An attack on British journalism
Was The Scotsman right to reveal that Samantha Power had called Hillary Clinton a 'monster'? Tucker Carlson thinks not.
Watch the political pundit take British journalism to task for low standards. And tell us your thoughts.
Hat Tip: Srabani
Alice Fishburn
http://bp3.blogger.com/_NtgXlrcvXZA/R9P46_z7GzI/AAAAAAAALfo/u-bctk2KW78/s1600-h/CHUCKMAN+-+CLINTON+HILLARY+-+CALL+ON+THE+RED+PHONE+-+MONSTER.jpg
Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | 10 Mar 2008 12:09:38
Please understand that I really hate to say it but Carlson is right. Though the British press think that they're tough tactics reveal truth in fact it has the opposite effect. When people feel they can't trust journalists to treat them with an even hand either on or off the record then all they do is adopt 'politics speak' in which case they say nothing or they use the press to churn out spin and propaganda. The American style of treating off the record as completely anonymous and unprintable without agreement of the source is a much better way of promoting honest disclosure to the press. Then again if journalists got back to investigating instead or regurgitating the wires and press releases that would be OK too.
Posted by: Doug | 10 Mar 2008 12:22:51
In the interview Carlson comes across as a pompous prat. And a bit thick too: he didn't seem to get the main point that the Scotsman interview had been agreed as "on the record" beforehand. And what was all that about asking Peev why she hadn't followed up by asking what she meant by "monster"? I can see that Carlson didn't like Peev's opening gambit of asking whether US journalists were so acquiescent. But Peev's rules rule in the UK.
Posted by: Wilf | 10 Mar 2008 13:01:11
"...being lectured on journalistic ethics by someone from the Scotsman..." Hehehe - it's like he's talking to someone from the Sun. To use an Americanism, "what a tool."
Posted by: Richard Young | 10 Mar 2008 13:36:33
It is rare that I would say thank god for the british press, and I do believe it is problematic that molehills of indiscretion can be whipped up into mountains of issues. However, the sanctimonious of Tucker Carlson about the behaviour of The Scotsman rankles.
Posted by: Michael Sweeney | 10 Mar 2008 13:50:09
Yes. British journalistic standards suck. But so do American journalistic standards. Or has Carlson forgotten the Drudge Report 'outing' Prince Harry? Or the Fox News 'Mass Effect' debacle? Or Bill O'Reilly?
Posted by: Dave B | 10 Mar 2008 15:05:33
"in the 'united kingdom', as she calls it." lol.
Posted by: Jim | 10 Mar 2008 15:25:11
I was under the impression that MSNBC was a decent TV channel and that FOX News was the pile of crap one??? That just leaves CNN I guess...
What really amazes me is that Carlson seems to think he came out of that on top. As I watched it, he came out looking like a prize cock.
Posted by: Dean Rodrigues | 11 Mar 2008 02:36:21