Recently MSNBC presenters have all fronted promo slots which, I guess, are designed primarily to promote the network first, and their roles on MSNBC.
That cable channel is the nearest thing to "truth" that we get on TV, and there are some real diamonds among the presenters. Krystal Ball has a habit of getting straight to the issue, Chris Matthews will usually skirt around it with rare moments of lucidity that have me yelling "Go Chris" at times ... unfortunately rare.
I like Lawrence O'Donnell, but he can be a bit "inside Beltway", and Rachel is without peer.
Then there is Chuck ... :: sigh ::
Chuck knows what he should be doing. Indeed, he nails it pretty well in this piece:
My question to Chuck Todd is simply this:
"Great piece Chuck. It's very clear that you understand your responsibility to the people of this country. My question is ... When are you going to start?"
"When will you ask the tough questions? Those questions designed to pierce the facade, deflate the pomposity and show your viewers exactly who it is they are electing?"
If you want a "Master Class", I have a great example, just read on. Unfortunately it comes not from US television, but from local UK Radio. I'm pretty sure the salary of this guy is orders of magnitude below Chuck's, and I'm equally sure his talent is orders of magnitude higher.
Here LBC's James O'Brian is interviewing Nigel Farage, leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party. A motley collection of racists and misogynists dressed up as people with a conscience.
The video is a long one, but really the first few minutes will suffice. You will get the drift.
Unlike the situation here when national journalists interview Tea Party types, and Republicans generally, the questions are not "soft-balled", not dressed up in glitter and candy, and served at a gentle 30 miles an hour ... they are brutal, pointed and devastatingly accurate. There is no place to hide, and politicians should be given no place to hide.
Fair enough to give notice of topics. No need to "ambush" people with questions they have had no time to prepare for. None of that type of journalism is necessary if the interviewer knows his/her shit, and is prepared to force folk to answer honestly.
I'd dearly love to see this guy go ten minutes with John Boehner:
So Chuck ... You know your job. You described it beautifully in the puff-piece.
When are you going to get to the truth? When is America going to see you shed your desire to be an insider, and become a journalist?
-