In all the hoo-hah about them over the last 10 or so days, one of the things I found most annoying was that Brian Williams and Jon Stewart kept being described as journalists. Performers, yes, but journalists? Either of them? Not even close.
That was my reaction, anyway, but then I got to wondering: Does journalism, real journalism, even exist anymore? Original research and reporting, good, accessible writing, all presented with freshness and energy and intelligence? Is it still around? Or has journalism become so debased that we might as well concede the collapse of another corner of what used to be called Western Civilization and go ahead and grant that, by current standards, Williams and Stewart really sort of were journalists?
The answer is that there’s still good stuff around — stuff good enough to evoke admiration and even a kind of awe at the sheer craftsmanship it involves. To wit, Andy Ferguson in the current Weekly Standard:
Boy, that didn’t take long. Over the span of a few short days in late January and early February, three members of the top tier of Republican presidential candidates demonstrated why they’ll never be president. They didn’t do anything to disqualify themselves directly, just revealed the traits that will make them appear unsuitable to most voters by the time the campaign really heats up, say, when the presidential election is a mere 18 months away. As it is, all three of them—Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, and Chris Christie—can pack it in right now and save months of time and tons of money. They’d be doing themselves a favor, and us too.
Provocative, funny, and, as you’ll see when you read the whole piece, argued.
Andy’s conclusion:
We are a forgiving people, but there are many qualities Americans will not accept in a president. They wouldn’t, we can assume, want a professional gambler, a sex offender, a fashion designer, or a collector of 19th-century dollhouses. No race car drivers, stand-up comics, or Esperanto-speakers need apply. Neither, just as reliably, do they want a prig [Huckabee], a prickly, unconvincing hipster [Rand Paul], or a 52-year-old man who still plays air guitar [Chris Christie].
In one piece, Andy demonstrates the standards according to which journalists ought to be judged–which is to say that he not only demolishes three presidential candidates but two former anchors.
Published in General
Peter Robinson:
Sharyl Attkisson. Katie Pavlich. And yes, James O’Keefe.
The American public twice elected a buffoon who played the saxophone embarrassingly badly on late-night TV while wearing Ray-Bans in a pitiful attempt to look hip.
I’m not convinced there is any idiocy that is intolerable to the voters.
Perhaps this should have been titled, “Peter’s Mancrush Redux?” Not that Andy isn’t a witty and courageous writer, he is. But so is Jonah, Lileks, Rob, P.J., Anne even at times Charles and George. There are others I’m sure I’ve left out.
But where are the witty, courageous Liberal Journalists (the ones not accused of making facts up or plaigerism)? That’s what I want to know. And Jon Stewart doesn’t count.
Journalist. One who writes for a journal.
“We are a forgiving people, but there are many qualities Americans will not accept in a president. They wouldn’t, we can assume, want a professional gambler, a sex offender, a fashion designer, or a collector of 19th-century dollhouses. No race car drivers, stand-up comics, or Esperanto-speakers need apply. Neither, just as reliably, do they want a prig [Huckabee], a prickly, unconvincing hipster [Rand Paul], or a 52-year-old man who still plays air guitar [Chris Christie].”
Ouch, that last one hurt, as I am 53 and play air guitar – to make matters worse, often to Springsteen. In my defense, I play actual guitar in a band, therefore, when I play air guitar, I am playing actual chords. Well, it seems like a defense, anyway.
Over the past couple of days, I have been thinking about those things that we might want our president to be able to do, rather than not do. Things that have nothing to do with the presidency. I got to thinking about this after Mike Rowe’s brilliant Facebook post about Howard Dean’s deeming Scott Walker to be unknowledgable due to the latter’s failure to finish his senior year (and we all know how much studying goes on at that time in a college career).
My fantasy is this: A presidential “debate” including candidates from both parties. It wouldn’t really be a debate because there would be little or no speaking. It wouldn’t even be a contest, though there could be timed race element to it. It would be more of an exhibition. The candidates doing things that normal Americans do – perhaps even things that the average man or woman ought to be able to do. Such things as:
Are these too male-centric? We could add “Baking cookies” for Mrs. Clinton’s benefit; as First Lady, she was allegedly terrific at that task.
Don’t you think this would be a fascinating spectacle? Imagine the ratings!
My point (if there is one) is that most politicians are so far removed from the average American’s everyday reality that many of them would embarrass themselves if they were put on the spot by having to do an everyday task. We already see this happen occasionally on the campaign trail.
My guess is that Scott Walker could do all the tasks above, including the cookie-baking.