History will pass judgement on the abilities and actions of many, assuming it is still left to be shared in a professional, agenda-free form from the hands of those who in theory concern themselves with facts and balance in serving us our information.
If so, I rather doubt President Bush will be deemed on his merits one of the best the USA has had, for their own country or others.
However, I do rather find myself warming rather perversely to the man, if for no other reason than having just caught a bit (popping Mum back home after lunch, and she, much to everyone's misery, watches News 24 dawn 'to dusk) of the live commentary of his arrival somewhere here by helicopter.
I can only presume the person doing all the talking was an invited American guest as there was a British accent involved too, but all I heard was a stream of rather partisan opinion on Mr. Bush's legacy. To the extent that as part of the invective there was thrown up the fact that 9/11 took place during his Presidency (yeeees.... but not so sure the whole 'attack the US' concept was entirely aimed at him. I am sure Mr. Clinton's statesmanlike actions might have had a hand in things) and he didn't cope with the whole being told in front of the kids thing very well (what was he supposed to do? Leap up and scream 'we're under attack!!! I'm off to man the nearest ack-ack gun?').
These are all entirely valid things to opine in a free, democratic system, but they seemed distinctly odd as part of the commentary on the arrival of a world leader to our country. If there was balance before or after I must have missed it, but in the circumstances it was anyway rather extreme and to me beyond the remit of our national broadcaster.
But in the world of reporting helicopter diplomacy, at least in the hands of the BBC, as a bookend to Ms. Plett's eulogy during Yasser Arafat's ascension to the heavens it would be perfect.
The Editors' blog is moving
11 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment