Bozell Column: Liberalism Lite with Ann Curry
When the folks at CBS shooed Katie Couric out the door, one could almost hear the harrumph with which Scott Pelley was reinstalling the Old Regime of Ed Murrow. Unlike Couric, Pelley wasn’t debuting with celebrity interviews and updates on Tom Cruise’s baby. CBS is going back to biased Dan Rather basics, treating Couric’s tenure as little more than a palate cleanser.
With Couric off the news grid in pursuit of cloning Oprah Winfrey’s success in feel-your-pain afternoon chat, who will be the public face of soft and marshmallowy News Lite? Coincidentally, NBC’s Meredith Vieira retired from NBC’s “Today” and NBC was contractually obligated to promote long-time morning news reader Ann Curry. How light is Ann? Last October, while narrating a story on how Russia implausibly unveiled a new set of inflatable weapons designed to fool spy satelittes, Curry added her own touch: “Wish all weapons were like that.”
Since joining the show in 1997, Curry has demonstrated that the network news types shouldn't be too fast to point and sneer at their own cartoons of Republican women like Sarah Palin as too dim to be a national leader. When political reporter Chuck Todd laid out the Super Tuesday primary map in 2008, Curry couldn't find the state of Illinois on a map. (She pointed to Minnesota.)
Sometimes political correctness is the issue, not factual correctness. In 2003, Curry questioned an author of a book urging families to learn more about the history of Thanksgiving and to appreciate being American. She insisted, "You know, there are some American Indians who feel that Thanksgiving should be a day of mourning, not a day of celebration because of what happened to their people."
In her interviews, Curry has almost patented a sappy style of liberalism lite, especially on the environment. In 2007, she promoted a Ben and Jerry's executive using a "people-powered blender bike" to make smoothies. Curry added: "You really care and have, for years, cared about global warming." As Curry pedaled the blender bike, she exclaimed, "You see, you can save the environment! It is possible!"
Perhaps she could make enough electricity to power the "Today" show if she bicycles during all her interviews?
In 2006, she showed her hippie-friendly stripes by promoting a concert with activist Trudie Styler, the wife of the rock star Sting. Styler said global warming was coming home to roost on a "karmic level," and said her concert's after-party would have a "Woodstock theme," singing Sixties songs in Sixties clothes, and Curry begged, "Oh, please give me an invitation to that one!"
In 2002, Curry interviewed Jane Goodall, the "legendary" chimpanzee-wrangler and sympathetically underlined Goodall's radical cant: "You had once written, quote, 'I feel deep shame when I look into the eyes of my grandchildren and think how much damage has been done to the planet Earth since I was their age. Each of us must work as hard as we can now to heal the hurts and save what is left.' Why do you think each one of us can make a difference given the enormity of the damage?"
Curry meshes perfectly with the way NBC has promoted "green" initatives like Al Gore's 2007 "Live Earth" concerts. In the midst of oodles of live coverage on NBC, Curry urged Gore to run for president: "After fueling this grass roots movement, if you become convinced that without you there will not be the political will in the White House to fight global warming to the level that is required, because the clock is ticking, would you answer the call?"
Curry does not bow and scrape before Republican officials. Back in early 2008, she scolded President Bush that the high cost of the Iraq war was bringing "suffering" to the American people. But when she chatted with then presidential candidate Barack Obama weeks later, after insisting he might want to pick Hillary Clinton as vice president, she tossed softball questions like: "Coffee or tea?...Beatles or the Rolling Stones?...Cubs or White Sox?...Basketball or bowling?" There was also "Best thing your mom ever taught you?"
In short, it's worrisome - and predictable - that NBC is now placing its high-profit "Today" franchise in the hands of a woman whose soft-news hero was Katie Couric and whose hard-news hero is Helen Thomas. Old TV habits die hard, but I predict "Today" watchers will find Curry's daily output is just too much syrupy bias to tolerate. They need less Twinkies and more fiber in their media diet.
- Brent Bozell's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Curried Bias
Submitted by Chris Norman on Tue, 06/14/2011 - 11:21pm.
Curry's kind of soft-pedaled gauzy bias is more damaging than the screaming, in-your-face bias of the fire breathers at MSNBC because it insidiously works it's way into the early morning and half-asleep semi-consciousness of people who don't have a strong political philosophy. Her kind of sweet talking, oohing and ahhing liberal bias gets responses like "Oh, isn't that nice lady so thoughtful and well-meaning?". Barf - I'll take Shrimp Curry any day over this neo-hippie.
The War on Error
Submitted by JohnJDunbar on Tue, 06/14/2011 - 11:00pm.
That is a great campaign slogan. I remember how the left loved to say "The end of an error" when referring to George W. I told a lib I know that the 2012 slogan is "The War on Error" and predictably he responded that it was offensive. When I reminded him of his use of the "end of an Error" slogan, again predictably, he said Bush stole the election from Gore, was a war criminal, and was stupid.
Liberals are good at feigning
Submitted by Chris Norman on Tue, 06/14/2011 - 11:09pm.
Liberals are good at feigning "offense".
never
Submitted by MidAmerica on Tue, 06/14/2011 - 11:27pm.
I never watch morning shows. You can feel the brain cells dying as you watch such mind numbing drivel.
Curry's hot air
Submitted by deadeyedan on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 12:43am.
As Brent points out, Mz. Curry is in the global warming herd.
Though Sarah's e-mails were to be scrutinized for every dotted eye, not a whimper for the far more revealing ClimateGate e-mails, a very thorough examination of which is here.
It's lengthy, but only the first twenty-five pages are required to give the reader a good idea - by the time fifty pages are read the discomfort bag is required.
http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/
ClimateGate - the revelation that the pseudo-scientists at East Anglia University know just as much about the atmosphere as Harvard law professors know about the Constitution - deadeyedan
The climate denial mob's
Submitted by Giygas on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 2:19pm.
The climate denial mob's obsession with climategate clearly shows that they have long run out of scientific arguments, and have degraded to willful ignorance and hatred of objective truth. How much longer will you cherish climategate as an attempt to protect your dearly worldview? Climategate has been dissected and redissected by many of the following independent inquiries:
"February 2010. the Pennsylvania State University released an Inquiry Report that investigated any 'Climategate' emails involving Dr Michael Mann, a Professor of Penn State's Department of Meteorology. They found that "there exists no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had or has ever engaged in, or participated in, directly or indirectly, any actions with an intent to suppress or to falsify data". On "Mike's Nature trick", they concluded "The so-called “trick”1 was nothing more than a statistical method used to bring two or more different kinds of data sets together in a legitimate fashion by a technique that has been reviewed by a broad array of peers in the field." http://theprojectonclimatescience.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Finding...
March 2010. UK government's House of Commons Science and Technology Committee published a report finding that the criticisms of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) were misplaced and that CRU’s "Professor Jones’s actions were in line with common practice in the climate science community".
http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/HC387-IUEAFinalEmb...
April 2010. University of East Anglia set up an international Scientific Assessment Panel, in consultation with the Royal Society and chaired by Professor Ron Oxburgh. The Report of the International Panel assessed the integrity of the research published by the CRU and found "no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit".
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/SAP
June 2010. Pennsylvania State University published their Final Investigation Report, determining "there is no substance to the allegation against Dr. Michael E. Mann".
July 2010. University of East Anglia published the Independent Climate Change Email Review report. They examined the emails to assess whether manipulation or suppression of data occurred and concluded that "The scientists’ rigor and honesty are not in doubt".
http://www.cce-review.org/pdf/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf
September 2010. UK Government responded to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report, chaired by Sir Muir Russell. On the issue of releasing data, they found "In the instance of the CRU, the scientists were not legally allowed to give out the data". On the issue of attempting to corrupt the peer-review process, they found "The evidence that we have seen does not suggest that Professor Jones was trying to subvert the peer review process. Academics should not be criticised for making informal comments on academic papers".
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7934/7934.pdf
"In February 2011, the Department of Commerce Inspector General conducted an independent review of the emails and found "no evidence in the CRU emails that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data"."
These videos linked below explain climategate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg&feature=channel_video_title
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXesBhYwdRo&feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8Ve6KE-Us&feature=channel_video_title
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WvasALL-hw&feature=channel_video_title
Wouldn't sacrificing
Submitted by ant on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 2:34am.
Wouldn't sacrificing 'smoothies' altogether be more beneficial to the "environment we've destroyed" than actually making a bicycle to pedal you're way to 'smoothie' goodness. I mean, who's always talking sacrifice in the first place? Certainly, manufacturing bicycles must cause greenhouse...uh, global warming...uh, ozone holes.......I mean climate change. Not to mention, the calories required for an individual to power a smoothie making bike must, in the end, create waste and therefore, warming-causing flatulence and human waste. There is no way around it, liberals must kill themselves to save the planet, otherwise, they're being hypocrites.
Quickly, everyone back in the space ship. We must leave.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 8:05am.
Let the earth grow wild again.
See the TV show, "Life After People." Fascinating. In a few centuries after we leave everything we have made will have been destroyed by the earth and the elements except possibly Mt. Rushmore.
http://www.history.com/shows/life-after-people
ewww, icky!
Submitted by spepper on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 8:12am.
Wait-- you mean to tell me that some weapons are not inflatable? They sometimes use things called bullets? Bombs? Rockets?
Ewww, icky!
Quick, someone please go get my hippo fart pillow.....
And she calls Palin Dumb ....
Submitted by libBuster on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 9:08am.
Here are some of my favorite Curryisms: