A preemptive counterstrike against anyone who accuses me of "speaking ill of the dead":

I'm not commenting in any way, shape, or form about Russert himself. OK, I said he was not as good a journalist as Peter Jennings. Am I wrong?

My point is not to bash Russert. My point is that the media coverage of his death went from lavish, to excessive, to surreal, to (on MSNBC, at least) insane.

I understand that his colleagues are sad. But their professional duty -- one would think -- is to continue to report the news of the nation and the world, not to turn what should be private mourning into a telethon.

It is grotesque. But I think it exposes the shallowness of cable news as a medium. The ratio of actual news (i.e., new information about real events) to endless rounds of "panels" talking about said news has gotten more and more out of balance.

This weekend's Russertpalooza strikes me as a jump-the-shark moment. But maybe the shark was jumped a long, long time ago.

Get off your high horse. Their boss - and for some, their best friend - died. Give them a day or two. Sheesh.

What vital news did they miss this weekend? I was watching on two separate occasions on Saturday in which they broke away from their tribute to discuss the Midwest flooding and to show the shuttle landing live.

If your hunger for news could not be sated because of Tim Russert tributes, you should know that there's a network called CNN that was ready and willing to service your needs.

Okay, I confess - I respected Tim Russert. I admired his family values; loved his book about his Dad; commended his loyalty to friends, sports teams and Brooklyn. He had a zest for life! He was always prepared for MTP and never snarky. Was he everything I wanted him to be as a journalist? Nope, but he was better than most.
That said, most Sunday Morning 'News' Programs continue to have (for the most part)the same old white people sit at their tables - relics of very different eras and even a different America - and pontificate about today's politics and voters.
As on cable daily, Sunday's network shows have some of the same pundits and guests whose blather has replaced competent investigative or any factual reporting.
NBC doesn't know what to do with MTP now - they say Russert can't be replaced. Then don't. Reformat the show - Rev it up - combine political isues with some good ol' reporting. Have a 'host/facillitator', but bring in panels of both young & old voters - conservatives & liberals - from the Northwest to the East Coast. Have Americans from all over America (okay, preferably not Idiots), include members of various ethnic groups, blue collar and white collar workers, different faiths, males and females. Put these politicos on the hot seat. Four different 'American' guests each week.
Just a thought - needs work. But without Tim Russert, MTP will never be the same without - so let's do it different.

Since we too often criticize the MSM for a complete lack of self-awareness, I think we can hardly criticize MSNBC for doing a few days of reporting "about themselves". A titan of journalism dies suddenly, and if it shocks us out of our 24-hour-cable sensationalist reverie for long enough to make us realize why we have journalism in the first place, and for long enough to springboard a national discussion about the value of analytic reporting, dissent, freedom of speech, and holding power to account, then that is only a good thing.

I don't think we should "give them time". Media networks don't collectively need time to recover; they're in the business of dealing with tragedy and shocking news on a daily basis. But if they're forced to discuss what journalism is all about for a bit, then we should give them all the time they need.

Scientific: I wonder if you think that when a beloved doctor dies, the entire hospital where he works should take 2 days to mourn him, and stop offering medical care.

I wonder if you think that air traffic controllers should stop directing flights for 2 days when one of their favorite colleagues passes.

My point is very simple: Journalists have a job to do. Their job is not 2 solid days of televised mourning for the death of one of their co-workers. That's unprofessional, and I suspect Russert might well agree. I could understand several hours of tributes to Russert over the course of the weekend. Instead it appeared to be 48+ hours of nothing else.

If they are indeed in the business of news, as they claim to be, I shouldn't "give them a day or two" to stop working and take a stroll down memory lane as the world continues to turn and news continues to be made. A tastefully abbreviated on-air tribute is sufficient. If they want to continue to collectively mourn, they can do so off-air at staff gatherings.

Has our concept of journalism become so debased that many of us accept what MSNBC did this weekend as normal?

Maximus:

Good post, it needed to be said.

To those that think the flood in IA was the only news story this weekend, think again.

The problem with the MSM -- and the bloggersphere for that matter -- is that only the punctuating events are treated as news. The long term, creeping evolution of stories is treated as something not as urgent.

And just as it's easy to boil a frog alive if you raise the heat slowly, so too, will we be cooked by the events with no punctuating event.

We are getting near fail-safe to reworking our economy, for example, in the absence of cheap energy. That is a story that needs 24 hour wall-to-wall coverage.

I am afraid I have to agree. There is a point past which mourning and commemorating becomes something else, for which there seems to be no word so I will use the neologism "spectaclizing." Funeral games went out with the Roman Empire, yet we seem to have gotten to that point with the unfortunate passing of Mr Russert.

So grateful I don't have a TV and have this weepfest slosh out of my screen like some sickly syrup.

Agreed: if MSNBC wants to hug and cry and weep together, fine. Just don't make me watch it.

Google "Timmeh" to see how many of Russert's mournful friends were criticizing him not so long ago for declaring the Democratic winner, among other crimes. Death is such a reputation cleanser.

Russert was a mid-level hack, not a courageous speaker of truth to power by ANY stretch--if he were he'd have been Donahued a long time ago. Richard Cheney's supposed to be a wonderful dad, too.

I'm all for critisizing the media. Network news if often and emberassment.

But perhaps you should wait and post this after someone close to you suddenly drops dead with no warning.

You might have a different perspective, and an ounce of sympathy. Maybe.

The coverage was too much, but this post is too much too.