Huffington Post picked up this entry from Brian Williams blog as a way to show conservative bias in the media (later, in a part unquoted, he praises Peggy Noonan’s column this week.) Anyway, I actually thought this was pretty funny, so I’m breaking my own rule about quoting items at length:
I read that the New York Times Sunday (and weekday) circulation is down. I must admit that on Sundays it becomes a tough paper to figure out. While this week’s paper featured an op-ed piece by Elizabeth Edwards bemoaning the lack of serious, in-depth coverage of the political race, it’s tough to figure out exactly what readers the paper is speaking to, or seeking.
Consider this: the Sunday Styles section lead story on April 13th was “Scavengers on the Urban Savannah” (people buy things at flea markets!), and promoted on Page One was “A Sex Chair Becomes A Battlefield.” Alrighty then.
This Sunday’s lead story was “Through Sickness, Health, Sex Change…” in a section that included the essay, “Was I On A Date Or Baby-Sitting?,” and “Let’s Say You Want To Date A Hog Farmer” (and who among us hasn’t?).
The magazine cover story this week was “The Newlywed Gays!” (happy gay men in Massachusetts who are married outdoor grilling enthusiasts!), and another feature story profiled a man who “lives and paints” in New Mexico (one of those states west of New Jersey) and has an old-fashioned typewriter!
This week’s restaurant/bar review featured a place in Brooklyn that features (tragically-hip/quaint alert!) “old-time cocktails and cheeses” (it strikes me: so did my Mom, at home in Jersey) and the so-called “big box” featured wedding was a classic: the groom wore the obligatory sneakers with his tux, the bride was a “spitfire” with a “wide and ready Julia Roberts smile.” Per usual, bride and groom are both free-spirited, with strong opinions.
The lead story in the Travel Section? The rise of vacation resorts catering to nudists. It did occur to me that I haven’t been getting out a lot on weekends. Is it just me?
There’s something very Bill Murray-ish about Brian Williams, and it comes out even in his straight reporting: it’s as though he sees the absurdity in every situation and choses to be amused by it rather than be driven insane by it. I don’t know if that makes him a better or worse TV anchor, or if it has no impact whatsoever, but it does seem to fit the era. For people who want to hear the news, they hear the news; for those who want a wink and a smile along with their news, well, he provides that too. I don’t actually watch any of the evening network newscasts — I think I’m part of that generation that has turned to cable and the internet (maybe I’m just “post-network news”). I’ve always kinda wished that we had Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite, or someone like them, but part of me thinks that bemoaning the fact that we don’t is just a nice excuse to chose to watch the more entertaining, personality-driven stuff. Maybe those serious guys wouldn’t play the same now. I mean, Olbermann tries to channel Murrow every night, but he still definitely does that wink and smile thing also.
As for the Peggy Noonan column Williams ended up praising… not bad. The first third, describing Gate 14, was well written. I actually do “get” the second third about being able to articulate a non-ideological patriotism. The last third, on why conservatives are nostalgic for Reagan, seems to come off the tracks a bit (writing-wise at least… and because I have a hard time believing that Peggy Noonan just figured out why Reagan is so missed by Republicans). Anyway, Brian Williams thought it deserved the Pulitzer for commentary. I don’t, but I’m still not convinced that he’s a closeted Right-winger because he does. Oh well.
