Tom Brokaw Slams Press Drumbeat For Hillary's Exit: "Inappropriate", "Commentary Disguised As Report

[NashVegas]

NEW YORK — Now that Hillary Clinton has ended her bid for the presidency, political journalists are suddenly deprived of one of their favorite stories: When is she going to drop out?

A study shows the only campaign topics that got more attention the past two months were Barack Obama's talkative former minister, the Pennsylvania primary and the fallout from President Bush's remarks about appeasement while in Israel.

More time was spent talking about when Clinton might call it quits than about how the candidates might deal with the war in Iraq, the high price of gasoline, home foreclosures or the sputtering economy. Or about anything that presumptive Republican nominee John McCain said or did during April and May, according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism's analysis of political coverage in newspapers, on Internet sites and on television news.

"It was inappropriate, for journalists especially, to try to cut the process short," NBC News' anchor emeritus, Tom Brokaw, told The Associated Press. "It was an appropriate issue for people to report on, in context, but there was an awful lot of commentary disguised as reporting that gave the impression that people were trying to shove her out of the race."

Brokaw's old-school attitude often put him at odds with Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann when he joined them for primary night coverage on MSNBC this year. One example was last Tuesday. Brokaw was talking about the contrasts between McCain and Obama when Olbermann interjected about "a third one trying toshoehornn her way" into the coverage.

"Well, I think that's unfair, Keith," Brokaw replied. "I don't think sheshoehornedd her way in. When you look at the states that she won and the popular vote that she piled up, and the number of delegates that she has on her side, she's got real bargaining power in all of this."

Brokaw called all the discussion about Clinton's exit a product of "too much time and too little imagination."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/09/tom-brokaw-slams-press-co_n_106003.html

[DevonRex]

1. Brokaw? LOL. He thought Dick Cheney beat Edwars in a debate

in 2004, and even brought out that fake apple pie smile when he said the elder statesman schooled the young guy.

SO, Brokaw has absolutely NO credibility.

[earthlover]

5. I think Edwards could have done better in the debate but he didn't.....

and I agree with what Brokaw said about Hillary. The media is basically lazy and arrogant. Brokaw said Hillary's exit was an appropriate issue, but it got disproportionate time....true enough. Just when is the media going to cover the real issues of this campaign?

[saracat]

18. As a huge edwards supporter, I was disappointed in John's performance in that Debate. Cheney did

very well and John didn't do much to counter him.It surprised me.

[Drunken Irishman]

7. I think a lot of people believed that, Jennifer.

[DevonRex]

21. Even my husband thought that and he is not swayed just because

someone is a democrat that they automatically win.

[MonkeyFunk]

8. so because you disagreed with his assessment of something

4 years ago, he's automatically wrong about everything? How silly.

[DevonRex]

15. Anybody with a quarter of a brain knew Edwards won that debate.

And do NOT call me silly. How jackassish of you.

[saracat]

22. That isn't true. Most of the Edwards fans I know don't think John won. I don't think John

himself thinks that.

[DevonRex]

24. Then you didn't pay attention to the actual issues discussed. nt

[MonkeyFunk]

26. So you judge a debate by

the issues discussed and which ones you agree with?

Using those criteria, a republican could NEVER win a debate no matter how poorly the democrat does. Your judging system seems a little off.

[DevonRex]

33. Damned straight. Republicans do NOT win debates on the issues. nt

[symbolman]

90. Haha!

Monkey stepped in it that time, even you couldn't help but agree.. "So that means Republicans are Wrong ALL the Time?!"

Bwahahaha!!

Good answer :)

[MonkeyFunk]

97. Not at all

Don't be daft.

I'm pointing out how stupid it is to say a debate is won or lost simply by which person you agree with on the issues. That's just silly.

[symbolman]

108. Excuse me, but isn't that how people, the public

and the Voters DECIDE?

Daft? I think you need to put the Koolaid down buddy, its been left out too long and gone sour..

So the Media decides who wins then?

Don't bother answering, there's not much of a conversation going on here, maybe you should try and convince someone more willing to listen to Parsing..

No offense, but you used to have a better grasp of the bigger picture.. :)

[saracat]

36. Well it seems that some judge a journalists entire career on wether they

personally agree with them on a single comment.

[saracat]

31. Okay, I don't expect you to believe me but Edwards himself told me that he thought he "blew" it.

I had an occasion to speak with him about it at a benefit in 2005. It would seem you are in the minority in your opinion.

[DevonRex]

38. Edwards on his worst day beats Cheney on his "best" day, hands

down.

[saracat]

44. Sorry if I agree with both Brokaw and John on his own performance. One of

the best qualities of John Is that he isn't self delusional.

[Jazzgirl]

79. Hmmm.....

I must have this person on ignore........

[MonkeyFunk]

25. You're wrong

a lot of people thought Edwards did poorly in that debate.

Nonetheless, it's YOUR assessment of the debate, not a subjective fact. That Brokaw disagreed with your assessment doesn't mean he's therefore wrong about everything. That idea is silly.

[Zynx]

59. It's hard to see something objectively when we all hate Dick Cheney so much.

I knew a lot of fair minded people who were very unimpressed with Edwards.

[Carrieyazel]

11. Edwards basically laid down to Birdshot in that debate.

I saw it, and the slimy Birdshot made some outrageous claims that Edwards did not address whatsoever.

Yeah, Brokaw sucks, but he was right on this one. After that was done, I knew Edwards was a bad VP choice.

[niceypoo]

144. He also happens to be correct...

...hense your ignoring what he said and attacking him personally. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[highplainsdem]

2. Good for Brokaw. Recommended.

[saracat]

3. Of all the pics I have collected of news guys,Brokaw is my favorite.

He opened a door for me once as we were enroute to a "spin room" and I was stunned. I babbled. "You're Tom Brokaw! ". He laughed and said"Yes he was." I asked to take a pic! I love this guy. He is a journalist. He and Dan rather were the last of a dying breed.

[DJ13]

4. Double standards are sexism

The MSM had a field day saying Huckabee couldnt win the GOP nomination, I never heard this kind of self important self examination when they pushed him out long before "the primaries were over".

Is Hillary so fragile she had to be treated different from every other candidate who lost?

[NashVegas]

9. Huckabee

Had 1/4 of the delegate count McCain did.

[papau]

10. BULL - she WAS treated differently - as in more poorly/mocked/ridiculed on MSNBC- AS IN SEXISM

[LisaM]

Yes. And it will come out as time goes on.

I'm glad he said something to Olbermann. About time someone knocked him down a peg.

[ShortnFiery]

112. ROTFLMFAO, HRC was treated like political royalty - even to the point of FORCING MSNBC to

suspend David Schuster because her and "The King" (Bill Clinton) were offended EVEN AFTER an sincere apology was given.

Hell! We'd all live in fear if "the Clintons" ruled again ... we'd all have to be either apologizing to The Queen, The Princess or King Bubba. :crazy:

[MonkeyFunk]

12. Huckabee was mathematically removed from contention

very early in the process. Clinton was mathematically removed last Tuesday, on the day of the very last primaries.

[DJ13]

19. Technically. Hillary was "mathematically removed from contention" a month back

We kept telling you that, but you wouldnt listen.

[MonkeyFunk]

29. Well I listened

and rejected it because you guys didn't seem to know what "mathematically eliminated" means.

She was mathematically eliminated last Tuesday.

[SoonerPride]

34. He had built an insurmounatble lead in pledged delegates.

Her only hope was for suepr delegates to overturn the will of the voters and everyone said that wasn't going to happen, so yes, it was over 60 days ago.

The shadow dance we just witnessed was a foregone conclusion back in March.

[NashVegas]

47. Having a Lead Is Not Having the Necessary Majority

To clinch the nomination.

[SoonerPride]

51. The supers let he stay in because of her last name.

[NashVegas]

65. Doesn't Matter. Obama Did Not Have the Necessary Majority

The media's calls for Clinton to stop competing were inappropriate.

[SoonerPride]

69. The media never called for her to quit. Not once. That is a lie.

However, they did point out that she was giong to lose.

That was a fact.

[wileedog]

55. And staying in a race you will not win will result in a lot of people speculating

when you will stop beating your head against a wall and quit.

That's not bias or prejudice or sexism, that is the way it works.

[MonkeyFunk]

100. So?

that has nothing to do with being mathematically eliminated from the race. That occurred last tuesday, no matter how often you misstate the truth.

[symbolman]

101. No, she was Forcibly Ejected last Wednesday..

20 congress folks told her to get her ass OUT..

It was an Intervention, because PollyAnna had so many Delusions swirling down the toilet of her mind that even while Everyone was hammering home the fact the it was Absolutely, "next we haul you away in a straightjacket" OVER, that she STILL believed she would Had or Would WIN..

She even sequestered herself in a veritable CAVE so she could claim she "Didn't KNOW" that she'd been kicked to the curb.. Game playing and deceitful, self deception is worst of all..

No one in her mental state should be allowed Near The Football OR the Office of the Presidency.

Period.

[SoonerPride]

30. The newscasters who also pointed out the math are what upset Mr. Brokaw.

He doesn't like reporters to report facts, just what was happening that very second.

Context ruins the theater for him.

[MonkeyFunk]

32. You guys keep talking about "the math"

"the Math" eliminated her last Tuesday, despite the fact that innumerate people here had been saying for months that she was mathematically eliminated.

[SoonerPride]

40. No, we said 60 days ago that this would be the outcome because we can add.

And we knew that this would be the outcome - and it was.

Would you care for me to pull up my thread from March which stated emphatically that it was over?

I'm not some clairvoyant being.

I have a calculator.

It doesn't lie.

[Ravy]

147. Even today, Hillary is not technically mathematically removed from contention.

So people were right not to listen to you then, and now.

[wileedog]

50. Oh bullshit

When was Edwards mathematically out of it? Certainly not in February.

She was done after he big Ohio 'win' netted her 10 delegates. It was obvious then she was NEVER going to catch him in delegates, and the SDs had been saying all along they were NOT going to be overturning the PD vote. Hillary people just didn't want to listen.

THe media spent so much time talking about her quitting because any other candidate not named Clinton would have been dismissed a long time ago. When you spend 3 months in a race you have already lost, what do you think the media is going to say about you?

[MonkeyFunk]

103. catch him in PLEDGED delegates

that was difficult, not impossible.

But those aren't the only delegates. There are superdelegates, and in fact, they put Obama over the top. He didn't win on pledged delegates - he won with the help of the supers.

[SoonerPride]

104. Well, when he had passed the majority of pledged delegates, it was in fact impossible.

There it is again, math.

[wileedog]

124. And the Supers, especially the top tier, were saying over and over

that they were not going to overturn the results of the Pledged Delegate vote. It was only Hillary supporters sticking their fingers in their ears singing "lalalalal I can't hear you lalalalala" who thought otherwise.

And it wasn't 'difficult', it would have been borderline miraculous. Again, her 'huge' victories in PA and OH netted her 21 delegates when she was already down in the triple digits. There was no way a craven pack of SDs, many of whom still have not actually endorsed when there is no political risk whatsoever, were going to stick their nose into that.

Braying over and over again about the technicalities of it being over does not change the realities that 99% of politicians who find themselves in Hillary's position quit and stop wasting party money and political capital for a lost cause. People were shocked when Huckabee didn't, but he at least didn't throw kitchen sinks or make up popular vote numbers.

The media had EVERY RIGHT to question when she would drop out, because the vast majority of politicians staring at the virtually unsurmountable lead in PDs her opponent had would have done just that.

[saracat]

14. Hillary was different from every candidate who "lost". She was the only women who has ever come this

close and she was "treated differently" Most of the press admits that.Even Howie Dean admits it now.

[dsc]

16. He exitted exactly and precisely when she did

when he was mathematically eliminated. Stop telling falsehoods.

[PM7nj]

6. It's over.

Can we please move on?

[MethuenProgressive]

13. KO tried getting away with saying HRC "shoehorned" her way into the race.

And the journalist slapped the entertainer down.

[Dinger]

20. Touché My Friend

:thumbsup: :hi:

[Beacool]

140. Olbermann is just another windbag and deserved to be put in his place

by a real journalist. Then again, at MSNBC they are not used to the real thing. Anybody can become a pundit.

Bully for you Mr. Brokaw!!!

[Dinger]

17. To The Greatest Page . .

Thanks for posting:)

[SoonerPride]

23. More victimization from the presumed unstoppable one en route to her coronation.

It was news because she was already defeated.

The kabuki theater and vanity exercise of the last two months was compelling theater to be sure, but the outcome was a foregone conclusion after 12 straight defeats in February and March.

Anyone who pointed that out is somehow being inappropriate? Sterange, I thought that was what newscasts were for......reporting facts.

The math is the math and she had lost back in March. Anyone with a calculator knew it was over.

I'm sorry Mr. Brokaw feels that reportage should only focus on the here and now and not any meaningful analysis, which was that she had lost 60 days ago and Obama had built an insurmountable lead.

Moreover, MSNBC was found to be the outlet with the most favorable coverage of Clinton.

[writes3000]

27. To be fair - the speculation was justified...

After the NC/IN primaries, the press knew that the Superdelegates were racing to Obama's side.

The question of whether Clinton would drop out or take this to the convention was a big question.

The opinionated pundits, of course, had a field day on this. I didn't see the question as sexist.

[NashVegas]

35. The Drop-Out Talk Started Back In January-February, Already

As is explained in the full article.

[SoonerPride]

41. Well, since it was over except for the vanity exercise of staying in to say she didn't quit.

Yeah, pointing out that she had lost is news.

She stayed in it to the end, even though it was a foregone conclusion that she had lost because she wanted to say she wasn't a quitter.

The outcome was not in doubt after 12 in a row.

It played out exactly as anyone with a calculator knew it would.

[NashVegas]

43. Except It Wasn't Over

As no one had enough delegates.

[SoonerPride]

46. See, that's where you fail to understand math.

An insurmountable lead meant that she had lost.

The super delegates would let her stay in as a point of vanity, because she is a Clinton, and then end it.

Everyone knew it.
Evertyone said it.

It was fact 60 days ago and it came to pass exactly that way.

It was over in March but was allowed to play out this way to appease her ego.

[NashVegas]

52. Math? People Calling For Clinton To Drop Out Weren't Using an Abacus, They Were Using Tarot Cards

[SoonerPride]

60. Here you go. Take a trip down memory lane with me...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5014240

At what point will Clinton give up and/or her supporters realize it is over?

Sometime after Pennsylvania?

Summer?

Dragged kicking and screaming from the convention floor?

Never?

Look, I voted for Clinton on Super Teusday and helped her carry Oklahoma. But it is OVER folks. The people have spoken. She cannot win without a super delegate reversal of the popular vote. Period.

In terms of states won, delegates amassed or even popular vote totals, it is over.

I, as a member of the DEMOCRATIC party, was taught to love and respect elections. Remember our dear friend Nancy Pelosi and her prophetic words: "Elections have consequences." Hillary Clinton put up a good fight and until the last week or so it was a decent fight. Now it has spiraled into a nightmare of depressing lies, innuendos and smears.

Repeat after me:

IT

IS

OVER.

The sooner she realizes it, and her supporters embrace that reality, we can begin to focus our attention, united and energized to beat the Republicans in November.

[NashVegas]

82. This Article Isn't About You, It's About the Media

If you feel that you are being accused, that's your choice.

If you are the media and you went on a microphone or wrote a column somewhere, your actions were most definitely inappropriate.

[SoonerPride]

85. The media was simply reporting the harsh numbers.

"For some time, it was obvious to those counting that Clinton was not going to be able to earn enough delegates to win, Harris said. That's both hard and wrong for reporters to ignore, he said."

That is the heart of it.

Why should the media sugar coat reality?

So people's feelings don't get hurt?

Out of respect because she is a woman?

Why?

Numbers don't lie.

"For some time, it was obvious to those counting that Clinton was not going to be able to earn enough delegates to win, Harris said. That's both hard and wrong for reporters to ignore, he said."

[apocalypsehow]

105. Nice way to try and change the subject now that you've been pwned on this topic by the other poster

:rofl:

[Major Hogwash]

53. That was because Lil' Miss Inevitability didn't win in Iowa, she came in 3rd.

That's why there was talk of her getting out.
She supported the Iraq War and gave a speech in December that she would take the troops out of Iraq "during her 2nd term".
They even played the tape just last week when Hillary said that!!

Hillary was so busy picking out the curtains for the White House by Christmas last year, she forgot that she hadn't won yet.

[NashVegas]

57. Please Don't Be So Hostile

The primaries are over.

The calls for Clinton to drop out while it was undetermined who would have the majority were inappropriate.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Schema Thing]

28. He may be right on one count. However, for all the calls for her to "get out"

they still didn't simply report the true state of the race. Hell, I heard someone say she "won Texas" (in a list of her important wins) as recently as last week. She lost Texas, and that was clear by the morning after the Texas primary/caucus.

She lost what, 10, 11, in a row? The media acted as if it was neck and neck even then.

[NashVegas]

39. Were The Calls for a Viable Candidate To Get Out of the Race Appropriate or Inappropriate?

[SoonerPride]

49. She wasn't viable after 12 in a row. She had lost. Get that through your head.

It.
was.
over.

People let her stay in as a courtesy and out of respect for her ego.

The math didn't change.

She wasn't going to win after she lost 12 in a row.

[Schema Thing]

64. The true status of her viability should have been reported

If you want to say that reporters have no business telling candidates to drop out...sure, I'll go along.

But if they don't, they damn sure ought to report to the American people the hard cold facts that the Vegas odds-makers are using to quantify the race.

[Skittles]

37. look at the drumbeat that was on DU

absolutely DISGUSTING from people who call themselves DEMOCRATS :puke:

[NashVegas]

42. That Started on the Night of January 3

That was the first, "It is time to unify and embrace our nominee, Barack Obama," post that I saw.

[Skittles]

45. it was unbelievable

what a DISGRACE they made of DU

[NashVegas]

54. And Still Do

I can't wait for my vacation. It will help me make the break.

[SoonerPride]

56. Yeah, everyone hates numbers

Sorry, but reality bites.

[Skittles]

61. you just can't stop, can you?

go get some fucking therapy

[SoonerPride]

66. I prefer a calculator

Sorry you are so bitter.

I voted for clinton you know.

This holding on to your pain is pointless.

She lost 60 days ago.

Get over it and support the party.

We have bigger fish to fry.

[NashVegas]

73. Calculators Are Different From Crystal Balls

People who use crystal balls to make predictions are okay, except for when they demand others take their advice, inappropriately.

[SoonerPride]

74. What part of "he has an insurmountable lead" did you not get?

It was mathematically impossible for her to overtake him, especially when he secured a majority of pledged delegates.

Her only hope was that super delegates would snub the voters.

Well, we all knew THAT wouldn't happen.

What part of that was confusing to you?

[NashVegas]

78. It's Very Sad That Some People Wish To Turn This Thread Into a Bickering Flamefest

When the topic is the media and their inappropriate interference in the primaries.

[SoonerPride]

83. But the very article says it is hard and wrong to NOT report the facts

and the facts are that everyone knew she was going to lose:

For some time, it was obvious to those counting that Clinton was not going to be able to earn enough delegates to win, Harris said. That's both hard and wrong for reporters to ignore, he said.

Why should reporters sugar-coat reality?

They all said she could stay in but that it was futility.

And it was.

[jgraz]

127. Yeah, especially when they compared her unfavorably to McCain and then hinted she might get shot

Oh wait...

[GarbagemanLB]

48. I don't see why, once it was mathematically impossible for her to win the majority of

pledged delegates, it was 'wrong' to call for her to get out?

[NashVegas]

58. It Only Became Mathematically Impossible

on June 3rd when Obama clinched the magic number.

[GarbagemanLB]

62. She should have dropped out once someone won a majority of pledged delegates. Relying on the SDs

to 'overturn' the will of the people was a horrible reason to stay in.

[NashVegas]

70. Pledged Delegates Did Not Give the Necessary Majority for the Nomination

Calls for Clinton to stop competing prematurely were inappropriate.

[SoonerPride]

71. No one in the press ever called for to quit, did they?

Prove it.

[NashVegas]

76. The Press Obsessed Over It

The 103 stories on whether or not Clinton should get out were nearly matched by the 100 stories on Obama's remarks about bitter people turning to guns and religion, according to the PEJ's index. There were 243 stories about Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

[GarbagemanLB]

77. So there were twice as many stories about Wright than about Clinton? Wow! The media sure hated Obama

[SoonerPride]

80. Why did you leave out the very next sentence in the article?

Because it says exactly what I've said all along?

Strange how facts work:

"For some time, it was obvious to those counting that Clinton was not going to be able to earn enough delegates to win, Harris said. That's both hard and wrong for reporters to ignore, he said."

Interesting.

Let's see that one more time.

For some time, it was obvious to those counting that Clinton was not going to be able to earn enough delegates to win, Harris said. That's both hard and wrong for reporters to ignore, he said.

They were reporting that she was going to lose. And it is "hard and WRONG" for them to ignroe reporting REALITY!!

Facts are a harsh mistress.

[NashVegas]

86. That's the Same Guy Who Said This

"I've always felt that it was not the job of reporters to be like `The Gong Show' and hoot candidates off the stage," said John Harris, editor in chief of the Politico Web site.

[SoonerPride]

91. But they aren't supposed to point out futility?

Why is that?

It was clear the race was over 60 days ago.

Anyone saying so is somehow wrong?

I fundamentally disagree with that notion.

I want reporting to be clear and concise and based upon reality.

[wileedog]

84. Actually I don't think it is the Press obsessing in this case....

[NashVegas]

89. Heheh

:evilgrin:

[wileedog]

67. So what?

It was obvious months ago she would NEVER overtake him in pledged delegates. It was never going to happen and EVERYONE knew it.

Edwards wasn't mathematically out of it either, why did he drop out?

[Skittles]

63. are you fucking kidding?

they started waxing on about her dropping out AT THE START OF THIS YEAR

[DeepModem Mom]

72. K&R

[zulchzulu]

75. The race was mathematically over weeks ago, so Brokaw is full of shit

Perhaps Brokaw could back up his claim by showing how Hillary Clinton had a chance at the nomination where her percentage to getting it was less than 5% after Pennsylvania. It had to drag on for almost two more months.

Brokaw, in my view, was always playing it safe with journalism. He is no Murrow by a million miles.

[FrenchieCat]

81. Agreed.....Hillary Couldn't win mathematically and she was doing real damage

with the smears against Obama. "Elitist" she called him over and over again.

She may have cost us the election with that shit.

She didn't exit early enough...and the pundits let her go on and on until the damage had already been done!

[SoonerPride]

95. Did the supers let her stay in till the end because...

1. she is a woman
2. her last name is Clinton


They could have ended this weeks ago, but they choose to let her vanity exercise play out until the end.

Why?

[highplainsdem]

92. And Keith "Take her into a room" Olbermann is no Murrow, either,

despite his delusions about playing Murrow on cable news.

Good for Brokaw for slapping him down. I wish I'd seen it.

[SoonerPride]

98. Well, it turns out Keith's scenario nearly came true.

It took two conference calls from her delegation and supporters to "drag her from the room" on Wednesday.

I'd say he had a better grasp of reality than the effete Mr. Brokaw.

[zulchzulu]

111. Keith Olbermann is certainly closer to Murrow than Brokaw has ever been

Brokaw has been a cheerleader for the appointed spin that his appointed Masters allow. Name me one time where Brokaw strayed from anything the GE war-profiteering weapon makers would let slip by with the TV wars and such that he's read the teleprompter like a good company boy would.

Olbermann has at least been somewhat Murrow-like.

[AtomicKitten]

87. What was unusual was a candidate staying in the race 3 months after it was lost for them.

She screwed up by not competing in the caucus states and by not planning past Feb 5th, and chose to try to correct those fatal errors with scorched earth strategy that backfired, big time. Obama has had a mathematically insurmountable delegate lead since the end of his winning streak in February.

I think the MSM had a perfectly reasonable response/reaction to the above circumstances and that some folks are perhaps a teensy bit unreasonable in attacking that. Instead the rather inappropriate reframing of the reality of the situation (i.e., she can win!) ended up perpetuating the batshit crazy drama that ensued. That IMO is the response the MSM really was after, not shutting it down.

[tishaLA]

88. In essence Mr Brokaw is right. BUT

Let's be perfectly honest here: Brokaw was never especially imaginative, either. He was very adept at reporting the traditional narratives about candidates, at looking at the horserace, at talking red states and blue states, at covering gaffes, etc. He was a fine anchor, and he may have been a fine reporter (I don't remember his reporting days, which ended, IIRC, in the early 70s), but *as* an anchor he was akin to Mr Russert: a purveyor of conventional wisdom.

That said, Mr Brokaw is correct in his overall point, but it may be a complaint he has because of the difference between cable news, which is dominated by opinion for better or worse, and nightly news, which is more compact and heavily edited.

[NashVegas]

94. Fair Enough But

Imagine a football game where the announcers spent 1/3 of their time talking about how one team, that was within 90% of the other team's score, had no chance at all of winning and should just quit.

[SoonerPride]

102. They do that all the time. They will point out that a game is over.

And the other team is simply playing out the clock.

They also point out that meaningless scores late in the game do not change the outcome which was determined in the early stages of the game when the winning team built an insurmountable lead.

Gift scores and late TDs mess yup the betting public and Vegas, but have no affect on who is going to win the game. And they will say it just as plainly as that.

As a matter of fact, that happens nearly every game.

[ShortnFiery]

110. Brokaw is IMO, a bitter old bastard who's always lauded *authority*-kissed Corporate Masters' asses

and yelled out, "Thank you Sir, May I have another?!?" :puke:

[Thrill]

93. Where was this outrage when the Bush crime family was taking the country to war?????

[NashVegas]

99. It Was Right Here On DU

I'm sorry you missed it.

But we're not talking about the Iraq War, we're talking about the media's obsession with pushing Clinton to drop out. Do you have something to add on that topic?

[Thrill]

107. I would of liked to see Brokaw....this upset about the Iraq war

[JoFerret]

96. He is right

Onward.

[ruggerson]

106. Check this out: Is Olbermann's snide act on MSNBC the future of TV news?

And this is written by the VERY liberal, much beloved critic emeritus of the LA Times.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-comment7-2008jun07,0,6590521.story


"It seems like a couple of centuries since His Holiness Pope Walter reigned as God's deputy on the airwaves. Even longer if you think about leave-'em-laughing funnyman Keith Olbermann.

The leer, the smug histrionics, the relentless needling, the shameless self-puffery, the accusatory rants excoriating Bushies and other Republicans as well as cable competitor Fox and its temperamental bully, Bill O'Reilly. And, of course, the comedy.

"Countdown With Keith Olbermann" is the bean ball between "Hardball With Chris Matthews" and "Verdict With Dan Abrams" in MSNBC's weekday lineup. This trio has spent the election season heckling Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton from deep inside Sen. Barack Obama's hip pocket and hammering Sen. John McCain since Day One.

Olbermann and Matthews co-anchored MSNBC's coverage of this year's party caucuses and primaries, and when Obama clinched the Democratic nomination this week, calming down these guys would have required a defibrillator. But the low point was New Hampshire, when they spent probably 15 minutes giggling at and making fun of the speech McCain gave after topping that primary's GOP field."


"We worried in Walter Cronkite's day in the '60s and '70s that a news anchor would sway public opinion merely by raising a brow in subtle response to a story. Oh the horror.

Yet today, mainstream TV and the blogosphere regularly market opinion and speculation as news, and few viewers would be shocked if Olbermann slapped on Groucho brows to get a guffaw. Anything -- anything -- to get a laugh."

(more)

[ShortnFiery]

109. Wow! I think we all need to take a step back ... plus breathe & consider that we're all DEMOCRATS?

This infighting is getting seriously old and destructive ... yep, now I'm ready for Wednesday.

Enough petty B.S. from BOTH SIDES. (that's me too :blush:)

[SoonerPride]

114. I don't think everyone here is a Democrat.

I used to think that, but I don't anymore.

[ShortnFiery]

116. Yeah, you and me both ... prepare for the re-infestation.

:(

[highplainsdem]

118. I've been one for 40 years. First voted in '72 for McGovern, first worked for a Democratic campaign

in 1968.

And I'm disgusted by Obama supporters suggesting that people who disagree with them aren't Democrats.

I'm planning to vote for Obama, but I believe the obnoxious behavior of many of his supporters here is hurting the Democratic party and his chances of winning in November.

You are not going to see unity if you treat Hillary Clinton and her supporters with contempt.

Obama himself is wise enough to recognize what a strong race she ran and how many supporters she has. I wish more of his supporters here were as sensible.

[SoonerPride]

119. If anyone won't vote for Obama because of what someone says on the internets

Then they are too fucking stupid to even have the right to vote.

It should be taken away from them on the grounds that they are mentally incompetent.

This little dog and pony show here is fun and games.

Elections are deadly serious. Just ask the 4,500 dead from our misguided war in Iraq.

Or the thousands more dead each year because they lack health care.

Anyone - and I mean any one person on this planet - that is so fucking stupid to allow the meaningless drivel from anyone in the blogosphere to affect or cloud their rational thought processes should be taken out and shot in the head and put out of their misery.

[ShortnFiery]

122. That doesn't pass the "smell test" for me either.

I've said it before but I don't blame HRC supporters for this dissent - I blame HRC herself.

She wanted to be "an Idol" NOT "a leader" ... and it shows. :(

[ShortnFiery]

120. Enjoy ONE (1x) more day of Obama bashing, then it's time to work WITH the Team.

:-)

[ruggerson]

125. I think it's perfectly appropriate to criticize members of the media

for demonizing good Democrats.

Which is basically what Rosenberg does.

[highplainsdem]

113. Wow, does Rosenberg take Olbermann apart -- and he deserves it.

Get a grip. The man's a big ham.

Olbermann has his own heroes. His sign-off -- "Good night and good luck," after which he crumples a page of his script and flips it at the camera -- is a homage to iconic Edward R. Murrow. It's an odd coupling, like a Cyclops saluting Brad Pitt.
...

But is his ends-justifies-means credo good for the news biz? The answer is no, even if you dislike the president and his policies as much as Olbermann does. I do, and can still testify that watching Olbermann collect Republican scalps like baseball cards is only marginally more rewarding than watching his favorite foil, O'Reilly, batter guests who don't share his wacky views. These two gunslingers face off at 5 p.m., six-shooters blazing bombast. Olbermann delights in mocking O'Reilly, and face it, Bill-O (as Olbermann calls him) is so very mock-worthy.

But at least O'Reilly invites dissenters to his lair (if only to disembowel them), whereas "Countdown" is more or less an echo chamber in which Olbermann and like-minded bobbleheads nod at each other.

[ShortnFiery]

115. Someone should cue in Rosenberg and O'Reilly that their *jealosy* is TRANSPARENT.

As an aside, WTF is going on tonight?!? - are we having some sort of "INFESTATION?" :shrug:

[ruggerson]

126. Rosenberg is the opposite of O'Reilly -

Rosenberg is a hugely respected very liberal critic.

Rosenberg is arguing that Olbermann, otoh, is the flip side of O'Reilly. Both entertainers masquerading as journalists.

[SoonerPride]

128. Keith speaks truth to power.

Albeit in a snarky way.

And often times he is preachy and self-aggrandizing.

Still, though, he is nearly the lone voice of the left on cable and has a wide audience.

He's on the newsy-left spectrum somewhat to the serious side of Jon Stewart and Colbert. Funny, snarky, sprinkled in with serious hard news and analysis. Unashamedly from the left.

If that isn't refreshing, then I don't know what is.

[ruggerson]

129. Had he bashed Obama with the same zeal he bashed Clinton nightly

you would loathe him.

[SoonerPride]

130. He reported truth.

Had Obama smeared and lied and cast stones at Clinton, that shit would've been called exactly what it was.

Vile.

And hurtful to the party.

And all from someone who was going to lose anyway.

I supported Clinton. But I support the party more.

I don't hold Keith responsible for speaking the truth.

[ruggerson]

132. No, he spoke spin

and attacking bad journalism, btw, is not attacking our side of the fence. Bad journalism can come right back and bite us in the ass when they decide to feast on liberals.

There were times watching MSNBC was like reading Pravda. It was pure, unadulterated propoganda. As bad as Faux News.

[SoonerPride]

133. "when they decide to feast on liberals." where the hell have you been?

The press has been "feast(ing) on liberals" for the last two decades.

Finally we have one voice of sanity on the air.

ONE!

His program does not purport itself to be "just the facts and nothing but the facts" news. It clearly states its purpose and stays true to that purpose.

Unlike other "news" programs which covertly spin or sway through biased "journalism" Countdown is a snarky/lighthearted hour of opinion and rolling eyeballs tossed in with some harder news and fluff.

It is far less problematic since anyone going in knows what to expect, whereas one expects the ABC evening News to be reportage of the highest caliber, and instead it is filled with right wing hit pieces and outright fabrications masquerading as news. That is far more insidious.

[ruggerson]

136. Well we'll have to disagree on Olbermann

I'm not impressed with propoganda, whether it's coming from the left or the right. And when it's gussied up as infotainment it's even worse, because then it's message is seen as innocuous, while it's actually seeping into the (less discerning) brains of its viewers.

Corporate news, otoh, while perhaps less partisan, is driven by one motive: profit. Which is why they will spend ten minutes on a Rev Wright scandal and 5 seconds on Obama's economic policy.

Think of how this campaign was covered: it was one gaffe after the next, one scandal after the next, with almost no serious discussion of the issues, except when the candidates themselves drove it. That's, sadly, because Americans tune into gossip, scandal and intrigue. That's what drives ratings.

[Lord Helmet]

138. sounds to me like you're allergic to the truth or something

just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not truth. KO is just speaking truth that you don't want to hear

[Doctor_J]

117. Brokaw is a war criminal

and will hopefully be prosecuted after the DOJ has all of the sewage flushed from it next year.

[and-justice-for-all]

121. Thanks Tom, but what were you doing during the Iraq...

build up?? Pretty sure you were beating those drums.

[SoonerPride]

123. Well there was money to be made for GE.

.........and all their advertisers wanted to reap the profits.

War is good for business and Tommy was good for getting their message out.

[McCamy Taylor]

131. Tom Brokaw told Republicans to get behind John McCain so they could unite against Dems.

He did this on air very early in the campaign when the Republicans were in massive disarray. He is trotted out at MSNBC to deliver the pro-McCain talking points. If he is saying nice things about Clinton (and bad stuff about KO and Matthews) it is because McCain and the bosses at GE have told him to.

[Skip Intro]

134. He's absolutely right. K&R.

[LostInAnomie]

135. I just love a good media mea culpa.

Like these fools (and Brokaw is definitely included in that category) are oblivious to the state of media coverage. They cover the most salacious, or inflammatory material 99% of the day and then lament how "real news" never gets covered anymore. Brokaw isn't new to this game. In fact, he's been an active participant in it for decades. I'm sure he was loathing himself the years he was covering the Lewinsky scandal, or the Chandra Levy investigation. :eyes:

Brokaw needs to STFU and stick his wagging finger up his indignant ass.

[Raejeanowl]

137. I Think Brokaw Should Be Respected On One Point

That he is encouraging his peers to police themselves against the temptation of trying to SHAPE and SPIN the news, rather than fulfill their essential reporting duties.

The old-school Brokaw deeply misunderstands the hybrid of a political pundit, allied to journalism, but serving editorial and entertainment functions as well. It's still a new paradigm for him and probably feels more than a little sacrilegious to play that game.

I don't agree that commentary was "disguised" at all, but some members of the public are clearly unable to differentiate between the factual information conveyed and the interjected personal opinions of the talking heads.

[Beacool]

139. Thank you Mr. Brokaw!!!!!

Finally a true journalist puts that sexist mental midget Matthews and that pompous ass Olbermann in their place!!!!!!

Brokaw's old-school attitude often put him at odds with Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann when he joined them for primary night coverage on MSNBC this year. One example was last Tuesday. Brokaw was talking about the contrasts between McCain and Obama when Olbermann interjected about "a third one trying to shoehorn her way" into the coverage.

"Well, I think that's unfair, Keith," Brokaw replied. "I don't think she shoehorned her way in. When you look at the states that she won and the popular vote that she piled up, and the number of delegates that she has on her side, she's got real bargaining power in all of this."


:bounce:

[emilyg]

141. Thank you Tom B.

[Major Hogwash]

142. Tom Brokaw is a Republican.

And votes in Montana.

You guys aren't dealing with reality here.
You're just looking for any excuse to complain.

Sean Hannity also thinks that the media helped to "push" Hillary out of the race.

[underpants]

143. DC establishment and media couldn't protect their candidate

they are trying to defend her now

[ElsewheresDaughter]

145. good on him!

"Well, I think that's unfair, Keith," Brokaw replied. "I don't think sheshoehornedd her way in. When you look at the states that she won and the popular vote that she piled up, and the number of delegates that she has on her side, she's got real bargaining power in all of this."

[krkaufman]

146. Brokaw's an idiot. He had an opportunity to do journalism ...

... and he failed. Brokaw was in the anchor chair in the run-up to the Iraq war, and NBC was just as lapdog as every other media outlet in the rush for war.