The coverage of Tim Russert’s untimely death is obscene. Can you imagine the BBC lamenting for days on end the passing of one of their broadcasters, or even the head of the BBC network? Never. It would not happen. You’d hear a curt, solemn announcement to the effect that, “Our colleague has passed away tragically. We mourn his death and extend our condolences to his family. Now to the news of the day.”
This pathological coverage, once again, is of a piece with the childish, self-centered, deeply silly American media, which knows not what its proper mandate is. Has such impropriety afflicted the national psyche? You tell me. I suspect most Americans are preoccupied with other matters. I hope so.
Mature, normal people know when to grieve, how publically, how loudly, and how long. When the president of the US pauses, on an official visit abroad, to declare to the world how sad he is about the death of a man his audience doesn’t know—you know what a naval-gazing nation we’ve become.
This kind of coverage applies with spades to the elections: Since 2007, cable networks have focused exclusively on the elections to the exclusion of most other new and certainly world news.
As I asked in “Elections Fatigue”: “America’s pathological, election-time self-absorption makes a mockery of the idea that the US is suited to lead the world. Shouldn’t a world leader take an interest in the world?”
I suspect that Mr. Russert would have been appalled by the choice of broadcasting his colleagues have made.
