It's way too bad. He was the last journalist I ever trusted to even try and ask politicians the tough questions that they were all too ready to brush off in a flurry of prefabricated PR. Every other journalist, these days, only ask softball questions or, even worse, stupid questions.
His loss will be greatly noticed by those who lament the fall of journalism.
Totally agree. I loved Tim Russert. And
trusted him to ask those tough questions of everyone from Dick Cheney to John Kerry. He did it the precise way it should be done. Use their words and confront them, don't back down from uncomfort and give them the opportunity to stand up and defend themselves. He would ask a question and then
actuallyallow the interviewee to answer. Almost never interupting and never worried about time restraints.
The saddest thing, in light of it all, is these other journalists and pundits (talking just the TV personalities) praised him for this very thing all evening. Which at least tells you how aware they were of their journalistic credibility with the regular people. Sort of like almost saying "they are on to our game but we still have to go for those ratings!". Which is probably ironic considering the size of the audience during Meet the Press. Cable news is just the antithesis of Tim Russert. And that's not a good thing and I think they all know it too.
Anyways,
Russert got big ratings too! That's what was amazing. Without all the cable newsy senationalism. He owned Sunday mornings and Sunday mornings are probably the most important news day for politics. Chris Wallace, Bob Schieffer and Wolf Blitzer all acknowledged this, to an extent. I mean, they have to acknowledge that MTP wins virtually every Sunday morning but they also praised his integrity and methods. As Blitzer becomes even more of a stooge for his corporation and Wallace tries to find the latest conservative spin for Fox. Schieffer is all class but just as boring as it seems. Russert was hardcore news and politics and it was entertaining because you knew the great question would never be avoided. And the 'dodge' by the interviewee would not be passed by. He'd also treat his subject with respect and allow them to fucking talk. There aren't many interviewers anywhere, from ESPN to David Letterman to E! to Larry King that will allow a motherfucker to speak and not be interupted incessantly.
John Edwards even remarked on MSNBC's coverage today about how you could tell by the look on Russerts face if he thought you were bullshitting him with your answer and right then, you knew he'd follow up.
Anyhow, this was a big, big loss. Especially 5 months to go before such a HUGE election. Perhaps David Gregory could be a replacement temporarily but given his tenacity with the Bush admin (which is a good thing) he might be seen as a partisan, at first at least. He'd have to go after the Obama campaign and the Dems in a similar way and I think he would and maybe he'd be a good choice. At least in the short term. Even Russert worked for two prominent Democrats but made his name with fairness, fierecness and earned our trust. I think it's fair to say we have a trust problem with the rest of our own media.