"Russert Has Spent 20 Years Building Credibility. All Of A Sudden He's Taking Questions From [A] Daily Kos Blogger?"Building credibility with whom, I wondered. Russert hasn’t spent two decades building credibility with me. To me, Russert has spent 20 years insinuating himself into the pundit power structure. That's not "credibility" that's reliability: Russert reliably will do what the pundit power structure needs to have done.
And they all yodel together
Over at The Daily Howler, Somerby critiques how exquisitely the on-air pundits play dumb.
Life would be better without cable “news” channels, we couldn’t help thinking last night. The problem is the same old problem—the problem of pundit gang-comment. Routinely, our pundits All Say The Same Things, thereby giving the (false) impression that their Approved Group Views are cast in stone. Through their gang-punditry, they construct your world—and viewers quite often don’t know it.Somerby also points out that, institutional amnesia be damned, such non-concessions are hardly unprecedented in American presidential politics and, for the edification of the nation’s pundits, produces a list (suitable for laminating) of some big political names who delayed their concessions or who never quite got around to conceding.
In particular, we were struck by the way the pundit corps gang-reacted to Clinton’s lack of a concession. It isn’t as if this was a surprise…. In short, all [the] pundits knew, when they went on the air, that Clinton wouldn’t be “conceding.”
Anybody have the fax number for MSNBC?