David Gregory's 'Meet the Press' problem
By John Amato Friday Mar 20, 2009 12:00pm[H/t driftglass]
I've long said that David Gregory was a bad choice to host Meet the Press. He was fine as a WH press pool reporter peppering Scottie, but it's another thing to host the # 1 talk show on Sunday and be a driving personality to captain the ship. Tim Russert for good or bad did have a presence on camera that Gregory simply does not possess.
Can he improve? Yes. Will he? I doubt it. What I've seen is a guy who's just hanging in there and trying to imitate the show's longstanding format, but without any of the bite it once had. It feels flat and convenient now. I thought NBC should have tried to develop a new voice from within all the other NBC news affiliates across the country, or go out and hire someone not in the NBC family.
Under Gregory, "Meet the Press" simply doesn't feel like the force it was under his legendary predecessor, Tim Russert, who died last June.
Vernie Gay of Newsday reviews Gregory's performance so far:
The problem? Actually, problems. The new moderator often seems like he's wearing a suit made for someone else - Russert - and as a result has yet to clearly establish why he got this gig instead of anyone else in the conga line of potential successors. Gregory is terrifically polished, well-informed, a good listener and has the talking points of both sides down cold. But he also seems more intent on covering the waterfront than digging for news, or in pushing the talking heads off their talking points. Recent interviews with Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) felt like a waterfront that went on for miles - an endless vista of chatter and spin.
BOTTOM LINE "Meet the Press" is now the de facto safe show on Sunday morning - "safe," that is, for those being interviewed.
Gregory has been handed perhaps the most important program in television journalism. It's time to start acting like the king who rules wisely yet ruthlessly. Otherwise, his legacy will match that of Garrick Utley or Bill Monroe - moderators who were highly respected but not highly feared. In this job, it's vital to be both.
As we learned through the Scooter Libby trial, the Bush administration considered MTP a good place to get their talking points distributed even with Russert there and did so to scare the country into supporting a war with Iraq. If I was working for the Obama administration I'd look at it the same I. I imagine Dick will start to toughen up and President Obama is the media's prime target now so he'll start to be more aggressive as opposed to Russert who was a beltway insider and acquiesced some of his power to them so he could have access to the Villager class and remember, he often faced them when he wasn't doing his show. President Obama passed on MTP this time around and he's very good on the Leno's of the world, but after thinking about it, he might have taken Gregory to the cleaners this weekend. Reading right wing talking points as an interview technique would be a piece of cake for Obama to handle.
I said I was going to launch a segment that asks our readers to select a series of questions for David to ask his guests on Friday's and that will begin soon. If his effort doesn't pick up soon, Meet the Press will drop in the ratings and NBC will be looking for a new host fairly quickly.
Login or Register to post comments.
look out for the Zucker Machine. He'll gnaw a hole in your good Sunday go to church slacks for criticising his pals...
Was a sub host for Lauer this morning on the "Today" show -- THAT seems to be the perfect gig for him: insubstantial, light-hearted fluff.
However, as John points out above, Russert was pretty much a stooge too. Remember the Moyers doc on the run-up to Iraq? Russert 'wished his phone had rung' -- isn't it the job of a reporter (paid millions) to take the initiative?
He was boring as a guest host too, I couldn't watch more than 5 minutes without my eyes drooping.
FYI - You have a couple of unfinished sentences. Please update the post so it is complete. Thanks much!!
[Thank you. I've sent him and the team an email-Sitemonitor]
When you look up "journalism" in the dictionary.
You do NOT see David Gregory's picture.
IS David Gregory.
Cheney's office knew MTP was the outlet of choice for message delivery and that was during Russert's tenure.
Bottom line is any corp news outlet is going to suck when compared to the likes of BBC or The NewsHour.
He embodies the essential lack of curiosity of the press.
the next time he has a democrat on his show. He will softball and never follow up on the republican lies.
I stopped watching the second week DG was hosting, however, if
President Obama is on this Sunday, I WILL break my rule and watch. But just this one time!
No one I know has any interest in Meet the Press any longer. It's staid and Gregory is a non-entity. He was a horrific choice as moderator and brings absolutely zippo to the show.
RIP: Meet the Press
I've already erased MTP from my Sunday mornings. That silly smile on his face when he asks puff ball questions is just too much.
Was it a rumor or is it true that President Obama will be on MTP this week?
What's more everyone knows David Gregory is just another (very pedestrian I might add) PIMP for the GOP - a media whore propagandizing for the gang of thugs known as the Republican Party.
I always thought Russert was a pretty weak interviewer. Sure, he got a reputation for being "tough" because he played a few sound bites, but he never really went after his interview subjects. That's why Cheney felt it was good to put Bush Administration people on his show - because their views wouldn't be challenged by a timid Russert.
I still do not understand why people think Tim Russert was "legendary". He was weak. The Bush administration treated him as a whipping boy. Meet the Press is now unwatchable.
totally agree.
Russert was a lackey.
Gregory hasn't figured out how to BE a lackey, and make it APPEAR you aren't.
was weak but he was better than Gregory! At least he didn't get on a stage and dance with(I think I'm gonna puke)Karl" Don't call me a pig, I'm just fat"Rove!
Russert had incredible opportunities to ask questions and point out the obvious lies, inconcistencies, and hypocricies of the Bush administration yet he barely uttered a peep. He went right along with the rest of them playing up WMD, ignoring torture and criminal incompetence.
When I see Gregory, a little video pops up in my head of him dancing with Rove. That was the last straw for me. A dignified serious journalist would not have done that.
have that so impresses the NBC bosses? I have never seen one iota of spark or charisma from Gregory.
I think Dan Abrams would have been terrific in that spot.
Dan Abrams would have been a much better choice.
But he to was more tolerant of the Boosh agenda in the beginning.
But later on, when people were waking up, he caught on.
I think he would have been more impartial and been more up to speed with the current situation. He probably would have been attacked anyway for being too hard on the left though.
And the right would certainly attack him for being what is called the Liberal media.
I guess that's how we can tell when a reporter is doing their job.
When no one likes them.
"If his effort doesn't pick up soon, Meet the Press will drop in the ratings and NBC will be looking for a new host fairly quickly."
DG is THE WORST of the Sunday talk show hosts and while he probably could develop the chops to ask the good questions, he prefers to pretend he knows what he's talking about and somehow manages to get in his little smirk - ala Bush - whenever he thinks he has a "gotcha question". And it's usually only directed at the Democrats; never the Republicans.
In order to have a fair and honest discussion, he should do his homework, or his producer should do it for him, and then feed him the questions through his earpiece!
Methinks he's been unduly influenced by his uncle, David Broeder, but it's time for him to assert himself as his own man. Either that, or take a walk.
Like aquarius at 13:32, I've always been impressed with Dan Abrams. He's smart, fair and respectful. Most importantly, he's no pushover.
If NBC had a clue, they would boot Gregory out and hire somebody who isn't afraid to challenge repub talking points. If they allowed a more balanced right/left forum on their pathetic little show, their ratings would soar.
I might watch meat the "press" if they allowed a more balanced right/left forum.
Until that time, I'm saving electricity and my blood pressure.
and getting lots more sleep!
Put Bill Moyers in Gregory's seat and watch what happens to their ratings.
david greGory doesn't have the presence that tim ruSSert had. i will agree with mudshark dan abrams would seem to have been a good/better choice. i do like the meet the press format especially when they expose someones past comments by showing them during an interview. this was very effective when
john mcLiar was on the show.
... after they announced Gregory would be taking over. I never thought he was a very good reporter or interviewer in his previous stints on NBC....and hes' apparently a lousy dancer!
His wife is some kind of big-time, Washington attorney, so maybe he has an inferiority complex...
What's all this crap about "presence"? Tim Russert held that spot because he promoted the World According to GE. That's why Gregory holds the spot as well.
This is like saying one prostitute is better than another because she has a spiffy hat.
maybe your correct my bad. Can you provide a non bias, absolute proof, so i can get a handle on your
statement that ruSSert promoted the WOrld according to GE?
But here's some reportage:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/russert-watch/
and from FAIR:
that could tip the scale in her favor...
I remember Gregory protesting last year, when it was said that major media didn't ask the Bushies the tough question, in the lead-up to the Iraq war. He swore that, "We did ask the tough questions," when in fact, they rolled-over and played dead, and that includes Russert.
Look for Republican Campaigns to trash their Democratic opponents next year with a beautiful Republican Talking Point concocted by David Gregory; "The last time they (Obama/the Dems) said a Republican was "out of touch with the economy", they sure came around to AGREEING with him in a hurry, didn't they?!"
I'm talking about McCain's "The fundamentals of our economy are strong" gaffe that Gregory re-wrote in order to slip a new Republican Talking Point into the national buzz from his perch at MTP by falsely declaring it to be "the same as" the statements by Obama and his economic team even while "the economy has gotten worse".
Here is what happened (and, honestly, I don't know why this never showed up on Mediamatters):
David Gregory and Obama's economic advisor, Dr. Romer, on MTP last week:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29705720/
Gregory showed a video clip of Obama saying this:
(Obama): "If we are keeping focused on all the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, then we're going to get through this. And I'm very confident about that."
Then he showed a video clip of McCain's statement about the economy just prior to the total collapse in the stock market last September:
(McCain):"You know that there's been tremendous turmoil in our financial markets and Wall Street, and it is--it's--people are frightened by these events. Our economy, I think--still, the fundamentals our--of our economy are strong, but these are very, very difficult time."
THEN David Gregory REWROTE what McCain actually said in order to IMPROVE upon it and slipped it back into his discussion with Dr. Romer as though his REWRITE was what McCain said on the tape and what the Obama team criticized earlier:
GREGORY: "So back then during the campaign when Senator McCain talked about the strong fundamentals of the economy it was then-candidate Obama and his team that roundly criticized McCain, saying he was out of touch, he didn't get it, he didn't understand how bad the economy was. And yet now the president's talking about the strong fundamentals of the economy. So what's different between then, the campaign, and now, except for the fact that the economy's gotten dramatically worse?"
No, you lying pro-Republican Karl Rove dance partner, John McCain DID NOT "talk about the strong fundamentals of the economy". He said "the fundamentals our--of our economy are strong"...
The PRESIDENT said, "If we are keeping focused on all the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, then we're going to get through this"...
Those are two TOTALLY DIFFERENT statements with two TOTALLY DIFFERENT meanings.
In fact, the REWRITE that NBC's David Gregory slipped into the discussion with Dr. Romer AS THOUGH it was what McCain said (when it wasn't) and what Dr. Romer agreed with is what the McCain team rewrote for their OWN candidate after he got blasted by the Obama campaign for being "out of touch".
DR. ROMER: "I think when the president says he's focusing on fundamentals, what he means is, is we're focusing on, on fixing the fundamentals; that we've always said we're not looking at the ups and downs of the stock market, we're looking for those crucial indicators: when are jobs turning around, when are sales turning around, when do we see consumers coming to life? That's the kind of thing that--certainly that I'm looking at in terms of when's the economy going to be doing better and, and when can we see some hope."
MR. GREGORY: "Are the fundamentals of this economy sound?"
DR. ROMER: "Well, of course the fundamentals are sound in the sense that the American workers are sound, we have a good capital stock, we have good technology. We know that, that temporarily we're in a mess, right? We've seen huge job loss, we've seen very large falls in GDP. So certainly in the short run we're in a, in a bad situation."
Not two hours later, the rest of mainstream media picked up on David Gregory's cue to push his fabricated Republican Campaign Talking Point into the national consciousness as "fact" that Obama and his economic team are lying hypocrites.
White House says economy is sound despite 'mess'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090315/ap_on_go_...
[[WASHINGTON – The economy is fundamentally sound despite the temporary "mess" it's in, the White House said Sunday in the kind of upbeat assessment that Barack Obama had mocked as a presidential candidate.
…During the fall campaign, Obama relentlessly criticized his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, for declaring, "The fundamentals of our economy are strong." Obama's team painted the veteran senator as out of touch and failing to grasp the challenges facing the country.]]
Republican candidates WILL use this gift from the NBC/MTP/David Gregory gods next year. Count on it.
The best thing about having David Gregory host MTP is that it's much easier to avoid seeing him when he's only on television one day a week (plus repeats).
I thought appointing Gregory was a proverbial win-win for everyone.
Not because I liked Timmeh but because I loathe David Gregory.
Can't comment on the next thread.
[*Shakes fist* Amato's browser! You can now-Sitemonitor]
Gregory just needs to "twitter" with the political machine, like George Snuffleupaguss?
I haven't watched the new Meet the Press once -- not once.
It's not a beyond the grave loyalty to Tim Russert, it's just that I can't stand David Gregory. He's a lightweight. Like a singer who hits all the right notes but, you just don't believe for a second what they're singing.
I haven't seen the ratings for MTP since DG became host and it probably doesn't matter. For NBC, Meet the Press, is their jewel in the crown -- their Sunday morning news program, so General Electric will keep paying the bills even if fewer people watch than watch an episode of ShopNBC.
But when the day comes that CBS and ABC and CNN starts making news on Sunday mornings and NBC is forgotten, expect Gregory to be jettisoned faster than New Coke.
My Vote within NBC would be for Lawrence ODonnell or Rachel Maddow,or, OR.... maybe either of them on every other Sunday so they can keep their other gigs without burnout.
Am I wrong or wasn't Timmy the Chaney VP office's favorite stooge according to a leaked memo?
I think he's either improving a bit, or he's just trying harder. But the problem isn't the magnetism of the host, I think it would have been great if they would have gone back to a very old format. Have guests face a panel of three print journalists for a good grilling. Less preening, more follow-up questions.
For years now, the only follow-up you can count on on MTP or This Week is, "I'll ask you for a third time, senator... Are you running for president?" After a while, you start wondering if they just aren't any smarter than that.
I never watched timmeh except on Crooks And Liars
snippets and if the topic sounded interesting.
Timmeh was a msn prostitute and stooge. When
Timmeh had passed on it affected me as much as
if a cockroach died.
After listening to dick (or prick) gregory's
misinformation on race to the whitehouse, I stopped
listening except to hear Rachel Maddow appear and
spoke.
The good part about gregory on mtp (where mtp =
meet the (media) pricks is knowing that when
I never tune in, I never miss anything. Now
that the New York Times and Washington Post
are best used a bird cage liner, I primarily
go online to Common Dreams, Alternet, Counterpunch
and Crooks and Liars for balanced news and opinion.
I consider most of NPR as MSM faux news except for
occasionally Bill Moyers.
Hope gregory and mtp will RIP soon.
David Gregory once an honest reporter wanted in the circle of friendships with the White House. He got it! He was part of the Plame Leak and it's been down hill from there. Live on TV Karl Rove sought out his best friend David Greogory to do a rap dance to how he hated Patrick Fitzgerald. David smiled and welcome the attention with his friend as he showed other Journalist at the Event that it was he that the White House looked as special. David followed in step to every directive given for propaganda. He hired a lawyer to protect him from testifing at Scooter Libby's trial. Now that viewers know David Gregory is an open liar and will spin for the GOP he's finished. Notice President Obama has no insiders as reporters/Journalist in his Administration. GE is not only losing alot of money but losing million of once trusted viewers. Tim Russert must be crying in heaven to see the show he held keep one numer is now at the bottom.
Give DG all the support and promotion he needs... to put ratings into its inevitable tailspin...
THEN put Rachel Maddow on that program. I think OVERNIGHT you would have the beginnings of a fresh new hard news FRANCHISE that would WOW the whole broadcast journalism industry.
is a repub sycophant. "Wish my phone had rung?" What kind of lazy ass reporting is that? Of course neither of them are journalists (and those are becoming as rare as hens teeth), they're just talking heads, but you'd think they'd at least tryo to be balanced.
John, are you down on Gregory because he isn't a good "talking head" or because he's a lousy host or both? You can be one and not be the other. I think he fails on both accounts, but the latter is more important than the former ... if you don't have to worry about ratings.
do us all a favor and show Gregory the door!All this blow job knows how to do is lick republican scrotum!Hey Dave, fixed any rusty trombones lately?LMFAO!
I don't care for Gregory and his very partisan Reslug guests he normally has on weekly, so I don't watch it anymore.
That's the main reason I don't watch him or watch any MSM so called news show!......... It's the news according to Korporate Amerika.
Login or Register to post comments.