May 12, 2014

"[T]hey all loved Tim Russert, right? Because the benefit of Tim Russert was that not only did he let them control the message..."

"... but he cast the appearance that they were subjected to really rigorous questioning. So it was the extra bonus of propagandizing while convincing the public that they weren't being propagandized. And so I think all those TV hosts do that, and I think that most major newspapers are incredibly deferential to high-level government officials, and especially to military and intelligence officials."

Said Glenn Greenwald, scoffing at the standard depiction of Tim Russert as "hard-nosed... like everyone was petrified of him."

27 comments:

Brando said...

Perhaps he could provide some examples? Because from what I recall, Russert often made his guests look like insincere idiots. Does Greenwald really think that was what those guests intended?

Michael said...

I happen to agree that Russert was not what he wanted to appear to be. He was an old school middle of the road liberal with a distaste for conservatives, a view that they weren't quite the right sort for a hearty populist yakking truth to power. Too cerebral for Tim.

Alex said...

Tim Russert always went after the Clintons.

TDP said...

Greenwald is correct as far as he goes.

If Russert, et al, were truly "hard-nosed" American journalists instead of ruling political class journalists, Americans would not be in the dire straits we are.

paul a'barge said...

Journolist.

Remember Journolist, Greenwald? We do. We know all about the pathetic butt-buddy bidding you and yours do for DemoNcrats.

Whine on, but don't think for a minute anyone with an IQ of a marble takes you seriously.

Sam L. said...

That's Glenn (Sockpuppet) Greenwald, as I read a number of years ago.

Robert Cook said...

By definition, any journalist who actually probed at the truth beneath the carefully fabricated simulacra of "reality" that is presented to us by Washington would not be kept in well-paid prominent permanent position on one of the network "prestige" (sic) Sunday morning news magazines.

traditionalguy said...

Russet would push back some, but only on small issues. He was not a threat to the powerful on secrecy issues.

Obama desires total mind control in his selected alternate reality. No journalist can give Obama what he demands...but they surrender to him every time because he is half black.

St. George said...

Russert, whatever one thinks of his skill as a journalist, had charisma. He popped off the little TV screen as a larger than life figure. The man was full of life and zest. Gregory is small and grey by comparison.

Writ Small said...

Greenwald reveals a lot more about himself than he does of Russert.

Let's review: Months ago, David Gregory asked Greenwald a mildly challenging, easily anticipated question regarding Snowden and the line between journalism and criminality. Greenwald, instead of answering calmly, acted offended the question was even being asked. Said Greenwald to Gregory's question: "I think it’s pretty extraordinary that anybody who would call themselves a journalist would publicly muse about whether or not other journalists should be charged with felonies. "

Greenwald was so butthurt over this exchange, whining about it for days wasn't enough. Trashing the pathetic David Gregory in his sad little book wasn't enough. So hurt was Greenwald over a tough question, he felt it necessary to criticize a journalist not even alive when selling out our intelligence agencies first entered Snowden's head.

rhhardin said...

Russert showed up on Imus a lot, where he played the part of serious person.

Bob R said...

I wouldn't want Greenwald to give examples of where Russert was soft on his guests - I want an example of a show where big name guests are genuinely sent through the ringer in a way Greenwald wants. Of more to the point, I want an example where such a show gets a second big name guest. If you want to defend Russert you can only do so compared to other Sunday morning talking head shows. None of them generate much in the way of news, so Greenwald has the easier side of the argument.

Michael K said...

Greenwald is trying to build his own image after Snowden by tearing down Russert, and others.

Mark O said...

Journalism is a business, not a profession. Television is entertainment, not a mean of inquisition.

What do you think you will get?

Watch Candy Crowley and Obama lock eyes over the "terrorism" issue just before she claims to have a transcript.

George S. is the man who introduced contraception into the 2012 campaign. Who do you think he is?

Jack Wayne said...

The sock-puppeteer is jealous but that doesn't make him wrong.

garage mahal said...

Remember Journolist, Greenwald? We do. We know all about the pathetic butt-buddy bidding you and yours do for DemoNcrats.

Smart take!

Anonymous said...

Yarrrgh, Red Robert, I see you've come out at the mention of Glenn Greenwald's Left-liberal anarchic tendencies.

Thar be the scent of socialism in this wind blowing to port at 12 knots. A whiff of salty hope, perhaps?

Here ye be trying to explain false consciousness to the deckhands on this semi-capitalist ship while you sit in the crow's nest of socialist doctrine on the very same ship.

Avast, matey, what cruel irony! The rotting hulks of post-Communist vessels drift by....The Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea...bloated bodies everywhere.

Tell us again how to find ultimate reality on that special Socialist map you've got there, Red Robert

Tell us again about walking the plank, or starving in the holds, or each ship of State slowly breaking apart in the surf....its leaders baked mad by the sun and beating their crews.

Yaaarrrrghhhh!

Your

zefal said...

What he's says is true but the left still didn't like Russert. They wanted a less aggressive shill. I'd put Jake Tapper in this category. A not-as-aggressive shill as Russert.

William said...

Greenwald describes himself as a journalist. Russert's act was much more convincing.

RecChief said...

. but he cast the appearance that they were subjected to really rigorous questioning.

Even if Greenwald's take on it is true, it's a skill not many master, and David Gregory will never be able to do it.

Greenwald has become kind of cranky lately. Things not going so well on his new venture?

grackle said...

… from what I recall, Russert often made his guests look like insincere idiots. Does Greenwald really think that was what those guests intended?

I also recall Russert fondly. It was years ago but I remember him making some guests look very uncomfortable, not that that has to be the litmus test for good interviewing. Cannot remember the guests but a couple of them were high up in the military.

I've seen his son, who favors his father in looks, on various shows on MSNBC & NBC, most of it straight reporting. Too early to tell much about him.

Ann Althouse said...

"Greenwald has become kind of cranky lately. Things not going so well on his new venture?"

He came to the U.S. to pick up and award and wasn't arrested (but that happened after the interview).

I think he's always been cranky and hostile in his expression.

The interviewer indicates that he seems friendly and relaxed in person, unlike his public persona.

He has 12 dogs.

Brando said...

Russert's style usually followed a simple pattern:

Russert: Senator, you are saying that all dogs should be properly licensed and neutered, do I have that correct?

Senator: Absolutely. Unneutered dogs are a dangerous thing in our society, and licensing is the only way we can be sure of the neutering. I firmly believe that God would want His own dog neutered.

Russert: Okay, but it looks like six months ago you were in this newspaper photo walking your dog who is clearly not neutered. And apparently quite happy. [Show's photo of Senator with happy, non-neutered dog]

Senator: Well, that's not my dog.

Russert: Are you saying this quote that went with the photo which says "Senator walking his dog Fido near his home" is incorrect?

Senator: Er, I mean that's my wife's dog.

Russert: So your wife doesn't agree with your neutering policy?

Senator: No, I didn't say that. [Sweating!] My wife and I agree about neutering dogs, we even put that in our wedding vows.

Russert: I see.

Senator: In fact, if I recall correctly, in this photo I am walking our dog to the vet for neutering.

Russert: Okay. In the accompanying article, you are quoted as saying "What I love best about Fido here is that he is not, and shall never, be made neuter because when I buy a dog, I buy the whole dog." Were you misquoted, Senator?

Senator: EEK!

Michael said...

Not that there isn;t some truth to this, but I'm sure Glenn Greenwald's idea of a question would be a 1000-word speech on the subject of how the military-industrial complex secretly runs everything.

Lonetown said...

Wow! Something I actually agree with Glenn Greewald about.

Russert was a hack and would never ever harm a liberal cause.

Robert Cook said...

"...I'm sure Glenn Greenwald's idea of a question would be a 1000-word speech on the subject of how the military-industrial complex secretly runs everything."

What about their control of everything is secret?!

Tom said...

Glenn Greenwald is detestable. When at Salon he was merely an insufferable coward, but he has not become a self-appointed savior of the world and enables criminality in its pursuit.