My email to the Today Show , please add your thoughts before I send

[journalist3072]

I am emailing the Today Show about Meredith Vieira's softball interview with Laura Bush today. Please feel free to add your thoughts/suggestions bebore I send. It's lengthy, but I think it is worth it to make these points. Thanks DU fam!

I am writing to express my deep disappointment with Meredith Vieira, for the manner in which she conducted her interview with First Lady Laura Bush on today.

As someone with a college degree in Print Journalism/Mass Media Arts, it was clear to me that Meredith Vieira lacked any critical thinking in her questioning of Mrs. Bush.

At times, Vieira’s interview seemed also to be a commentary. Speaking to Mrs. Bush about the First Lady’s effort to combat illiteracy in many countries, Vieira said “Even if you have wonderful proposals, WHICH YOU DO, how do you convince the government in those countries to enact them?”

When Ms. Vieira asked Mrs. Bush about her thoughts on Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton referring to George W. Bush’s presidency as “the fear factor,” Vieira issued another commentary, saying “If someone said that about my husband, I’d probably knock them.”

Moreover, Ms. Vieira failed to ask critical follow-up questions of Laura Bush.

For example, Ms. Vieira asked Mrs. Bush how she responds to someone she might meet on the campaign trail, who is on the fence about the war in Iraq. Mrs. Bush responded that she tells them it is important that we “stay the course.” Yet, Vieira failed to ask Mrs. Bush what she meant by “stay the course.” “Stay the course” is not a policy, so the obvious follow-up to Mrs. Bush should have been to ask her what the Bush Administrations means, from a policy perspective, by “stay the course.”

Vieira also failed to challenge Mrs. Bush’s statement that “The President doesn’t want war. No one does.” Any journalist worth their salt would have asked Mrs. Bush about several circumstances that indicate Mr. Bush DID want war.

For example:

Two years before September 11, then-candidate George W. Bush told his ghostwriter Mickey Herskowitz that he planned to invade Iraq if elected President. He told Herskovitz that invading Iraq was on his mind because in Bush's words: "One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief. My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. If I have a chance to invade, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency."

- Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill has also said Bush planned to invade Iraq, just days after entering the White House. O'Neill said: "From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go. For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap."

Furthermore, O'Neill says: "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this.'"

- Likewise, former White House Counter-terrorism Chief Richard Clarke says that in the aftermath of 9/11, he expected the focus to be on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Instead, Bush's focus was on Iraq. Clarke says: "They were talking about Iraq on 9/11. They were talking about it on 9/12."

Another area where Ms. Vieira failed to challenge Mrs. Bush, was on her statement that “Americans are not for torture. Neither is the President.” An obvious follow-up, would have been to ask Mrs. Bush why the President issued a signing statement saying he is not obligated to abide by John McCain’s anti-torture bill, that the President signed into law.

Again, as someone who went to college to obtain a degree in journalism, it pained me to seem someone with as much news experience as Meredith Vieira (i.e. her tenure on 60 Minutes) lack any critical thinking in her interview with the First Lady. Moreover, I would hope that in the future, the Today Show’s co-hosts would refrain from their personal commentary, when interviewing political figures. If they feel the need to do their own commentary, perhaps it could be done after the interview, not during.

[Oleladylib]

1. Very well written and I totally support your take on not adding

her personal commentary..Interestingly, Rosie O'Donnell is doing the "same" thing on The View with her personal commentaries but then..The View isn't a news program

[liberalpragmatist]

2. She's probably overcompensating

Can't sound biased to the right-wingers. Given that she was an-out-and-out Dem on The View (marched in antiwar protests, etc.), she's probably trying to hard to be friendly to the RW.

[Buzz Clik]

3. Interviews with the First Lady should be softball.

She's the president's wife. That's it. If Pickles was some major policy influence, I'd say grill her. But she isn't.

[JerseygirlCT]

4. I have to agree

And beating up on Laura Bush wouldn't have gotten a bit of good information out there at all.

As it was, I thought she got some good points made, in a very congenial and subtle way. The interview didn't upset me in the least.

[journalist3072]

6. Sorry but I don't think that would have been "beating up" on her

It would have simply been doing what any journalist worth their salt does: follow-up questions.

[journalist3072]

5. She's the President's wife, but she wholeheartedly speaks out in support

of his agenda, and Republicans as a whole.

It would be one thing if she did not. But she is out there on the campaign trail for Republican candidates. She is saying "stay the course." In other words, she is inserting herself into the national dialogue and debate.

So therefore, I think it is not only OK to question her; it is an OBLIGATION of a journalist to do so.