Tom Brokaw Taking Sides

Wasn't Tom Brokaw supposed to be, umm, neutral or something? I guess that goes out the window once NBC's access to the Republican candidate begins to be threatened, in which case Brokaw is perfectly willing to exert influence in order to mollify the McCain campaign.

But less widely known is that Mr. Brokaw has also played a pivotal role out of public view, both within NBC and in its dealings with the campaign of John McCain in particular.

In an interview here after Sunday's broadcast, Mr. Brokaw said that over the summer he had "advocated" within the executive suite of NBC News to modify the anchor duties of the MSNBC hosts Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews on election night and on nights when there were presidential debates. Their expressions of strong political opinions from the MSNBC anchor desk has run counter to the more traditional role Mr. Brokaw played on "NBC Nightly News" for more than two decades. NBC said earlier this month that the two hosts would mostly relinquish their anchor duties to Mr. Gregory, while being present as analysts.

No, much better to do it behind the scenes, real quiet like.

Mr. Brokaw said he had also conducted some shuttle diplomacy in recent weeks between NBC and the McCain campaign. His mission, he said, was to assure the candidate's aides that -- despite some negative on-air commentary by Mr. Olbermann in particular -- Mr. McCain could still get a fair shake from NBC News. Mr. Brokaw said he had been told by a senior McCain aide, whom he did not name, that the campaign had been reluctant to accept an NBC representative as one of the moderators of the three presidential debates -- until his name was invoked.

But where does this assistance he's providing to the McCain campaign -- to make sure that they don't think NBC is in the tank for Obama and thus, hurt access -- end? On Sunday, Brokaw brought it into the moderator's chair.

From a MoveOn.org e-mail today.

At the end [of Sunday's MTP], Tom Brokaw did something strange. He opted to give himself the last word and told the audience:

In fairness to everybody here, I'm just going to end on one note. And that is that we continue to poll on who's best equipped to be Commander in Chief, and John McCain continues to lead in that category despite the criticism from Barack Obama by a factor of 53 to 42 percent in our latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Fairness? Really? Is that what you call using your platform to inject a piece of completely extraneous pro-McCain propaganda into the conversation?  Not to mention the fact that, as with most propaganda, it wasn't true.

MoveOn does the digging:

We checked, and the latest NBC poll actually has no question about Commander in Chief. We contacted NBC about this, and it turns out Brokaw was referring to a poll taken weeks ago--right after the Republican convention and well before Friday's big national security debate. And in each of NBC's last two polls, Americans chose Obama over McCain.

Classic.

Contact Tom Brokaw today and demand that he correct the record and apologize.



Display:


Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (2.00 / 0)

"Contact Tom Brokaw today and demand that he correct the record and apologize."

Done and done.  Respectfully so, as well, which is often outside my skill set.


by ProgressiveDL on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 02:44:10 PM EST

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (2.00 / 0)

Heh.  Same here.


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:04:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (2.00 / 0)

I already diaried about this and apparently no one thinks there is anything wrong with it.

BTW this man will be the moderator for at least one presidential debate.. conflict of interest much?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/9/30/1203 4/7650


by Why Not on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 02:51:33 PM EST

I'm not sure about this (2.00 / 0)

I'm not prepared to assign this to anything but Brokaw error.  I'm actually in favor of the measures he's taken to get the McCain camp to come on NBC and MSNBC more regularly.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 02:53:27 PM EST

Re: I'm not sure about this (2.00 / 0)

Assuming you're to file under "Give 'em enough rope"?


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 02:59:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Duh. (2.00 / 1)

Completely aside from the Brokaw, Olbermann, and Matthews in discussion now, NBC and MSNBC have the best journalists outside of PBS and NPR.  Actual journalism has an anti-McCain bias; so far McCain has relied on bad, partial journalism to sell his myth.

Exposing him to real journalism is seriously problematic for McCain.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:09:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Duh. (2.00 / 1)

Yep, yep.


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:14:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm not sure about this (none / 0)

What about FOX?   What are you doing to get them to actually offer fairness to Democrats going on that network, and Lieberman does not count as a Democrat.


by gavoter on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:02:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm not doing anything (2.00 / 0)

My goal is to prevent NBC from becoming as transparently bankrupt in terms of journalistic integrity as Fox.

I understand the desire for everything to obviously turn against Republicans, but I mourn the loss of media that even tries to be impartial.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:05:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (none / 0)

From the first day that he tool over MTP it was blatantly obvious to me that Brokaw was clearly biased towards McCain.
He's ridden roughshod over evey single Democrat that has been on that program from the day he sadly took over from Tim Russert,and given a smooth ride to almost every single Republican.
by Lodgemannered on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 02:59:57 PM EST

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (2.00 / 0)

I can't stand Tom Brokaw.  Never have, if only because of his "never can have too many cliches" style of speaking and puffed up sense of importance.  Speaking about the record amounts that the Clinton and Obama campaigns were pulling in earlier this year, he said "in politics, money is becoming the coin of the realm".  Idiot.

I left all that out in my letter to him.


When you start out making the "slippery slope" argument, where do you draw the line?
by Jess81 on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:08:35 PM EST

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (none / 0)

By Greg Sargent - September 30, 2008, 2:55PM

Over at TPM
I missed this yesterday, but it's really worth a quick mention. Buried in this New York Times piece about NBC anchor Tom Brokaw and his efforts to patch things up between his network and the McCain campaign is an extraordinary glimpse into the equal parts whining and behind-the-scenes ref-gaming the McCain camp has undertaken with some members the media...

Mr. Brokaw said he had been told by a senior McCain aide, whom he did not name, that the campaign had been reluctant to accept an NBC representative as one of the moderators of the three presidential debates -- until his name was invoked.
"One of the things I was told by this person was that they were so irritated, they said, 'If it's an NBC moderator, for any of these debates, we won't go,' " Mr. Brokaw said. "My name came up, and they said, 'Oh, hell, we have to do it, because it's going to be Brokaw.' "

Mr. Brokaw will moderate the second debate, on Oct. 7, in Nashville.

A senior McCain adviser actually threatened that McCain might skip the next debate if NBC fielded one of the moderators? This, from the same candidate who hammered Barack Obama for not agreeing to six dozen town hall meetings or whatever it was McCain wanted? Another day, another snit...


by venician on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:09:02 PM EST

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (none / 0)

It's too bad  that the McCain camps bluff wasn't called on that one. It would have  been interesting to see how that would have gone down."McCain refuses to debate becasue he doesn't like the moderator".
All of the media  are completly spineless as far as I'm concerned.It's just  a matter of varying degrees.
by Lodgemannered on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:28:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (none / 0)

The REAL problem with the American political system is that KNOWINGLY LYING about your opponent is LEGAL is the US. (It SHOULD be TREASON!) This is why the Missouri legal challenges by BO as so important. Apparently there it is illegal to KNOWINGLY lie. He is taking people to court who say he's a Muslim and not a Christian - forinstance.

FOX is a FULLY PAID up PIMP of the REBUBLICANS. Keith and Rachel are FULLY PAID up PIMP(s) for TRUTH- these days TRUTH has way more currency on the Democratic side. I TRULY believe whaen the Democrats DESERVE to be blasted tehy will blast away. FOX on the other hand - just lies, lies, lies. They support the Rebublicans - right or wrong. K & R BELIEVE what they say - a huge difference.

One LAST point - Balanced media coverage MUST not include giving equal "balance" to clear LIES and MISTRUTHS.


by 1Mylegacy on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:13:49 PM EST

Re: Tom Brokaw Taking Sides (2.00 / 1)

Okay, Brokaw screwed up on the poll. Wow, someone made a mistake.

But can someone explain to me how his wanting to ensure that NBC maintains some semblance of neutrality in their network coverage is taking McCain's side? I love KO, and on MSNBC his bias is a nice counterpoint to Fox, but having him and Matthews anchor convention and results coverage is clearly not in the interest of a network that wants to position itself as neutral. MSNBC may be courting the democrats, but it's not at all surprising that Brokaw would want to make sure that NBC maintains neutrality, and it's not therefore surprising that Brokaw would try and give those assurances to McCain's campaign.

Spinning that as being in the tank for McCain, or taking McCain's side, or anything other than an attempt to present a front of neutrality is almost willfully mis-reading the situation.


by fsm on Tue Sep 30, 2008 at 03:16:21 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.