Lynn Sweet wants the Obama team to come clean over its contacts with Blago. David Shuster has a different concern. He's hoping the media won't get "adversarial" once the Obama folks get around to releasing their report about who said what to whom.Shuster made his pre-emptive plea for good media manners on this evening's 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the MSNBC show Shuster has recently begun hosting now that David Gregory has moved on to Meet The Press.
Sweet, of the Chicago Sun-Times, began with a reasonable reporter's take on the pending release by Team Obama of its accounting of contacts between the President-elect's representatives and Blago and his minions: take your time but be complete. In contrast, Shuster's focus was his demand for media decorum and desire to exculpate Rahm Emanuel before even learning the facts.
View video here.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
LYNN SWEET: I hope, and I've been reserving judgment, if Obama's team wanted to agree with Fitzgerald's request and give them a few more days [to prepare its report], that's fine with me. I just hope that when we get the report, for the administration that says they want to be transparent, I hope we have a time-line, I hope we have a list of the contacts.
I hope that they omit nothing important, because sometimes some of the people involved in this operation sometimes--maybe we have a difference of opinion--but I think sometimes they omit some things that are kind of, maybe, helpful to know. I hope that they look at the story in context and just state, from the beginning, what happened in a timeline: lay it out neatly, no summary narrative, and just let us know as many facts as they can. That's what I'm hoping. And if they can use this week to take that extra time to make a more detailed report, I'm all for them using the extra time.How ineffably understanding on Shuster's part. And of course we all remember how Shuster urged the MSM not to jump to conclusions about Pres. Bush on any number of matters. Or not. In any case, I don't think David has too much too worry about the MSM getting overly aggressive with their guy.
DAVID SHUSTER: I'm also hoping that it's not adversarial. Because at this stage there's no reason for them or the press to make it that way. There's no evidence they did anything wrong. And you know, look: of course, Rahm Emanuel and others will have had contacts with Rod Blagojevich. That was essentially his job. There's nothing wrong with that. I think the question is going to be: will Rahm Emanuel just simply come out and say, look, here's what I did, here's what I didn't know, and here's some of the information that maybe we're still trying to figure out what happened.
It's ironic: a few days ago, noting Shuster's ascendancy to Gregory's spot at 1600, I thought of saying that despite Shuster's excesses, I sensed that he actually retained some real reportorial instincts that distinguished him from the likes of Matthews and Olbermann. I'm actually saddened to see this kind of flackery from him.
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Rush
December 19, 2008 - 22:08 ET by TexndocI wouldn't watch this guy with a gun to my head. I did enjoy Rush reading some MSM reports today on the "Office of the President Elect"s recent news conferences. Some "does anybody else think this guy talks a lot but isn't saying anything?" from them. Shocking.
No kidding. Since when
December 20, 2008 - 06:17 ET by motherbeltNo kidding. Since when does a President-Elect hold regular news conferences?
Mr. "It's not about me" is showing more every day that that's exactly what it's about!
Speaking of not watching him, I walked into the kitchen/family room area yesterday and my husband was watching it. I said "Change the channel. I will NOT listen to that guy!!" LOL
I bought him TV Ears so if he wants to watch news I won't have to listen. LOL
Ignoramus
December 19, 2008 - 22:13 ET by iveseenitallJust goes to show you how ignorant this "journalist" Shuster is. It is the responsiblity of the free press to be "adversarial" when necessary, and certainly not to pick and choose with whom to be adversarial according to their own biases. What a jerk. Jounalism is dead in America.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
DAVID SHUSTER: I'm also
December 19, 2008 - 22:40 ET by MidAmericaDAVID SHUSTER: I'm also hoping that it's not adversarial. Because at this stage there's no reason for them or the press to make it that way.
This is actually kind of heartening to see that the members of the media learned a valuble lesson from the Valerie Plame affair when the media got ahead of the facts and created an atmosphere that was adversarial to the Bush administration when in the end the facts showed a completely different story than what the media had assumed.
So, way to go David. Let your fellow media members know that media feeding frenzies can often times lead to poor reporting and analysis.
I'm also hoping that it's
December 19, 2008 - 22:54 ET by SvenI'm also hoping that it's not adversarial
Don't worry David, they won't!
How Dare They??
December 19, 2008 - 23:01 ET by BarkerI'm sure that David Shuster -the Gold Medalist in Facial Contortions- would just die if those meanies in the press gang up on his Delicate Little Flower.
He might even tell those bullies to 'stop that'.
Ha Ha
December 20, 2008 - 10:45 ET by capavGood description! My husband used to mock him when he made his closing statement on a report..."this is David Shuster for Hardball". He seems to have an extra-wide mouth and usually uses it for extra-wide leniency for Democrats. I actually thought David Gregory was a tiny bit fair on that show. What a joke to replace him with this guy. He's the lead-in to Matthews, Olbermann and Maddow. Add another biased show to amessnbc.
The spin
December 19, 2008 - 23:16 ET by KC MulvilleThis is another media myth, that relations between the press and the president turn hostile only because the president screws up. As if the press only turned on the Republican presidents after the GOP screwed the press.
NewsBusters is compiling evidence daily that media attacks conservatives purely because of ideology. MRC has compiled years of evidence. The liberal media is adversarial against conservatives out of ideology - it has nothing to do with decorum.
The MSM getting adversarial
December 20, 2008 - 00:37 ET by KevroyThe MSM getting adversarial with Obama? LOL. Now they are doing standup comedy? Cuz this is hilarious...
Never Fear
December 20, 2008 - 00:51 ET by pbthinkerWhy would David worry about adversarial, hell we're talking about the media wing of the Democratic Party here, no adversity here.
Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.
No need for concern....
December 20, 2008 - 01:15 ET by ScandimanDavid Shuster (aka Shyster) echos the desire of the MSM to protect a guy they failed to even vet for the highest office in the land? I think his concerns are unfounded as the MSM will circle the wagons around Obama.
I don't recall Shyster requesting the same kind of fairness and refrain when MSM assaulted Sarah Palin on a daily basis!
Robin Shuster
December 20, 2008 - 03:21 ET by AgentAmericanThis pathetic boot-licking squirrel has about as much testosterone as a college cheerleader. I have never seen such flaming candy-ass on TV who we are supposed to see as a...ahem...journalist. Journalist?
Goebbels had more macho than this priss. Really.
2010: A GOP Hill
They dont even hear themselves
December 20, 2008 - 05:01 ET by dark_dsI find its amazing that Shuster or any other "journalist" have have any concept of their role in the Press. I took one Media ethics class at a JC and I think more stuck to me than all the elite education that these reporters alledgedly have benifited from. The truth is their goal, and the search for it must be done with out bias. Yes I know i am incredibly naive
MSM needs help
December 20, 2008 - 05:45 ET by richb313I am concerned for the mental health of our stalwart reporters from the MSM. They are incapable of recognizing reality. Thier view of reality is so colored by thier built in biases it has risen to the pathological. There is a medical term that accurately describes this condition, it is called delusional.