!

[Lilybart]

YUP.

[springsm]

Gee Brian, what have you done for investigative news lately..alot longer than lately? A pretty face doesn't make for credibility. Did you announce the number killed in Iraq this week, have you given the totals, what else did you pass over today on the news? I think that NBC actually talked about life existing on Mars tonight..and I am sure it was your broadcast. Gosh Brian, grow a spine, stick up for the real news and ohmygosh..report it. There has to be a reason why people don't watch MSM anymore. Hum.

[lutzi]

Science. Thats no story! We need to find a story about some new medication for 80 year olds. Their the only people that watch the nightly news anyhow.

[mediamarv]

Bad hair, bad hair... equally bad reporting...

[JBS]

Yeah? Well, now at least we know what happened to Shatner's toupee.

[GayIthacan]

When does any rational adult give any credence to what Brian Williams thinks?

[gevan]

I don't think we can eat or breath Martian soil, can we?

[eplatypusunum]

Not directly, no. But apparently we could put Martian soil through various processes to create the water and breathable gases we'd need to live there.

Very intriguing implications, should we ever get our collective crap together enough to make a serious (manned) exploration of Mars. Colonization is iffier but also possible. The solar radiation would be the big problem there (no ionosphere or ozone layer to shield the surface from the damaging radiation).

Anyway, I used to like Brian Williams. But he's pretty much just a corporate tool like the rest of them. But at least he's watchable. Charles Gibson unmasked himself as a clueless tool during that Dem debate with George Snuffaluffagus. I have not watched Gibson whatsoever since that day. Arrogant, elitist, out of touch peacock who affects an aw-shucks down-home demeanor. God, I can't stand that man.

epu

[mathme]

The ozone layer is a liberal conspiracy.

[prospace]

FYI, It's not recommended to eat or breathe earthen soil.

[raker]

Watch Brian Williams and listen to the words he says, especially the teasers going out to commercial. He strings together cliches that seem to belong in the same sentence because they have a certain rhythm, but they mean nothing, as though they were written by an intern with a Mad Libs book. Lauer does it too. They must have the same staff of chimps on duty all day long.

[prospace]

He's not ripping it. He doesn't make himself totally clear about what he thinks but recognizes that it's a big deal, which it is.

For those interested in science and learning, it's a very big deal.

[Anastasia]

That was my take too.

I don't get how the statement, "SCIENTISTS SAY MARTIAN SOIL COULD SUPPORT LIFE. Alrighty then" - is a rip. It seems totally neutral, too brief to mean much of anything.