[print-me]

Meet the Press: Exemplary of misleading news

Each week the Sunday News Show “Meet the Press (MTP)” opens by describing itself as: “The longest running show in television history,” starting in 1947. CBS Evening News apparently must be the second, starting one year later in 1948.

Talk about stolen valor. In this case misrepresenting one’s honors.

What is significant about having a news show that airs each week and never stops? All that continues is its format: interviews with major and not-so-major political leaders, a panel of expert and not-so-expert news observers. And sometimes a random subject opined on because it interests the producers.

That shouldn’t earn it plaudits for never being cancelled. And it probably will be airing as long as television continues to exist.

As I wrote last year in the Baltimore Post-Examiner, MTP has a history of excellent and not-so-excellent hosts and interviewers, including on the top side, distinguished by seriousness, fairness, disinterestedness and preparedness: Lawrence E. Spivak (1966-1975), Bill Monroe (1975-1984), Marvin Kalb (1985-1987), and Tim Russert (1991-2008), leading to the dregs side of hyper-partisanism with Chuck Todd (2014-2023), who is now openly progressive and anti-Trump, and Kristen Welker (2023-present).

https://baltimorepostexaminer.com/the-false-pretensions-of-todays-meet-the-press/2025/05/22

I have been critiquing MTP regularly the last couple of years in a variety of outlets. And it has marginally improved, although generally openly friendly to liberals and progressives and Democrats to openly hostile to conservatives and Republicans.  This prevailing bias has in the past manifested itself by consistently featuring more of the former and fewer of the latter as guests and woefully ideologically imbalanced panels with those on the left and far-left outnumbering the single conservative. Welker herself always adds to the former progressive-liberal side..

The latest MTP on August 2, 2026 showed the slight – slight – improvement of the show. The major guests were two: one from the far-left and one from the right.

Sen. John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, was the first and best guest, and, to be fair, an excellent choice. …he gives opinions clearly, cleverly and is willing to criticize his own party if that is what he thinks.

Welker kept her interruptions at a minimum, a rarity for her with conservative guests. But they were there, as opposed to her following interview with Bernie Sanders, which had none.

The panel was almost exactly 7 minutes…what a waste of time! It included Ashley Etienne, former communications director for Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi in her least offensive participation…she’s always there but for no discernible reason: no great insights and no interesting point-counterpoint; Garrett Haake, Senior White House Correspondent for NBC News; Stephen Hayes, Editor and CEO of The Dispatch; and Amy Walter, Chief of the Cook Political Report.

Not all their fault due to the short number of minutes they were on. But it was Anodyne Anodyne Anodyne…no substantive contributions…

There were two more panels – the second of which was just worthless.

I. Panel on protecting youth from social media…good idea if it can be done…

2. “Common Ground” conversation on role of dignity in politics with Governors of Oklahoma (Republican Kevin Stitt) and Maryland (Democrat Wes Moore) with Tim Shriver CEO of UNITE…an empty lovefest personified…no mention of The Baltimore Sun’s lengthy critique of Moore’s ethical lapses.

Moore…trite and hackneyed throughout, said people just want to see you get things done…[nothing on zero sum game of politics]…

Stitt…We’re all trying to move our country forward…he loves Moore…gag me with a spoon…so what?

(Shriver, son of Sarge Shriver, one of my favorite centrist Democrats…a Teddy Kennedy lookalike, who is his uncle).

Meet the Press could improve so much by choosing better guests, having a moderator who is ideologically in the center and making some effort to cover political differences fairly.

As it is, it is still a minor embarrassment to serious interviewing on public policy — better than it used to be, if I may damn with faint praise.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.