In my opinion this is a “right-on” piece. And here I am, thinking I'm the only one in the world who thinks Russert is overhyped with all the impact of milk-soaked bread. The rare times when I tuned into his Sunday show, I watched as one of his guests dropped an answer that if pursued, would have been a real bombshell. But Russert just let it go off into never-never land. An old newsman once told me that if you want to be a successful interviewer, throw away the damned paper with the pre-written questions and actually LISTEN to what you’re being told. Not only will you learn something, you’ll probably end up with a real story. Broadcast journalism has become nothing more than talking-head entertainment. Always a favorite with ... More »

The author provides salient points regarding Russert, but I do question this statement:"where newsmakers go to be grilled by one of television news's most respected figures." Respected by whom? Perhaps this is the answer from the article; "Because, as Geraghty has noted, it's a rite of passage, and any politician too chicken to play Russert's inane games would never garner the respect of the political class." It's unfortunate that the author doesn't identify 'the political class' as such seems to be essential to understanding the complete context of the article.

While focused on Tim Russert, this is not such an important topic. If Yglesias had broadened the focus, as he just touched on when he mentioned Russert's "legion of imitators," it then becomes a very important topic. Because his central point, made at the very end, that Russert's goal isn't to inform his audience, but to get attention for himself and his show--is one of the great failings of our modern media. As presented, it's a devastatingly accurate portrayal of the show and the "journalist" Russert plays on TV.

The story criticizes the lack of good journalism by the chief talking head of candidate inquisition. Confrontation gathers lots of mindless eyeballs which sells TV ads. Intelligent inquiry and important policy issues that serve the public are anathema to these pugnacious brain-injured front men for the corporate controlled press.

Yglesias does point out an inanity, but it is the nature of most of this type of program on TV. Russert is better than O'Reilly perhaps, but not by much. We are hard-pressed to get in depth coverage of the important figures who may gain the reins of government. He should stick to fluff like Britney Spears or whoever is delighting the smallest minds.

This opinion piece is good journalism mainly because it is one MSM source criticizing another source- all too rare still. Yglesias accurately identifies two of Russert's favorite interview tactics and shows how they are less about informing the audience than creating another news story. I believe Russert is overly respected, and unlike Chris Matthews- an easy NBC target- Russert doesn't get nearly as much criticism as he deserves. Both Russert and Matthews are key actors in the over-dramatization of TV news, like all TV news personalities, which is why citizens should not get their information from television, except perhaps CSpan and sometime PBS. And when it is useful to see motion pictures of spectacular events like Katrina, ... More »