Requiem For Pope Russert
Tim Russert is dead. Long live Tim Russert!
It should come as little surprise that, precisely at a time when the sanctimony of the Old Media stands threatened by blasphemes, bloggers and an increasingly agnostic public, the choirboys, priests and cardinals of the Media Church should treat the passing of a figure like Tim Russert as if it were the demise of the Pope.
As someone who himself has paid a couple of unscheduled visits to the CCU in the past couple of years, I intend no personal disrespect toward Russert or his family with whom we must all share our grief. But the flagrant disrespect shown us by the stage-managed, manufactured and excruciatingly prolonged televised requiem for Russert is rather breathtaking.
Russert collapsed on Friday just as I was beginning a 5 hour road trip through the Mojave desert allowing me, via XM Radio, to soak in the endless dirge begun by CNN and presided over, quite appropriately, by Bishop Wolf Blitzer. The Bishop -- and his long list of public mourners -- from John McCain to Jim Carville to the Clintons to Paul Begala to Colin Powell and countless others -- all seemed shocked, not only by the purported infallibility of Russert, but also by what they had apparently supposed was his immortality.
Over and over and over again, Bishop Blitzer loudly mused how was it possible that a 58-year-old man, seemingly in good health, could be stricken by a flagging heart? My own doctors had answered that same query from me a year ago by simply reminding me that I was a human -- much clearer information than the confused and inaccurate mumbo-jumbo about cardiac arrest doled out repeatedly by CNN's medical correspondent, Elizabeth Cohen.
In between her dollops of misinformation, as I barreled up I-15, I did learn the following: that Tim Russert was not only a fabulous, relentless journalist, he was also a model father, a model son, a devout Catholic, a man who never ever forgot his humble roots as the son of a garbage man and a man so in touch with blue-collar America that -- if only he had survived -- perhaps Barack Obama could have named him Veep to win over all those beer drinkers in Buffalo.
I had met Russert a couple of times -- twice out in Iowa during this or that year's presidential caucus. And he seemed nice enough of a fellow. In fact, after reading his memoir, I had acquired a certain amount of personal sympathy for him. Though he deftly cashed in on his taciturn dad, Big Russ, and celebrated him as a man who placed the values of "responsibility and accountability" over those of affection and nurturing, I began to see Russert as the victim of a childhood shadowed by an emotionally stunted father. What, in the end, is there to celebrate about a father who can't bring himself to say "I Love You" to his boy until that son is 54-year-old man? Brrrr.
But with all due respect for the dead, I would rate Russert as a journalist perhaps just above the median average. He certainly mounted his weekly pulpit of Meet The Press well-prepared by a hard-working research staff. He'd have his quotes and video clips lined up meticulously to at least, briefly, put his subject on the spot.
But what was baffling, if not downright maddening, about Russert's style, was that he would inevitably pull that knock-out punch and end the encounter with an embrace rather than a roundhouse right. Just when he'd get his guest to start backtracking, dissembling and stumbling, he'd gently let him -- or her--go.
Strangely enough, during his prolonged liturgy for Russert Friday afternoon, Bishop Blitzer -- chummily reminiscing with former General Powell -- noted the same tendency by Russert. But Blitzer found it praiseworthy. He always asked "the tough questions," said the Bishop of Russert. And then he added, admiringly: "But there was always the soft landing." Ah yes, "the soft landing," Colin Powell concurred.
Indeed, without unfailingly pulling that last punch Russert knew very well he would risk excommunication from the Inner Sanctum of the Beltway. A harder landing for his guests could dry up that most cherished of press commodities -- access and kinship with the powerful.
But back to CNN. After three straight hours of listening to Blitzer's prayer for the dead, I could stand no more. The desert I heard on the air seemed infinitely more vapid than the Mojave I was driving through. You also had to wonder what was in those cynical little heads of the CNN execs. Did they really believe that all those average beer-swilling Americans whom Russert presumably loved really wanted to stay glued for hour upon hour to hear the same regurgitations over the death of an elite, remote, talking head?
Probably not. The inexplicable amount of air time devoted to Russert's death surely was laced with some potent self-pity by the networks themselves. In the sudden death of Tim Russert they no doubt caught a passing glimpse and reflection of a fate they fear for themselves.
Looks like Andy Warhol -- who will leave a much longer lasting mark on the world than Russert -- was dead wrong when he mumbled that line about 15 minutes of fame. Warhol departed the earth in 1987 just when cable TV news was maturing. He could have no idea that two decades later, in the bottomless hole created by the continuous news cycle, 15 minutes wasn't anything at all. We could now go for hours and hours and hours over so very little.
Loading comments…
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
You sir, speak the truth!
How refreshing
:-)
Okay now here is my question. Do you have the only XM satellite radio package that has only CNN radio? If you didn't why did you listen to same station for three straight hours? Maybe it's me but I would have put on some classic rock or something else rather than listen to the same topic for that long.
Thank you for your article.
It's bizarre the way the press worships it's own. None of them did their jobs in the run up to the Iraq war, and they're still not doing their jobs because they refuse to acknowledge the real reasons for war - control of the oil and war profiteering. Until they (the MSM) acknowledge the full extent of the corruption in Government, then the press serves as nothing more than another mouthpiece for the administration.
They're still not doing their jobs with regard to McCain and his extraordinary number of flip flops, and until they do, the public has no reason to feel grateful to anyone in the corporate media.
See Frank Dwyer's Profile
I read all the comments expecting you would be excoriated, but almost everybody gets it and agrees with you.
Pope, ex-President, ubiquitous newsman, and not hours but days of this coverage. I call it "vamping and ghouling." Every time I turned on the television to see if anyone was covering the downward spiral of the country into fascism or the failure of the Opposition Party to oppose or impeach a self-admitted war criminal, I got more Russert hagiography.
I wrote down random super-vapid bits (Russert was a big fan of the Buffalo Bills; Howard Fineman said if he ever became a Catholic it would be because of Russert; Barbara Walters said he wasn't a pretty face "like some of us'; Pat Buchanan said he and Russert would sometimes chant the priest-altar boy Latin of the Mass before a news program--it took me a long time to get that image out of my head). I emailed a friend with these breaking news revelations, but I didn't have the nerve to blog. You're a hero.
I wouldn't mind 24 hours of pundits reminiscing about what a terrific person Rosa Parks was; how much she loved her family, what sports teams she followed; how her faith sustained her, what a brave thing she did on that bus that day; how she changed the world. But unless the achievements of the deceased come up to that level, please let us stop this pompous, vacuous display.
Thank you for this article. It is sad to lose anyone, like the 5 service members lost this week, but hardly anything is on TV, in print, or on the Internet about them.
Now that he has died, I see that he was friends with many of these people ihe interviewed and maybe that's why he did not ever press them on their stances, beyond "please respond to your words, and what were you trying to say." He should have disclosed and all press should disclose to the public if s/he is friends with the subject of interviews.
He was in the chorus of media that was silent when the war drums were beating, and did not challenge the administration or military. The press as a rule, failed to do its job. I don't see the great man that he was.
But the real story is that the media celebrating a life as if we had lost MLK. And when I hear these journalists sitting around saying, he "was so committeed to his work, he was always prepared, read everything in preparation for his interviews", I can't help but think -- he was paid $5 million and that was his job!
I walk away from this with the sense that media, particularly those on TV, think they are contributing greatly to our national discourse. In reality, the most important recent public policy changes have come from investigative print journalism -- such as the Post oncovering Walter Reed problems.
Finally someone has the courage to say -- ENOUGH. Of course, Tim Russert's shocking, sudden death at 58 years old is tragic for his family and his colleagues. I stopped watching MTP way before the Bush & Co. appeared regularly to beat their war drums. Mr. Russert appeared to fawn over too many of his powerful guests. All this talk about "gotcha" journalism?? I always felt Russert backed off the minute a guest showed any resistance to any questions. Frankly, I can't imagine Russert making McCain squirm in his seat like Ellen DeGeneres did when she challenged his position on same sex marriage. Mr. Russert was the consumate D.C. insider. The evidence is in the eulogies. Yet as a "journalist" you pay a very high price for access. Dan Rather's carcass sits in the middle of the MSM beltway as proof of what can happen when you really ask "gotcha" questions.
Who is Andy Warhol?
I should definitely start my own Family Channel
I would hate for one of my loved ones to pass and not receive 24 hour eulogy for the entire world to see
Gotcha!
Maybe the wrong moment to beat the drums? - Respect for the deceased -
But I get the message and couldnt agree more with you from a European point of view. The "naive and selfrightous" reporting of CNN and Co. are often an insult to the rest of the world. (= 96%!).
The price Bushco will leave to your country is and will be very high! More and more of you people do realize it. But are you prepared to learn from it and act consequently and wisely? Bush is beating the war drums again (Iran) Can you hear the sounds? At the same time Bush'es "most reliable ally" in the Mddle East is Musharraf of Pakistan (lol)... Pakistan is considered the most dangerous country in the world with nuclear warheads potentially wandering in the hands of Al Kaida asf. The US Middle East policy of the past 40 years is one long disaster and it will go on.
The US is still using 25% of the worlds fossil fuels and represents only 4% of the world population. Bush cynically shredded the Kyoto protocol. That all this is now working against you and your car maufacturing industries will propably shrink to ridicoulous levels. It is dawning on a lot of you people now.
asf.
Did Mr. Russert and all the other media celebs ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ? You the Americans have to give an answer to this question!
Obviously, they did not. Over 4,000 of our own troops are dead, tens of thousands more
suffer amputations, severe head injuries, and severe cases of PTSD (including an alarming
number of suicides by Iraqi veterans), and the deaths, grave injuries, and refugee status
of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would attest to the fact that there is something really
wrong with a country that gave George W. Bush too many votes in both 2000 and 2004.
Russert was a willing toady of the corporate clique that runs our country.
I would not dispute the fact that Tim Russert was a fine man, a gentleman and a scholar,
in his personal life. But I was googling this morning to remember why I hadn't trusted him
for a long time -- and found a story about Russert showing his "W" pin to a Republican
when he thought Al Gore was off the set.
Thank you for this posting - I'm getting sick of all of this "Tim Russert was the perfect _____ (man, father, journalist, etc., etc.) coverage. I lost respect for him during the 2004 presidential election when he prematurely began the call for John Kerry to concede the election, when it was clear that there was funny business going on with the "counting" of votes in Ohio. Journalistic integrity would have dictated that the goings-on in Ohio be thoroughly investigated before any Kerry concession was called for - however, Russert seemed more interested in his own (and his network's) power to force the end of the election than whether or not the result was a true one. I stopped watching MTP after that, as it was also clear to me at that time that he had carried a great deal of water for BushCo leading up to the war in Iraq. I thought it was clear that he had traded integrity for access, which was a trade that damaged both the press and, especially, the American people.
I definitely feel sympathy for his family and friends, but I think this "orgy" of wailing and gnashing of teeth going on, especially on MSNBC, is getting way out of hand.
I don't get it either.
Our press are like some weird little clique. I don't really share their boundless love for each other.
It is odd that that a pundit is getting more press than a head of state. Maybe they're all in the same club.
Fianlly, someone honest enough to spit at the hipocrisy. MSM has indeed glimpsed its own demise, headlined by Russert. Soon the other tired, old talkingheads will follow and then Fox, CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS will follow. They are noise-boxes that throw sand in the eyes of Americans while helping Washington insiders burn American lives and treasure. Like the rest of the talkingheads, Russert thought it was his job to decide for us who leads this country.
Cooper wrote: "But what was baffling, if not downright maddening about Russert's style, ... . Just when he'd get his guest to start backtracking, dissembling and stumbling, he'd gently let him - or her--go."
Russert didn't let his guests off the hook. Russert understood that one doesn't have to clobber a guest to expose the guest's weak underbelly. Tim didn't believe in nor did he have to deliver the "roundhouse right" that Cooper apparently believes is required. Marc, did you happen to watch Russert's interview with Ross Perot during the 1992 election campaign, Tim's first season as Meet the Press host? Many believe that Russert's interview was the beginning of the end of Perot's dangerous Napoleon-o
Russert's style, and even his substance, may not have warmed the cockles of Huffington Post readers' and editors' hearts. But many of us found him quite talented and effective in holding political and other leaders accountable and in revealing enough about these leaders, often from their own lips, to then let his viewers make their own best judgments. Finally, Marc, at least for those of us well over 60, a 58 year old is young indeed!
Russert was a perfect emblem of the horrid state of our media. An utter mediocrity propped up by a research staff feeding him "tough" questions which his limited intelligence was unable to effectively follow up on—which he was only interested in doing if the guest was a Democrat, making him a corrupt mediocrity.
(For those who would criticize me for speaking ill of the recently departed, I would remind them that my comments are meant to apply to his professional life only.)
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
