Peter Jennings (RIAP)

Peter Jennings: Rest in Accurate Peace

Obviously there was a lot "wrong" with Jennings' coverage of September 11th, or so many people in the world wouldn't have come to the same conclusion at the same time. It isn't like anyone was out to "get" Jennings.

I personalize the situation with my own experience ---

Jennings was my #1 newscaster my entire life. Before 9/11, the only broadcast news that I watched was ABC News and...and that was solely because of Jennings. I hate(d) Rather, and found Brokaw "fine" but NBC's overall coverage a little drub and boring.

On September 11th, I was so flabbergasted at what I was witnessing/experiencing from Jennings that I thought that I must have been falsely reacting because of emotional trauma from the attacks. That was, until I spoke with my two best friends (independently of each other) and both of them brought up the topic of Jennings' behavior, perspective, and coverage.

Then, the rest of the world started talking about it and I (unfortunately) felt 'vindicated'.

Think about this. This wasn't Dan Rather whom I would have been looking to criticize. This was Jennings, whom I was completely looking NOT to criticize. I came to this conclusion DESPITE a (strong) pre-determination that he was "my guy". That is VERY HARD to do.

I can understand everyone's aversion to want to criticize Jennings' so close to his death. I agree with not slandering the character of the dead in principal.

However, I'm not sure that limiting comments to those related to Jennings' performance and not his character is so wrong. "Miss Ellie" just died this week...would it be out of bounds for me to comment that I didn't think that her work in Dallas Episode #97 was her finest hour?

I am not sure that there is ever a time that it is not "right" to try to be both accurate and fair. If anyone is going to talk about Jennings this close after his death, why is it acceptable that only certain parts of his story be told?

Isn't NOT telling the whole story the true bias and editorializing (by omission)? How many times have you heard about Jennings' four wives and anything else about what some people claim to be a controversial personal life? Isn't the kind of "journalism" that the paragons of virtue in the media supposedly subscribe to based on telling the whole story and letting you decide? Isn't that the kind of bahvior that Jennings himself believed he employed?

At a time that all of these reflections and biographies of Jennings' life and work are being promulgated into the public consciousness -- how is NOT the right to try to be as accurate and complete as possible? Isn't that what the journalists so piously claim is their job and purpose? Why is it so different now?


http://wascallywabbitt.blogspot.com/2005/08/peter-jennings-rip.html

http://takingnotes.blogspot.com/2005/08/peter-jennings.html