Bitter Barbara

I hardly ever watch network news magazine programs. They annoy me on many levels, especially the way they sensationalize what would otherwise be trivial subjects. However, I've always liked John Stossel and I stopped on 20/20 last Friday night to watch his editorial report on the attorney connection to politics. Specifically, he was questioning the connection between the lobbying power of lawyers and John Edwards. (You can read a summary of the report here.)

What Stossel points out in his report has more to do with the perception of large medical lawsuits rather than the suits themselves. He states, "we rarely hear about the unintended consequences of what they do, and how the lawsuits they pursue impact our lives." It's a powerful statement. The very purpose of journalism is to ask difficult questions and bring to the surface the truth. I think it's legitimate to question the impact large medical lawsuits have on the rest of us and the doctors themselves.

Here is what sticks in my mind more than the story itself. Right after the story was over, Barbara Walters gave a disclaimer that is not on the transcripts on the ABC Web site. She said (I'm paraphrasing from memory), "I would like to remind everyone that John's editorial does not necessarily express the opinion of 20/20 or this network." Stossel looked taken aback and simply replied, "Okay."

Wow. I rarely see such blatant animosity from one journalist to another. Everything should be questioned; that's what journalism is about. Questions about any topic should be presented with facts on both sides. Stossel did his homework and presented evidence for his opinion. To me, that is more journalism than questioning celebrities about their personal lives on Oscar night. I think Walters should "Give Me a Break."

Popularity: 1% [?]