posted on June 10, 2004 05:14:02 PM new
One would expect a little respect for President Reagan, but nooooo. You can bet if it was for Carter or Clinton, they would want 24 hour coverage.
---------------------------
DAN Rather and Tom Brokaw work for
different networks but agree one thing — coverage of Ronald Reagan's death has been excessive, they say.
"Even though everybody is respectful and wants to pay homage to the president, life does go on," Rather told the Philadelphia Inquirer.
"There is other news, like the reality of Iraq," said the "CBS Evening News" anchor. "It got very short shrift this weekend."
Networks have been going almost wall-to-wall with coverage since Reagan passed away Saturday at the age of 93. The former president was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease nearly 10 years ago.
"Once the herd starts moving in one direction, it's very hard to turn it, even slightly," Rather said. "Nationally, the herd has grown tremendously."
"I think just about everything is over-covered these days," said Brokaw, who anchors the "NBC Nightly News." "The spectrum is so crowded. With all the cable networks, it begins to have a 'video wall' feeling to it."
Jennings said he had mixed feelings about the Reagan coverage.
"I'm more inclined to spare coverage — come on [the air], do something meaningful, then get away," he said.
"The last time I had to do it was with O.J. Simpson [during the 1994 car chase], and I had nothing to say after a certain period of time."
Coverage of Reagan's death will continue through Friday's funeral on all the news networks (broadcast and cable). — Post TV Staff
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 10, 2004 05:35:45 PM new
When Nixon died there wasn't this much coverage.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 10, 2004 05:52:32 PM new
I absolutely agree - I liked Ronnie in a lot of ways when he was pres but hey, he got way more than an average slice of pie thruout his life, had a much longer run than most and he died for all intents and purposes some time ago. The coverage is waaaayyy overboard - and the reality is there's no real news there. The first bulletin and a day or two of retrospectives covered it all. Let it go.
OTOH I find it somewhat ironic that the 3 anchors complaining are all Managing Editors of their own broadcasts and all
fully involved in it. If Rather had told CBS
" No, I'll do a couple hours, then I'm done" what would they do?
posted on June 10, 2004 06:27:57 PM new
Come on Bear - we have seen live coverage everytime this mans casket was moved preceeded with a 20 minute dialog on the move and proceeded with a 30 minute recap of the move. It has been ridiculous. There is no reason that moving the casket from the funeral home to the Library needed to be carried live, nor did moving the casket from the Library to the airport - both were just plain silly. I think that a few minutes at the Library would have been appropriate as was yesterdays processional. People are getting burned out and we have not even gotten around to a Memorial Service yet. Then we get then trip back to the airport, and from the airport back to the library. Then what - two more days of Katie Curic interviewing visitors at the gravesite trying so desperately to to be Jackie O and Gidget at the same time?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 10, 2004 08:04:36 PM new
You're right bear....and dan rather is going to give [the name they don't like me mentioning ] his full hour to discuss his new book - My Life - By B.C.
Too Much Reagan Coverage?
<http://ratherbiased.com/news/content/view/112/2/> --
Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, and Tom Brokaw are all afraid that television is going to talk too much about deceased president Ronald Reagan and the preparations for his funeral.
"They will be over-covered," Rather told Philly Daily News TV critic Gail Shister.
"Even though everybody is respectful and wants to pay homage to the president, life does go on. There is other news, like the reality of Iraq. It got very short shrift this weekend."
"Once the herd starts moving in one direction, it's very hard to turn it, even slightly.
Nationally, the herd has grown tremendously."
Brokaw and Jennings agreed that television will overdo the coverage but disagreed with Rather on whether reports should mention negative things about the departed president.
The CBS star said he thought that was inappropriate.
"When a twice-elected, two-full-term president dies, it's not the time for a seminar on his strengths and weaknesses, in my opinion," he told the columnist. "To paraphase Marc Antony, I think, by and large, that the good that men do should live after them, and the evil should be interred with their bones."
Interesting to say the least. We find it ironic that these three, especially Rather, would complain about television "over-covering" something considering they are the most powerful men in their respective news divisions. Where was this attitude during the media frenzy over Abu Ghraib? Earlier in May, CBS ran 28 stories, almost one a day, on the scandal.
After Promising Not to, Rather Attacks Deceased President.
Opponents of John Kerry often accuse the Democratic presidential candidate of flip-flopping on issues of importance. That may be true but when it comes to flip-flopping, John Kerry has nothing on Dan Rather, who yesterday managed the difficult feat of saying one thing and then doing the opposite in the span of just a few hours.
The anchor's first move came while he was speaking with Philadelphia Daily News TV critic Gail Shister about the television coverage of Ronald Reagan's life and death.
In contrast to his higher-rated rivals who said that some criticism of the late president's policies is appropriate even before his burial, Rather disagreed.
"When a twice-elected, two-full-term president dies, it's not the time for a seminar on his strengths and weaknesses, in my opinion," he said. "To paraphase Marc Antony, I think, by and large, that the good that men do should live after them, and the evil should be interred with their bones."
Hours later, though, Rather and his colleague Bill Plante did just that with a piece which blamed Reagan for "helping to set the stage for the first Iraq war and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism."
"Straight ahead now on the CBS Evening News, President Reagan and the missiles-for-Iran deal," Rather teased as he went into a commercial before the piece. "Is or is not America still paying a price for what's called the Iran-contra debacle? Our special series The Legacy is next."
Back from the break, Rather continued:
"Ronald Reagan was and is one of the most popular presidents in U.S. history, and with good reason. He accomplished a lot. That does not mean his record is without questions and, in fact, blemishes.
Tonight, CBS's Bill Plante, who covered the Reagan White House, begins a week-long series assessing the Reagan legacy.
With that introduction, Plante began his piece which was fairly objective until the end when the correspondent began to editorialize.
"The president's full disclosure at home, however, didn't salvage U.S. policy in the Middle East," Plante argued. "Relations with Iran deteriorated further. Iraq, which the Reagan administration had backed in its war against Iran, went on to use chemical weapons in 1988 with little protest from the U.S."
In print journalism, that kind of assertion would require about 5000 words to back up but since this was television and Plante needed help making his anti-Reagan point, he turned to a former Clinton State Department official for help. As might be expected, Plante did not tell viewers of the background Jon Alterman, "mideast analyst"
"But when it came time to really having partnerships and policies that move forward in the Middle East, there wasn't a lot positive happening on the ground," Alterman said.
Having "proved" his point, Plante delivered his conclusion:
"An arms control agreement with the Soviet Union refurbished President Reagan's image, but U.S. efforts to deal with the tough issues in the Middle East went on hold, helping to set the stage for the first Iraq war and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. Bill Plante, CBS News."
Of course, Plante or his producer could easily have found another "mideast analyst" who would completely discount his argument. But that would've ruined the whole point of the thing.
posted on June 10, 2004 08:11:27 PM new
Each President, or maybe their wives have a choice of what kind of funeral they want. The Nixon family chose only to have a ceremony at the Nixon Library. Nancy chose this as did Jacqueline Kennedy choose to do the funeral for JFK. Maybe you don't remember that long drawn out one where she walked the whole distance with John John and Caroline to the Capital Building where her husband laid in State. I don't remember Eisenhower but television wasn't really in yet and all we heard was the news on the radio. There are many more presidental funerals to come and each one will have their choice as to what they want people to remember them by.
posted on June 10, 2004 08:19:09 PM new
Dan Rather or Tom Brokaw probably don't remember this funeral.
President Johnson’s body lay in state at the LBJ Library in Austin, and then in state in the Capitol Rotunda in Washington, D.C. President Johnson’s funeral at the LBJ Ranch took place on the cold and rainy day of January 25, 1973. He once told Mrs. Johnson, "When I die I don’t just want our friends who can come in their private planes. I want the men in their pickup trucks and the women whose slips hang down below their dresses to be welcome, too...." Hundreds of people attended the funeral, which was conducted by Reverend Billy Graham.
posted on June 10, 2004 08:20:04 PM new
So Linda - are you saying that you think that live coverage of a casket being transported from the Funeral home to the Library was needed and appropriate and simply would not have been complete without additional live coverage of the transport from the Library to the airport and that that footage of Ron Jr and Patty standing outside the library with Ron trying to show her where on her lip her make-up was smeared was simply something our country could not have lived without and that the absence of it would have been a slap in the face to the former Presidents memory?
All Hail the Queen of Run On Sentences!!
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 10, 2004 08:22:38 PM new
I remember catching one of the talking heads saying that the Reagans started planning this right after he left office and that the complete plan was 300 pages long. Personally, I think that's a sure sign you need a different hobby.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 10, 2004 08:31:38 PM new
You don't have to blame the Reagans for this it is the National Media that wants the ratings the most. There didn't need to be all this coverage but the News dictates as to who is going to get the award for the best coverage so it becomes an extravaganca. I really don't think that all the Reagans had a say in what was going to happen. I think Maureen was instrumental in a lot of what is going on even if she is gone. I also think that Ron Jr. and his Mother and Dad were at odds during this time. Although I might be wrong as I am quite often. We all have different ideals or ideas in life on how we are going to live it and exit it. Mine will be simple, small family ceremony and creamation.
[ edited by Libra63 on Jun 10, 2004 08:35 PM ]
posted on June 10, 2004 08:42:10 PM new
Libra - I don't think I did say that the Reagan were responsible for the excessive coverage. You commented on the family planning the ceremonies, etc and I just threw out that little piece of trivia about a 300 page funeral plan.
I actually don't have a problem with the plan (although flying the body cross country twice and the procession was a little over the top in my opinon). It's the coverage that has way too heavy. Personally I would love to see Rather or any of the others at some point just say... "Now that we have said everything that there is to say three times we are going to sit here silently until you all get bored and the news director finally realizes that you didn't really need to see this live coverage of the airport for 40 minutes before the plane was even scheduled to touch down."
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 10, 2004 09:22:16 PM new
Remember Dan Rather has a job and if that news network wants a particular coverage of an event he should have no say in the matter. His assignment was to cover it. Same with Brokaw. The national networks along with the broadcasters receive awards if the coverage was right and with those awards come perks I would bet. I honestly can say Dan Rather did a horrible job today as he stumbled quite a bit on his words. If you notice the networks didn't cover the evening as CSpan did.
Johnson also made two flights one to Washington and One home. Maybe now that the rest of the x presidents watch this they will take a different view and not do it, but then again you never know.
posted on June 10, 2004 09:34:58 PM new
I've been watching the new network, RFN (Reagan Funeral Network). It has been coving this event 24/7. I especiallly liked the 21 gun (Howitzer) salute. I'm hoping that they rename all public buildings and schools built within the past 30 years Ronald Reagan whatever. I also look forward to seeing his portrait on the 10, 20, and 50 dollar bills. I feel Franklin should be left on the hundred and if they bring back the 1000 get rid of Cleveland and replace him, with Reagan.
I think we need some stamps with Reagan on them also and this years academy awards should be dedicated to him and a lifetime acheivement award given to him for his work in Hollywood.
posted on June 10, 2004 11:36:37 PM new
fenix - Those are the best kind.
No, but what I'm saying is that the three newscasters have a lot of say so and control over what goes out....especially dan rather. All three of them are completely anti-Bush - have been since the beginning - after the USSC decision.....and they never 'tired' of speaking about the Iraqi abuse stories....nor of every little thing they think this President is doing wrong.
Personally I never thought an actor would make a good governor for CA...and I absolutely couldn't stand Nancy....but he surprised me and as President his approach with the Soviet Union was strong, forceful and his plan worked - they fell. No longer the threat they had been for so long.
I don't resent the coverage he's getting....imo, he earned it....but then again...I've had company and haven't had to see it all the time either. That makes a difference.
posted on June 10, 2004 11:53:01 PM new
A little part of an online article that mentioned this about President Reagan planning his death:
taken from KRON Channel 4 June 10, 2004
Reagan began talking about his funeral in 1981, the year he became president, his office said in a statement Thursday night disclosing his wishes for the service.
He asked George H.W. Bush, when he was vice president, to speak at his funeral, and years ago asked Justice Sandra Day O'Connor -- the first woman on the Supreme Court -- to read at his service, specifying she read from a John Winthrop sermon that inspired his description of America as "the shining city upon a hill."
His office said Reagan personally asked Thatcher many years ago to speak at his funeral.
The Reagans wanted an operatic selection and the former president expressed a preference for a soloist.
Other elements were filled in by Mrs. Reagan in recent years as Alzheimer's disease overtook her husband. She asked former Sen. John C. Danforth, R-Mo., an Episcopal priest, several years ago to officiate, following a suggestion from the Rev. Billy Graham that someone else be approached in the event Graham could not do it.
Mrs. Reagan asked President Bush on Saturday to deliver a eulogy, and she also asked Mulroney, a close friend of the couple, to speak.
And so the service will unfold: Danforth officiating, O'Connor reading, Irish tenor Ronan Tynan performing "Ave Maria," and the chosen eulogists paying tribute. Thatcher, who gave up public speaking after a series of small strokes, taped her remarks in advance.
----------------------
It really doesn't surprise me that any one would plan what would happen after their death -plan their own arrangements. It's hard for some to even discuss the possibility of their own passing.... such painful thoughts....but for others it's something they want their loved ones/family/friends to know. Especially when running for any public office after all the attempts made on their lives.
posted on June 11, 2004 03:00:42 AM new
If I had been shot and almost died, I believe I would think of my mortality and, more than likely, plan my funeral.
I don't believe I would obsess about it, but then I'm not an important person.
Who needs people crawling six feet up your butt with a microscope after you're gone?
posted on June 11, 2004 08:18:18 AM newOne would expect a little respect for President Reagan, but nooooo. You can bet if it was for Carter or Clinton, they would want 24 hour coverage.
Considering they were much better leaders than Reagan we could expect much greater coverage.
posted on June 11, 2004 09:17:54 AM new
I don't believe it is excessive
The nation's 40th president gives a farewell salute as he prepares to board a Marine Corps helicopter on his last day in office, January 20, 1989. When Reagan left office, he had the highest approval rating of any president since World War II.
posted on June 11, 2004 12:15:11 PM newCarter was a better President than Reagan?
Not hardley, I seem to remember Carter leaving American hostages in Iran for something like 400 days. Only when Carter was focusing on reelection did he attempt to rescue them.
When the Iranians realized that Reagan was to be the next US president the hostages released. I believe that when the ayatollah heard that Reagan had stated "the bombing starts in 30 minutes", he knew the bluffing was over.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
Are you truly that naive?
The Ayatollah let the hostages go because the deal was already made- that the US would sell TOW missiles (thru Israel)to Iran and then use then proceeds to fund the contras.
Both of these deals were in direct violation of laws then on the books, but GOPers felt it was a way to get the deal done and get the hostages out. Reagan approved the deal.
Part of Reagans initial high approval was that - getting the hostages out AS he was taking the oath! But, he ransomed them out, he made a deal with the devil. He didnt GET them out by dint of his diplomacy or by scaring the crap out of the Iranians with what he might do, the latter being the assumption of many people at the time.
I voted for Reagan twice and if he were on the ballot this time I'd vote for him again over Bush or Kerry, not because I think he was THAT great but because at least you knew what the hell he was doing and what he believed in.
Dont kid yourself for a second into thinking that he was Jimmy Stewart come to town to clean things up- he was just another politician with his ration of sleaze and double dealing- but IN MY OPINION then and now it was acceptable sleaze given the goals and ends it achieved.
As to approval ratings - they are absolutely meaningless except to a candidate- asking the American public anything is a crap shoot and you are seeking the opinion of people who by and
large know squat about the government or anything else.
In the long run, Reagan has by far the best chance of being highly ranked as a President
when compared to Clinton or Carter. History judges high points, not details and Reagan ended the Cold war, period. Bush 1 was pitching at the time - but it was Reagan's win, Bush 1 got a save at best.
Clinton did nothing of any note except enjoy the economic benefits of that conclusion and Reagan's tax cuts.
Carter? What are we supposed to remember Carter for? Camp David? Oh YES!! BRINGING PEACE to the middle east! Is THAT what's going on over there? The Carter Doctrine?
Who thought that one up? Human rights for all! Certainly has been a raging success, both in his time and up to the present- ask people in Sudan for starters -or any 3rd world country. Carter is a good man who was in WAAAYY over his head and should have gone directly from the Governors Mansion to Habitat.
Bear, Wise up, read a bit- stop depending on Hannity and Limbaugh for your history lessons- it's obvious you weren't there, or you were and weren't paying ANY attention at all.
posted on June 11, 2004 02:26:21 PM new
LOL, blairwitch. I can just see all the liberals that like to whine here because RR didn't coddle them.....squirting ketchup all over their ceilings as they try to choke the chit out of him. Hehehehehehe!!!
______________
You know...the best way to defeat a liberal is to let them speak.
posted on June 11, 2004 06:13:50 PM new
Twelve, Yes, I for one have heard of the off button. The funeral pre-empted my favorite soap today - that was expected - but I'm still not happy about it. Other than that the coverage hasn't affected me one way or the other.
I've probably watched less than 30 minutes total. I'm just not that interested - I'm guessing that's pretty obvious by now. But I know there are people who care and want to see it - so fine - I don't begrudge them the coverage.
] his full hour to discuss his new book - My Life - By B.C. 
