Madmen
"I mean, holy cow, somehow a liberal got in! This is going to be
interesting."
Phil Donahue's own words, uttered on the premiere show of his
much heralded return to talk news, neatly summarizes MSNBC's
marketing strategy in giving him the series in the first place.
The talk news genre, combining current events with commentary by
a particular personality, has of late been glutted with
conservative viewpoints.
This holds particularly true for the cable news channels MSNBC
and the Fox
News Network (thus far, CNN appears to be maintaining a focus on
reporting more than opinionating). Taking up the torch of
right-wing radio dynamo Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly leads the
conservative charge on Fox (The O'Reilly Factor), and
Alan Keyes used to reign on MSNBC's Alan Keyes is Making
Sense, recently cancelled. Such commentators spend their
camera time bashing all things "liberal," while television
executives afford them platforms in order to tap into their
considerable audiences.
Given this conservative element of talk news, MSNBC's
announcement of Donahue's show raised more than a few eyebrows.
With Donahue, the host "pioneered" the daytime talk show
format during the 1970s and '80s until the rise of Oprah did him
in 1996. During his run, however, the host was an active
participant in the political (read: Democratic) arena. In 1984,
he moderated the Democratic Presidential debate and, as MSNBC's
website points out, "During the 1992 presidential campaign,
Donahue presented a unique and unprecedented television
debate between then-candidates Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown."
Donahue was also an extremely vocal supporter of Al Gore during
the Supreme Court wrangling that decided the Presidential
election of 2000.
Donahue's well-documented liberal leanings would seem to clash
with the current, conservative monopoly in talk news, but if his
first show is any indication, the conflict will be a mild one,
if at all. With a few words of gratitude to MSNBC, Donahue
launched right into his first show's topic: a debate surrounding
the rumored invasion of Iraq by the United States. Rather than
declare his own views, Limbaugh- or O'Reilly-style, Donahue
instead played moderator to a panel of three, if "moderator" is
the appropriate term. Whether hampered by rust or reservation,
Donahue allowed former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter,
Republican Senator James Inhofe, and the Iraqi National
Congress's Ahmed Chalabi to run roughshod over his mild-mannered
protestations for civility. While political panel shows like
Hardball (also on MSNBC) depend upon lively, even
volatile exchange, debate quickly turns unintelligible without a
forceful personality to direct the conversation -- and
Hardball's Chris Matthews is nothing if not forceful.
Donahue was visibly overwhelmed by the venom and ferocity of the
guests' attacks against one another. After being talked over by
both Inhofe and Chalabi, Ritter retorted in exasperation: "I'm
not going to debate these madmen." Undeterred, Chalabi accused
Ritter (who was suggesting caution with regard to invading
Iraq), of being personally funded by Saddam Hussein. The quality
of the debate was disappointing. Rather than a debate on the
merits of opposing viewpoints, the program degenerated into a
pointless shouting match of personal insults.
Again and again, Donahue's self-described liberal politics were
effaced by the show's format. Unable to control his furious
guests, much less get a word in edgewise, Donahue seemed at a
loss on his own show. The second segment featured Donahue
interviewing Tonya Ingram, sister of CIA operative Johnny "Mike"
Spann, who was the first American combat casualty in
Afghanistan. Again, the format steered clear of any provocative
material, as Donahue solicited Ingram's compelling but utterly
predictable view on John Walker Lindh's guilty plea. While
questions remain concerning evidence of Walker's involvement in
the war in Afghanistan and his treatment by U.S. military
interrogators, Donahue opted to ignore these difficult
issues. By giving a platform to Spann's sister alone, the show
instead offered dramatically one-sided and unenlightening
observations. Again, the format handcuffed the host and the
progressive dissent that has been his calling card and what
seemed to be the premise, or at least the selling point, of his
new show. Where the first segment effaced the host's viewpoint
with overbearing guests, the second segment's guest offered
Donahue the opportunity to say nothing more confrontational
than, "You are a member of a very, very large family of loved
ones."
Not until the third segment, during which Donahue engaged Pat
Buchanan in a debate about the omission of "under God" from the
Pledge of Allegiance, did the host express himself without
restriction. His impassioned approval of Jehovah's Witness
schoolchildren, who refused, even during World War II, to pledge
allegiance to anything other than their God, offered a glimpse
at what the show could be. Donahue looked good set
against a lively opponent whom he also clearly respects.
The show's fourth segment was an interview with Bob Costas, a
synergistic tête-à-tête which allowed the pair to plug Costas'
role in NBC sports as they roundly condemned steroid use in
baseball. Once again, there was little room for meaningful
debate (can anyone make a compelling case for steroid use
in professional sports?) and there was little risk of Donahue
adopting any sort of controversial or divergent stance. While a
raging contest between political opposites is surely not be the
only formula for a successful, or entertaining, talk news
program, MSNBC's buildup that Donahue would be a liberal
fish swimming against the conservative stream was hardly
fulfilled.
All that said, it is, of course, too early to judge. And it is
worth noting that, even as he acknowledged his distinctiveness,
Donahue also acknowledged his shortcomings. After his exchange
with Buchanan, he was apologetic. He might have been referring
to the show in its entirety when he noted, "I didn't think we'd
be screaming like this... maybe we ought to go back to the
drawing board here." Subsequent programs, following the
premiere, suggest that he and the producers still have work to
do, though their tweaking -- in guest selections and format --
has started to reveal more of Donahue's politics and
personality, delivering more of the goods MSNBC promised.
22 July 2002