Chris Hayes passes an important test
by digby
I always watch a lot of cable news (or have it on in the background) but when a major story hits, I watch it more intently and tend to move around between the stations all day to see how they are covering it. Yesterday, everyone was on pretty good behavior even Fox which one could tell was having to bite its collective tongue not to use the occasion to criticize the president and push the Islamic terrorist scenario. Considering how tough that obviously was for them, they did an admirable job.
But still, the reporting by the usual suspects was painfully predictable and usually unenlightening. CNN was particularly excitable, particularly in rushing to “question” the president’s unwillingness to use the word terrorism before he knew the facts. Dumb journalism.
Mostly what I hate about this coverage is the maudlin and somewhat unctuous posing (at least it feels like posing) among the pundits and anchors. It makes me yearn for the days of Walter Cronkite. (I know, that makes me old — so shoot me.)
There were exceptions. I thought Scott Pelley on CBS was remarkably professional in reporting the minute to minute during the day yesterday. And among the evening anchors, I though Chris Hayes hit just the right notes. As an analyst as well as a reporter he asked probing questions with an appropriately serious mien, but he didn’t seem to be giving a performance like so many of the rest of them did.
And he brought on people who had something to say and said it ways that offered a new perspective. Like this interesting interview with a great wordsmith like Charlie Pierce:
We thinks of these anchors as political analysts, which on most days they are. But they also serve as our touchstones in times of crisis and those who offer both information and perspective are the ones we tend to trust. I was glad to see Hayes passed that test last night. I’ll feel confident going forward that I can turn to him at these sadly inevitable moments and he’ll help instead of hinder.
.