[QUOTE=want2know]
I have just done that on CS, and am now coming over here to do the same. I have been informed that Fox did dedicate a good chunk of time to the story, so I am admitting my error.
I think it was the lack of any mention on the ticker that, ahem, “ticked” me off. I jumped to an incorrect conclusion based on, as you say, “too little evidence”, and felt the need to vent immediately.
Guess that’ll learn me, huh? 
[/QUOTE]
We’ll see. 
But good for you for the mea culpa.
[QUOTE=want2know]
I have just done that on CS, and am now coming over here to do the same. I have been informed that Fox did dedicate a good chunk of time to the story, so I am admitting my error.
I think it was the lack of any mention on the ticker that, ahem, “ticked” me off. I jumped to an incorrect conclusion based on, as you say, “too little evidence”, and felt the need to vent immediately.
Guess that’ll learn me, huh?
[/QUOTE]
Congrats on admitting a mistake. Would that more people would do that around here.
Not to speak ill of the dead, and all, but why is his death such Omigawd news? I liked the guy as much as the next man - I mean, he fact checked!
This seems like a case of the news media being more interested in themselves than the news itself, though. For fuck’s sake, he’s getting the same column inches and air time that Gerald Ford got.
[QUOTE=Lok]
OTOH, CNN pissed me off with their coverage. They announced Breaking News and Wolf Blitzer came on and told about Tim Russert. Then they spent 3 hours talking over and over about what a great guy and outstanding journalist he was. No news about the floods in the midwest, nothing on Bush in Europe, the only thing they had from Obama and McCain was their reactions to Russert’s death.
It was good they had something about him. He was a pretty good journalist and it was a sudden death. But for those 3 hours, it was like there was nothing else in the world going on. It pissed me off enough that I sent them an email about it. If I was a Daily Show writer, I would be all over this.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll go stand in that column next to you. Honestly, I didn’t even know who Tim Russert was. I’m sure he was a fine fellow and maybe he’s done some important things, but IMO it’s really unbalanced the way the media covers stories that are close to its own, like the way CNN covers every minor house fire and car chase that happens in Atlanta.
[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
Not to speak ill of the dead, and all, but why is his death such Omigawd news? I liked the guy as much as the next man - I mean, he fact checked!
This seems like a case of the news media being more interested in themselves than the news itself, though. For fuck’s sake, he’s getting the same column inches and air time that Gerald Ford got.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, except that from what I hear he was a genuinely NICE person. That’s probably not too common in Washington. He’s getting accolades from both sides of the political aisle.
[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
Not to speak ill of the dead, and all, but why is his death such Omigawd news? I liked the guy as much as the next man - I mean, he fact checked!
This seems like a case of the news media being more interested in themselves than the news itself, though. For fuck’s sake, he’s getting the same column inches and air time that Gerald Ford got.
[/QUOTE]
I assume Tim Russert got around. Network News buisness is still a small cadre of folks (a couple dozen or so big names). They get to know each other, if for nothing else than to follow the careers of the competitors. They may even “fact check” off each other as a professional courtesy, and there is a lot of behind the scenes dialog between them.
Also, I think a sudden, unexpected death like that hits closer to home to the folks within the same industry. He didn’t look that old, compared to Andy Rooney or Walter Kronkite…
I was truly shocked and saddened that he died. He was on The Tonight Show quite a bit and he seemed down to earth, honest and thoughtful. He could ask a pointed question without rancor and never seemed to take things personally.
What a shame.
[QUOTE=want2know]
I have just done that on CS, and am now coming over here to do the same. I have been informed that Fox did dedicate a good chunk of time to the story, so I am admitting my error.
I think it was the lack of any mention on the ticker that, ahem, “ticked” me off. I jumped to an incorrect conclusion based on, as you say, “too little evidence”, and felt the need to vent immediately.
Guess that’ll learn me, huh?
[/QUOTE]
Nice job.