Tim Russert Dies At 58 196
SputnikPanic writes "Tim Russert, NBC News' Washington bureau chief and moderator of the popular Sunday talk program Meet the Press, has died of an apparent heart attack. He was 58. Russert was known as an even-handed journalist who did not shy away from asking direct and often difficult questions of politicians regardless of their political persuasion. Earlier this year, Russert had been named by Time Magazine as one of the '100 most influential people in the world.'"
This year's race won't be the same (Score:5, Insightful)
He was a rarity in the world of political journalism.
Re:This year's race won't be the same (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This year's race won't be the same (Score:5, Insightful)
He was a rarity in the world of political journalism."
I have to agree....I loved to watch him on Meet The Press. He asked tough questions, and wouldn't generally let the guest doubletalk their way out of not answering...and I thought he was nothing but fair no matter which side of the aisle the guest was. Damn....
Man...so many famous people are dropping like flies last month or two...Bo Diddley, Harvey Korman, etc. Those guys were quite old, long lives...but, Tim was so young looking. I'd not heard he'd had any health problems....wow.
R.I.P., you'll be missed.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, he reflected a physique that is becoming increasingly common in this country. As someone who fights with his weight, it's one of the first things that occurred to me.
Completely agreed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Quite sad (Score:2, Insightful)
RIP, Tim (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:RIP, Tim (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I said Democant
uhuhuh
will you pull my finger now?
He asked questions most people would want asked (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:He asked questions most people would want asked (Score:5, Insightful)
Who are you even talking about? (Score:4, Insightful)
I remember a Tim Russert who insisted in open court that his personal journalistic philosophy was that, when talking to a public official, anything that was said was implicitly off the record unless that public official said that it could go on the record, explicitly.
I remember a Tim Russert who adamantly refused to testify during the Libby trial, who refused to testify against a source who had committed treason against the United States (according to George HW Bush), a Russert who privileged his own journalistic access to the nation's elites over the interests of the people his journalism was meant to serve.
I remember a Russert who, in 2004, basically rolled over for the President. I don't remember any "hardballs"; I remember a craven submission [salon.com] to the bamboozlement of an administration he, along with the rest of his Beltway buddies, allowed to lie to us for years.
I remember a Tim Russert who the Bush administration knew was a sympathetic media outlet to their talking points, a Tim Russert whose "Meet the Press" was a preferred venue because, in the words of a top Cheney aide, they could "control the message." [salon.com]
I can't for the life if me imagine how you remember Russert as some kind of dogged truth-seeker who stuck politicians to the sticking place. Those of us who were paying attention to his show know that Russert was at the head of the destruction of American journalism; the leader of an abdication of their responsibilities as the Fifth Estate.
Who the fuck are you talking about? Because it wasn't, in any way, Tim Russert, official stenographer for the Bush Administration.
P.S. Maybe he was a great dad, and a great guy, I don't know. I feel bad for his father, I really do. But this Tim Russert you keep talking about, the one who was so brave and asked such probing questions... well, I sure as hell wished that Tim Russert had actually existed, instead of the craven, obsequious Tim Russert we actually had on Meet the Press, because maybe with a media that actually did it's job we wouldn't be in so many of the messes we're in.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember a Tim Russert who insisted in open court that his personal journalistic philosophy was that, when talking to a public official, anything that was said was implicitly off the record unless that public official said that it could go on the record, explicitly.
A journalist with a belief structure? Oh noes!
I remember a Tim Russert who adamantly refused to testify during the Libby trial, who refused to testify against a source who had committed treason against the United States (according to George HW Bush), a Russert who privileged his own journalistic access to the nation's elites over the interests of the people his journalism was meant to serve.
Seems to me he did testify, regardless of his wishes that you speak about, and was one of the star witnesses. I'm not gonna give you specific links because there's tons of articles on it since he was on the stand for a few days as I remember. Most people think that it was really Cheney's mistake, maybe that's the reason Russert didn't want to testify. Let's also not forget that the same guy who you say thought Libby committed treason commuted his sentence [washingtonpost.com],
Re: (Score:2)
A belief structure entirely at odds with his responsibilities as a member of the Fifth Estate.
You do understand the role of the media in a democratic society, yes? Surely you can see how implicit confidentiality with powerful elites undermines those responsibilities?
The interview is done, and the moderator will likely never get another interview like it from anyone.
It's his job to get the interviews whether people want to give them or not. The relationship between the pr
Re: (Score:2)
<quote>A belief structure entirely at odds with his responsibilities as a member of the Fifth Estate.</quote>
<quote>Protecting sources is only important when it serves the interests of the people.</quote>
<p>So which one is right? Russert is evil while Novak is awesome? Does the law only apply to you when it involves you, otherwise e
Re: (Score:2)
Both are right. Where's the contradiction? Russert had responsibilities as a journalist in a democratic society.
One of those responsibilities is to defend the confidentiality of sources when it's in the interest of the people, and to break that confidentiality when it's in the interest of the people.
Russert had it completely backwards. He broke that confidentiality when he thought it would serve Libby's interest, and then went back and tried to hide behind that confidentiality when he
Re: (Score:2)
I know quite a bit about HTML tags, my downfall is apparently down-drop menus. Thank you very much =)
Sure. Josh Marshall won a Polk award for his almost single-handed coverage of the US Attorneys scandal. Just because Russert was at the head of a concerted effort by the mainstream press to abdicate their responsibilities as newsmen doesn't mean everybody has to follow suit.
People who think the US Attorney Scandal was really a "scandal" also think the Iraq War is really a "war". For all your archaic English you misunderstand the meaning of the current words. But... I guess... congratulations... you're the one voice of reason in the throng. You've successfully, slightly, picked apart the character of one man for one or two insignificant incidents that didn't really mean an
Re: (Score:2)
Firing qualified attorneys because they refuse to take part in political witchhunts would count as a major scandal under any other president (and was, under Clinton, if you'll remember) - it's only by juxtaposition with the rest of the Bush administration's criminal level of incompetence and corruption that the USA scandal seems tame.
The Iraq War is not a war? What?
For all your archaic English you misu
rip (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:rip (Score:4, Insightful)
R.I.P. Tim, you will be sorely missed, not only on election nights, but on Sunday mornings. And though I'm not a Buffalo Bills fan...in your honor I say...Go Bills...
Last of a dying breed. (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead, we're left with Barbara Walters asking what sort of tree people would be, and persisting.
Another blow to quality journalism in America.
Re: (Score:2)
Murrow.
A sad day. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll never forget Russert on the NBC coverage of the 2000 presidential election. Early in the evening, Russert wrote on his little whiteboard "Florida, Florida, Florida!" before anyone had any idea how close it was going to be. I stayed up with Russert and Brokaw that night until the next dawn, hoping to find out who the next president would be. Of course there were no conclusions, but Russert's exploration of the electoral college system and the implications of the vote returns were insightful and kept me watching.
Russert wasn't afraid of asking tough questions to powerful people. When they would try to weasel their way out of a direct answer, he would ask again, and again if necessary. If only all journalists would have that kind of conviction.
He will be missed. My condolences to his family.
-molo
RIP (Score:5, Informative)
Here is his interview on Readers Digest a while back.
http://www.rd.com/poll-archive-parent/games-and-humor/celebrities-and-pop-culture/politicians/tim-russert/article26850.html [rd.com]
My fav. part is
After he was named moderator of Meet the Press in 1991, Russert called Larry Spivak, one of the show's original panelists, for advice. "Learn as much as you can about your guest, and his or her position on the issues," Spivak said. "Then take the other side. If you do that, you will have a fair and balanced program."
I think he followed that mantra throughout.
My wife and I had only one TV program in common...alas..our sundays won't be same.
RIP Mr. Russert.
Re: (Score:2)
I think people tend to see their biases reflected back at them. James Carville was saying he spoke to Russert almost every day - hardly a right-winger.
It's possible the VP just gets a softer pedal, no matter the party.
I'll miss his predictions (Score:5, Interesting)
A few days ago, after Obama secured the nomination, I saw him smile a little while talking about him on Nightly News. Smiling not for the candidate, but I think he was really, really, really excited that he would might see a black man get elected president of his great country in HIS lifetime. He looked like a little kid...sad he did not live to see what will be.
Didn't know him personally, but great journalist. A lot will miss him.
One of the best (Score:4, Interesting)
Tim Russert was both an amazing man and an incredible journalist- a tremendous asset to the fourth estate, our nation, and the world. His unique blend of hard-hitting questions and high standard of impartiality have made our politics richer, our people better informed, and our politicians that much more honest.
Without any doubt, Mr.Russert's passing is a terrible blow to the once-noble profession of journalism. He will be sorely missed both by those who knew him well and by those of us who knew only the good he did in the public eye. His death, early as it was, should be taken by all of us as a reminder of our transience, and of the need to preserve the work of our lives for the generations that come after us. Tim Russert's great work, the great effort of his life, was to restore to journalism the spirits of integrity, honesty, and candor that once characterized the mighty fourth estate. It would be a great shame to his memory if those spirits were to die with him; if, in the absence of the man himself, we allow his dreams to wither.
For everyone reading this, I hope you can find a way to honor a man who worked so hard to make this world a better place in which to live- to build upon his life's work, and to bring even one more iota of honesty to the political process. Register a voter, write a letter to your representative or the editor of your newspaper, join a campaign- and always ask the hard questions. I don't think he would've liked anything better.
RIP, Tim. If you see God, I hope you get an exclusive.
Re: (Score:2)
RIP (Score:4, Insightful)
Bland but not abrasive, and no more than that (Score:4, Insightful)
It's too bad he has died but it's only bad for journalism because so many of his competitors are loudmouth idiots. A calm demeanor has been enough to make him look like Walter Cronkite but for those of us with longer memories Russert is not notable.
Jon Stewart is a better journalist. (Score:4, Insightful)
And I'd recommend reading Scott McClellan's book to see how the press was manipulated. And is still being manipulated.
McClellan's book also has about the only decent quote from Russert about Gulf War II.
Lou Dobbs asks harder questions about immigration almost every single week than Russert ever did about the war.
Jon Stewart is the best journalist we have and he's limited by whatever he can turn into a joke.
I'm disappointed by the coverage (Score:2)
This was worthy of a breaking news bit, and some coverage on the 6pm news, along with a memorial 2 hour special a week later. But they've been going on non stop since like 4 pm this afternoon.
I doubt Walter Cronkhite will ever get this kind of coverage when he dies, and he was 10 times the reporter all of these people are I see on the tubes tod
Foreshadowed on the Colbert Report? (Score:2)
Jimmy James (Score:2)
Overstated (Score:2)
Not Related? (Score:2)
This is not news for nerds
It is for me. I learned how to build a MythTV PVR for the sole purpose of recording _Meet The Press_. That and _The Daily Show_. Some of my Linux expertise can be directly linked to Tim Russert.
He had good days and bad. Some interviews were harder some softer. One interview that still pisses me off was the interview with Dick Cheney and he's helping to hold up drawings of elaborate underground bunkers. It appeared, at least to me, he was swallowing it hook line and sinker. He gave Cheney a voice that I
Viewing from afar (Score:2, Interesting)
I had my fill of US politics a while back but Meet the Press made for good Sunday night viewing for Americanophiles. Some episodes were very entertaining and others not so entertaining, and I found it i
Springsteen Thinks So, Too. (Score:2)
ian
Tim who? (Score:2)
But that Time names a US interviewer, that few people out of the US know, one of the *world's* most influential people, just comes to show the complete and utter lack of journalistic integrity in your country, where the press has stopped to inform you and instead patronizes you and gives you frequent pats in the back.
If this individual was raising the bar a little it is indeed bad news his early demise.
Lionizing Russert (Score:2)
I, like a few others in this thread, don't think of Mr. Russert as a journalist at all, let alone a tough incisive one. However, most of the people posting in the thread have only high praise for his objectivity. Can you direct me to any inteviews by Russert that demonstrate this? Asking questions about real issues that demanded thoughtful answers? Pressing guests in the face of evasive answers? Most of what I see from "tough" journalists is comprised of questions about what I'd call distractions. The
Re: (Score:2)
are you seriously turning this into an os debate
Re:Most influential (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
~X~
Re: (Score:2)
Did we get a slashdot obituary for the first black PhD chemist who discovered steroids?
I don't understand this 'first black this, first black that' idea. We're all the same, so why do we have to constantly act like the black community is playing catch-up? I see it all the time in the UK with Lewis Hamilton being 'the first black Formula One driver' - what has his race got to do with his abilities as a driver? Or anything else that people might choose to do with their lives?
I'll take my -1, Offtopic mod now, but come on, it's got to start grating after a while - think about it: "yeah, we k
Re: (Score:2)
The Omlette (Score:4, Insightful)
cheers
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Last October I had to tell them that their links re: how to advertise on the site referred to Web sites that didn't exit!
-----
"http://slashdot.org/faq/advertising.shtml#ad100 has a link to:
http://slashdot.org/advertising.shtml [slashdot.org]
click it, and I get:
"An error occurred while loading http://sl [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You do realize this is a US site, with predominately US issues in mind don't you?
Or...you must be new here?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No..I don't usually pay that stuff much attention, but, when one of the most important political newsmen of recent times...that is as unbiased as they come dies....especially in such an important junction in US politics...it is something that is, or should be to US citizens.
Too many people in the US aren't paying attention...an
Memo to: The Fourth Estate (Score:2)
Even if you are outside of the United States of America, what happens in the United States of America can and will effect you.
Tim Russert will be surely missed. He was a leader.
He set The Standard when it came to investigative political journalism.
He was prepared for every interview with whomever he met.
He only sought Truth.
Those of you that are mourning tonight, must look ahead.
Tim would want that of you. Embrace your role now.
Be prepared and dig. Dig as hard as PJ at Groklaw
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:News for Nerds? (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, if this were "offtopic" for slashdot, why is there an entire Section about it?
Politics
This section is for news relevant to United States government politics. It was created primarily to cover the 2004 US Presidential Election, but today exists for occasional stories that fit the bill.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, you know what? (Score:2)
Failing these, you are also quite free to fuck off.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It probably was a perfectly natural heart attack, but we are in a time of political uncertainty, what with a very close election race, a President all but at war with the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't care, don't open the article. Easy enough for you?
That said, I'm a nerd, and I care, and I find that this matters, since Russert was one of the last true journalists out there, who wasn't a pretty talking-head pundit. Our supply of actual newsmen is dwindling rapidly
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But I sure wouldn't ask there about, say, what to do wite a gigantic pile of leftover hard drives--a thread that's collected twice as many comments here as this one has in about the same amount
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if that's not enough for you, I can see what can be done to make sure EVERY story on slashdot meets your high standards. Using 'The Economist' as a model should make that rather easy... Lesee
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently not (Score:5, Informative)
Russert had earlier been diagnosed with asymptomatic coronary artery disease, but it was well-controlled with medication and exercise, and he had performed well on a stress test in late April, Newman said. An autopsy revealed that he also had an enlarged heart, Newman said.
This is what all that Omega3 fish oil is supposed to prevent? Time to go kill a salmon!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In fairness, when you're dealing with political figures, you develop rules for what's on the record and what isn't. Clearly, Russert's practice for speaking on the phone was to treat such conversations as "off the record" or "background". If he then wanted to use what he got in a way that would lead to the official's doorstep, he'd need to ask permission. Knowledge gained this way is often used to question other officials on the record and shake information out of them, or to figure out whether somebody'
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly - because we know from their direct statements - the Bush Administration felt that the "ground rule" on Meet the Press was that they could totally control the message.
Is that the kind of hard, probing journalism that you all remember Tim Russert, for? Because it's precisely the sort of craven submission to power that I remember Tim Russert for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is that another issue entirely? Was Russert a journalist, or wasn't he?
Do you think that's just a press hat you can put on and take off, as it suits Beltway elites?
Re: (Score:2)
Read the original goddamn post. Are you fucking stupid? The issue is ground rules for telephone interviews. If you interviewed five Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists, they'd probably give you five different answers to the question of how they establish a working relationship with news-makers they have to deal with on a regular basis. The same goes for five wankers who write UFO stories for the Enquirer. My original point was that the ground rules Russert set up for his telephone interviews say nothing
Re: (Score:2)
Interviews with journalists, yes.
Is it your contention that Russert stopped being a journalist when he picked up the phone?
Why don't you answer the question? Are his "standards" consistent with his responsibilities as a journalist?
My original point was that the ground rules Russert set up for his telephone interviews say nothing about what kind of journalist he was...good or bad.
But how does that make sense to you? We're not talking about whether or not he
Re: (Score:2)
I ran this thread around the office and the votes are in: You're an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Two stuffed animals and an empty Cheetos bag don't count as an "office."
Look, answer the question.
When a journalist is on the record that the only conversations with elected officials he'll report on are the ones they specifically say he can report on, does that serve the American public, or does that serve the elected officials?
Just answer the question.
Re: (Score:2)
FTR: "The Office" is a newsroom at a medium-market Canadian television station.
I don't know if you see yourself as some kind of crusading news-hero or something, but you have no idea what you're talking about, and the question as you have framed it is simply nonsense. It is based on a false premise.
Because you are too lazy, or too lacking in talent, or just too stupid to do even a tiny little bit of research and find out for yourself why this is the case, I have done in a few minutes what you could h
Re: (Score:2)
Then Canadian journalism is a lot worse than I've heard. (I don't believe you, of course.)
there is no correlation between the quality of a journalist's work and what ethical rules they use
This is an amazingly idiotic statement of yours, and it's the statement that proves you're no journalist.
especially with respect to one narrowly-defined situation.
Calling people on the phone?! Yeah, what a corner-case. Hardly ever happens, I'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't even begin to, can you?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, my! I took a look at your profile, and a pattern begins to emerge. You post obsessively, utterly determined to have the last word regardless of the merit of your argument. In fact, your arguments are often narrow and dishonest; isolated facts presented in a context designed to mislead and obfuscate. Based upon their reaction, /.'s moderators, seem to agree. I added up the moderator points on our two pages (24 posts each), and you seem to be trailing 37 to 28. Given the nature of the situation, th
Re: (Score:2)
Answer the question. Can you?
Re: (Score:2)
"Your internet psychoanalysis falls somewhat short of the truth."
Only "somewhat"? By your own admission, only "somewhat"? Sounds to me like an objective observer might be inclined to be a bit more generous than "somewhat".
Go back and read the answer supplied. If you're too, um, "special" to understand it, I'm afraid there's not much more I can do, unless you let me have a word with your mommy. You're totally owned. You know it. I know it. Anybody who reads the thread knows it. Repeatedly squawk
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess with Obama we have to make sure he doesn't single-handedly re-write the U.S. Con
Re:Russert was not Even-Handed (Score:4, Insightful)
"Never mind."
-Emily Litella
Media Matters: Where idiots go to complain.... (Score:2)
Get your facts straight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh noes! You've hurt my
Oh...wait. I don't have
You can mod me Troll all you want, but you *know* my post was in no way a Troll or Offtopic, nor even Flamebait. Again, modding a political viewpoint you disagree with "Troll" only demonstrates your inability to tolerate any opinion that challenges your views, thus validating one of the major points of my post.
In other words...
I win.
Re: (Score:2)
Russert was at the top of his game and worked very hard for a long time to get where he was, and that deserves respect. However, to lament his passing as a loss of a fair and balanced journalist is simply delusional and self-vindicating feel-good mental stroking by people with leftist views at the expense of a dead man.
That right there is almost the definition of flamebait, you know, baiting to be flamed. If you don't see this, and assume that such an egotistical assertion is just 'informing the masses', well then 'troll' might be accurate too.
Re: (Score:2)
Russert was at the top of his game and worked very hard for a long time to get where he was, and that deserves respect. However, to lament his passing as a loss of a fair and balanced
journalist is simply delusional and self-vindicating feel-good mental stroking by people with leftist views at the expense of a dead man.
That right there is almost the definition of flamebait, you know, baiting to be flamed. If you don't see this, and assum
Re: (Score:2)
Your post was nothing more than a partisan attack on a dead man. An unwarranted and unsupported attack at that. You make a derogatory comment about someone based on political bias without any sort of evidence whatsoever, and are really trying to convince me that your post was something other than flamebait? And then the fail attempt at a subtle dig at me in the last paragraph? Yeah, you definitely exhibit tendencies of bo
Re: (Score:2)
Your post was nothing more than a partisan attack on a dead man. An unwarranted and unsupported attack at that. You make a derogatory comment about someone based on political bias without any sort of evidence whatsoever, and are really trying to convince me that your post was something other than flamebait? And then the fail attempt at a subtle dig at me in the last paragraph? Yeah, you definitely exhibit tendencies of both f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
#1 Brittany Spears' newest album pleases me just as much as the rest of hers have; not at all.
#2 Brittany Spears' newest album is nothing but a continuation of her self-worship and continued detachment from reality.
Both are opinion, both are very likely true, but one is a simple state