Why Tim Russert's "Meet the Press" is Still ImPRESSive

And new media and blogs have taken off beyond anyone's wildest dreams.

The original central mission of "Meet the Press" is "to learn as much as you can about your guests and his or her position on the issues and then take the other side, and do that in a persistent and civil way."

This year marks the 60th anniversary of the program and Tim Russert is still going strong. In an interview with John Elsasser, Editor in Chief of PR Tactics, Russert states that "the most important people on the set are the guests." He sees his job as that to elicit the views from the political guest, so voters can make an intelligent decision -- which is in stark contrast to much of what we see on cable, hear on talk radio or read on blogs, where people, according to Russert, focus more on offering their opinions rather than seeking opinions.

That may be the single reason why "Meet the Press" and other like-formatted programs are still impressive. Yet, people being tired of the spin is one of the reasons why blogs have become such a destination for readers. With blogs, there is a quality of voice that goes to unvarnished presentation of reality and that is really attractive. It comes through with the humanity of the person writing.

Russerts says that part of his role is making sure that people see if what is being suggested, offered or promised ends up adding up in dollars and common sense. That is probably why he is considered one of today's most recognized and trusted journalists. If you're interested in seeing him speak, he will be the keynote at this year's PRSA International conference in Philadelphia, October 20-23.

Maybe with the proliferation of blogs there's enough variety out there to warrant caution on opinion-heavy and facts/research-light. As far as online news goes, McKinsey & Company just published an analysis that noted the wild fragmentation of audiences (for an abstract link here). The payoff? Most respondents base their choice of news sources on convenience, comprehensiveness, or timeliness, not quality. [tip of the hat to Bruno Giussani at Lunch Over IP]

What is the main reason that prompts you to read a blog vs. a news media outlet?

Comments

[Trisha]

I absolutely love MTP and watch it whenever I can, for the very reason you cite - I trust the integrity of the source.

I use both the news media (online and print) as well as blogs to get both the facts (hopefully well balanced) as well as the pulse of opinion on both sides of an issue.

Often I have a knee-jerk emotional reaction to something, but over the years have learned to listen to others' feelings as well as their logic. A truly good news media outlet should offered an unbiased perspective, but Blogs offer a wide variety of opinions based on both logic and emotion, due to the massive number of people writing on any given issue. Sometimes another person's logic or depth of feeling will change my mind.

[Valeria Maltoni]

Trisha:

That is also the way I go from media and blogs. I expect a certain amount of bias and opinion on a blog and what I often see is an attempt to focus on the issues solely on their merits.

At times I have wished to have the luxury of more in depth research to back me up on a post, yet knowing that my information may be timely makes me select the publish button. I know that someone will come in and balance my view with theirs and welcome the opportunity to have a constructive dialogue.

[Nathania - Bold Interactive]

Blogs are attractive because of the ability to respond to what someone is saying. You can't voice your opinion on MTP.

Also, media outlets bombard you with repetitive information that is a bit shallow. I really don't think I can tolerate another report about OJ Simpson today!

[Valeria Maltoni]

Very well put, Nathania. While the news media talks about blogs being opinion-centric, they overlook the fact that they are centered on everyone's opinions, not just the author (at least for those who have open comments).

The single reason why I never watch TV is that I rarely learn something new that has depth there. And on the rare occasion I have the time... I am immersed in conversations with peers and mentors, many of whom have a wealth of information to share.

[Michael Wagner]

Thank you for the very healthy reflection in this post regarding public discourse and the contribution of shows like MTP.

The notion of total neutrality in any journalist would appear to be a myth.

Still, someone like Russert who seeks to uncover opinion in the course of an interview lives a lot closer to "unbiased" than most.

For me watching TV news has been a means of discerning patterns in popular culture more than a tool for learning or shaping my opinion.

There's a lot suggested in this post. More to think about here but wanted to tell you how much I liked it.

Keep creating,
Mike

[Valeria Maltoni]

Mike:

I like the idea of "discerning patters in popular culture" as you put it. What do you use to learn and shape your opinion? From our past conversations I would say books... and conversations. So maybe blogs are a destination for thinking out loud. They are for me.

And sometimes the less polished and more instinctual posts (what might be defined as timely and less researched) generate more wealth for my readers. Unfinished allows for adoption and flexibility in paths taken.

[Daniel Sitter, Idea Seller]

Great article Valeria. I enjoy Tim Russert on MTP and watch each Sunday morning before going to church. He's a good referee and debate stimulator. I like it when his guests are put on the spot. Always good information.

As good as MTP is, you can't converse like you can in a blog. I often find myself making comments to my television screen, as if part of the discussion!

[Valeria Maltoni]

Thank you for your kind words, Daniel. And there for a moment I thought that I was the only one talking back to the TV ;-) If I had to pick my favorite part of blogging, it would be the dialogue with readers.