I'm expecting Tom Brokaw to take over on a temporary basis, much as it says in this article. After that, it's anyone's guess. The thing about Tim Russert was, while he was good at getting interviews with important people on the topical, important issues of the day, he didn't do that by playing real hardball. Though that is his reputation, it is more PR than fact.
Tim Russert was not actually a journalist, he was a lawyer and a political acolyte, an assistant to late Democratic New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynahan. He had a love for politics and a deep understanding of the way the game was played that made him an invaluable asset as an analyst. But, at the same time, he approached the political realm from exactly that perspective. It was a game. Russert loved the horse race.
In fact, I always held that he was as responsible for the rise of John McCain in this year's primary season as any other single person-including McCain. He and McCain were friends, and I think this fact might have affected his objectivity. I'm actually quite sure it did.
Yeah, he threw a few "hardballs" in his interviews. What most people don't realize is, for the most part his guests saw them coming, and this was by design. Yet, for the most part we brought the schpiel, and so Russert, beginning in 1991, became the longest running anchor of the longest running television program in history-a program he propelled to a consistent rating of number one. It became more than a show, it became a brand.
So, where to go from here for NBC? They did not lose just an hour long television news show anchor. They also lost a friend, a boss, and the Washington Bureau Chief who probably worked himself into an early grave for them, and did so with a smile on his face. It will be next to impossible to replace him on so many different levels.
Replacing Russert would be comparable to killing off Doc Savage and trying to replace him with only one of his five assistants, any one of whom would be highly capable, yet severely limited by comparison. It's going to take some time to phase into an acceptable format, and even then, it's unlikely to soar to the same heights.
I suggest they reach out in an entirely new direction, find someone who is a relative unknown, perhaps a top-notch regional news anchor or interviewer, someone with whom they can make a brand new start, with a fresh new face.
A real investigative journalist would be a nice change of pace, someone who does ask the hard questions and won't accept the easy answers, but at the same time isn't all that enamored of the politicians he interviews.
That was Russert's main flaw. He assumed too easily that most politicians are more than just hacks. He saw them as basically honest, well-meaning if sometimes flawed would-be public servants who had the good of the country in mind more than their own self-aggrandizement.
Perhaps this came about because he wasn't really directly involved in politics long enough to get a good whiff of the rot. He left it while still mesmerized by the exterior shine of the veneer, and his own naturally gregarious and personable nature made his enthusiasm infectious.
Whatever the case, I do feel a great deal of sympathy toward Russert's father, wife, and, especially, his son, with whom he was very close. The love and respect of these and so many others who knew him well, might well be his greatest and longest lasting legacy.
Tim Russert was not actually a journalist, he was a lawyer and a political acolyte, an assistant to late Democratic New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynahan. He had a love for politics and a deep understanding of the way the game was played that made him an invaluable asset as an analyst. But, at the same time, he approached the political realm from exactly that perspective. It was a game. Russert loved the horse race.
In fact, I always held that he was as responsible for the rise of John McCain in this year's primary season as any other single person-including McCain. He and McCain were friends, and I think this fact might have affected his objectivity. I'm actually quite sure it did.
Yeah, he threw a few "hardballs" in his interviews. What most people don't realize is, for the most part his guests saw them coming, and this was by design. Yet, for the most part we brought the schpiel, and so Russert, beginning in 1991, became the longest running anchor of the longest running television program in history-a program he propelled to a consistent rating of number one. It became more than a show, it became a brand.
So, where to go from here for NBC? They did not lose just an hour long television news show anchor. They also lost a friend, a boss, and the Washington Bureau Chief who probably worked himself into an early grave for them, and did so with a smile on his face. It will be next to impossible to replace him on so many different levels.
Replacing Russert would be comparable to killing off Doc Savage and trying to replace him with only one of his five assistants, any one of whom would be highly capable, yet severely limited by comparison. It's going to take some time to phase into an acceptable format, and even then, it's unlikely to soar to the same heights.
I suggest they reach out in an entirely new direction, find someone who is a relative unknown, perhaps a top-notch regional news anchor or interviewer, someone with whom they can make a brand new start, with a fresh new face.
A real investigative journalist would be a nice change of pace, someone who does ask the hard questions and won't accept the easy answers, but at the same time isn't all that enamored of the politicians he interviews.
That was Russert's main flaw. He assumed too easily that most politicians are more than just hacks. He saw them as basically honest, well-meaning if sometimes flawed would-be public servants who had the good of the country in mind more than their own self-aggrandizement.
Perhaps this came about because he wasn't really directly involved in politics long enough to get a good whiff of the rot. He left it while still mesmerized by the exterior shine of the veneer, and his own naturally gregarious and personable nature made his enthusiasm infectious.
Whatever the case, I do feel a great deal of sympathy toward Russert's father, wife, and, especially, his son, with whom he was very close. The love and respect of these and so many others who knew him well, might well be his greatest and longest lasting legacy.
2 comments:
The name Chuck Todd is being considered to replace Russert.
There really was no doubt in my mind, that McCain would get the nomination. He had the most ruling class support and connections.
Yeah, I got to hand it to you, Ren. You always said McCain would get the nod, even when he was at his lowest ebb. I think it happened for a variety of reasons, but the reason you stated is certainly an important one.
Post a Comment