?

Log in

No account? Create an account
The Villages

hutch0
Date: 2008-03-09 21:36
Subject: peeved
Security: Public
Location:the utility room in the sky
Mood:annoyedannoyed
Music:foo fighters
I've previously been unaware of the ouvre of MSNBC's Tucker Carlson, but he recently interviewed Gerri Peev, the Scotsman journalist responsible for breaking the Hillary `monster' story which resulted in the resignation of Obama adviser Samantha Powers.
Now, the debate over whether Gerri Peev (I love the name) should have allowed Samantha Powers to retract the `monster' comment, claiming it was off the record, when no off-the-record parameters had been set at the outset of the interview, is I think a matter of cultural differences between British and US journalists. Ms Peev was working to one set of rules, and Ms Powers was working to another. Situations like that are always a car-crash waiting to happen.
But I really do have to take exception with Tucker Carlson. His question, "Since journalistic standards in Great Britain are so much dramatically lower than they are here, it's a little much being lectured on journalistic ethics by a reporter from The Scotsman," really got my back up. I can't claim to be The Scotsman's greatest ally, but dammit, this overpaid, overcoiffed, smug berk has no right to say that about my trade. I love American journalism - some of the mightiest writing in the business has come from across the Pond - but I don't consider Tucker Carlson a worthy commentator. On the basis of this, the man's an idiot.
You can watch the whole exchange (and a coda in which another guest congratulates Tucker Carlson) here. I'll grant you, Gerri Peev doesn't come out of it entirely whiter than white - she seems to have omitted to ask some fairly obvious follow-up questions. But really, the affrontery of the man.
I think I'm going to be keeping an eye on Tucker Carlson, just to check on the quality of his journalism...
Post A Comment | 39 Comments | | Flag | Link






RealThog: morgan brighteyes
User: realthog
Date: 2008-03-09 23:36 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:morgan brighteyes

"I like the New York Times very much"

So do I, but it has plummeted in my estimation not just because of the Judith "Let's Stenograph the Neocons" Miller affair but also because there've been a disturbing number recently of stories the NYT seems to have held back until a more convenient moment for Il Buce and his murderous little junta: the illegal eavesdropping story, for example, was held back until after the 2004 election, when you or I might have though illegal behaviour by the govt was a bit fucking pertinent to that poll, no?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-03-09 23:41 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
My liking for the Times isn't so much for its coverage of national politics as its continuing narrative about New York itself. There's real poetry in some of the stuff their writers do about New York.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
the villages
the links
December 2013
the promo