05/11/2012 04:21 pm ET Updated Jul 11, 2012

In Defense of Robin Roberts

Have you noticed? No one (absolutely no one) said ABC's Robin Roberts' interview of the president was in any way less than professional, thorough and news making.

But I have seen many snarky-ish references from snarky journalists' hypotheses about how ABC's Robin Roberts got the big interview with President Obama and hence got the scoop on his gay marriage statement. Those who criticize Robin for getting the interview are simply jealous and / or petty. Period.

Can we journalists be honest for a second? Everybody in the media uses his/her connections and reputation every day of the week to get big interviews. I use every connection I have to get interviews -- and so does everyone else. Anyone in the business who says anything to the contrary is lying.

I don't know that Robin (ABC) has any greater connections than others -- look at the incredible NBC access last week in the Situation Room on the Osama Bin Laden killing anniversary. And if she does have better connections, the rest of us better work harder to beat her out next time. Connections do not mean bias -- they can mean respect for a history of fairness and years of hard work.

Everyone (yes, everyone!) wanted that interview with President Obama (I would have loved it) so now the jealous ones who did not get it show they are petty by taking swipes at Robin and how she got the interview. Yes, she beat out the rest of us... can't we for just one second tip our hats to her for beating the rest of us?

The sore losers always suspect something sinister when a big interview is landed. I have seen one story that Robin got this interview because she is African-American... well then why didn't all the other African-American journalists get the interview if that is the reason why? She certainly is not the only African-American in the business.

Another story said Robin got the interview because she is not regarded as a "gotcha" interrogator. Really? Is being a "gotcha" interrogator and tripping up the interviewee the goal? I thought viewers actually wanted information from an interview and that the viewers were not looking for a gladiator contest where a journalist tries to show off and draw blood? You can get lots of information -- and ask very tough and pointed questions -- without being a boor. Viewers got a ton of information from Robin's interview with the president. We know that to be true because everyone is still talking about the content of her interview days later!

What is MOST IMPORTANT, however, is this: NO ONE IS ACTUALLY CRITICIZING HER INTERVIEW (the content or how she conducted it.) In other words, everyone concedes she did a great job. So the only way for the jealous ones to get at her is to suggest that ABC had the inside track or a cozy relationship and that that is somehow sinister. They are trying to make less of Robin. Go figure!

What matters is the interview -- did she get the news or not? And the answer is yes and that is the goal.

By the way, Robin is a very accomplished journalist with loads of experience and she showed it.

PS -- I still would have liked to have beaten her out for it!