Chuck Todd...possibly the new anchor on Meet The Press?

[cbc5g]

I think so...Maybe this will offer more clues




http://www.observer.com/2008/media/david-gregory-nbc-s-lame-duck

On the morning of Sunday, July 20, NBC News paterfamilias Tom Brokaw was wrapping up Meet the Press, where he has been anchor since the sudden and untimely death of Tim Russert.

The weekly round table had ended, and it was time to say goodbye to his guests, NBC political director Chuck Todd and NBC White House correspondent David Gregory.

When the segment ended, both reporters sat with their hands neatly folded in front of them and awaited the frugally dispensed approval of Mr. Brokaw.

“Thank you very much, David Gregory, our NBC White House correspondent and, of course, star of MSNBC’s The Road to the White House,” said Mr. Brokaw.

Mr. Gregory managed not to grimace. His show is called Race for the White House.

“Chuck Todd, our political director,” continued Mr. Brokaw. “We’ll be seeing a lot more of you, here, on Meet the Press … in the weeks to come,” Mr. Brokaw said, it seemed, to Mr. Todd.

Mr. Gregory kept smiling as the credits rolled. But if deep inside his mind there was a momentary flicker of career anxiety, the ambitious newsman could be forgiven. Since Russert’s death, speculation about the future anchor of Meet the Press has tended to favor the 36-year-old Mr. Todd and Mr. Gregory, 37. And it was Mr. Todd who got the public invitation to return.

Of course, it’s not Mr. Brokaw’s decision. But the slip was a reminder that nobody in Washington seems to be paying attention to Mr. Gregory’s new show.

Created when the network liquidated Tucker Carlson’s evening program, Mr. Gregory’s show was a fitting placement for the man who is arguably the most famous current White House correspondent. Over the past seven years, Mr. Gregory has become master of the dark art of theatrical confrontation, and the perfect whip-smart, self-important foil to Mr. Bush’s aw-shucks anti-elitism. For a long time, when the president was hot, so too was “Stretch.”

Along the way, he racked up more face time on the evening news than any other reporter in broadcast journalism. His blustery dust-ups with Mr. Bush and a succession of White House press secretaries became YouTube classics, heroic to those on the left, more proof of liberal bias to those on the right.

“He was that guy for the Bush administration,” said Mark Leibovich, a Washington-based reporter at The New York Times. “In a sense, he was the perfect Bush foil. Everything you hear about how George Bush felt alienated at Andover and Yale, and how he felt aggressively anti-elitist towards the people he thought were full of themselves, well, David Gregory would certainly fit that mold.”

But lame-duck presidents create lame-duck White House correspondents. And so identifying the silver-haired heartthrob with the big political story of the day was a blessing from the network.

From the moment the show kicked off on March 17, things looked grim. The format was essentially a high-tech version of, say, The McLaughlin Group, with various journalists sitting around debating topics of Mr. Gregory’s choosing.

There was one innovation: Instead of sitting around a table, the heads of the various guests appeared in boxes. An unfavorable review of the show in The New Republic promptly described the look as “intergalactic Nancy Grace.”

The show was minimally staffed. In the absence of an experienced, aggressive booker, the decision was made to cull each evening’s guests from the long roster of NBC and MSNBC political contributors. As a result, on each day’s show, Mr. Gregory spends much of the hour debriefing fellow reporters and pundits such as Michael Smerconish, Eugene Robinson, Harold Ford Jr., Tony Blankley, John Harwood, Michelle Bernard and on and on.

“It’s not particularly good practice for Meet the Press, where you’re having formal interviews with newsmakers,” encyclopedic TV news analyst Andrew Tyndall recently told NYTV. “I don’t think he ever has newsmakers on there. The function of the show is to showcase NBC’s in-house political analysts. There’s not much heavy lifting there for him to do. His current job is merely debriefing. The good debriefers are actually rather self-effacing. Couric was very good at that on the Today show. When she had the big ego political people come in, she would be a patient listener. And not really show off by asking too many questions. That sort of style—O.K., tell me about this, and then sort of shutting up and letting the person do their bit—it doesn’t fit his special skills.

“Add all those things together and he’s getting the face time, but he’s not getting the opportunity to display his journalistic skills,” added Mr. Tyndall. “On the other hand, if you’re a White House correspondent with this president and this White House, you’re just happy for any bone they’ll throw you.”

[ihavenobias]

1. Well

.

[Alter Ego]

2. Todd sucks as a political analyst. His work during the primaries as a polling analyst,

though, was much better.

[Muttocracy]

3. I'd vote for that. Seems like Todd has risen based on brains

and trying to be a journalist rather than grandstanding and giving a lot of spin (from what I've seen anyway).

Of course, they might not WANT that for MTP.

[freesqueeze]

4. I like either...

but there must be an out-of-the-box choice out there somewhere that will keep the show fresh.

Do they really have to limit their choice to one of the current pups in the NBC kennel?

[stray cat]

5. I really like Chuck Todd - they could do a lot worse....

[monmouth]

6. Chuck was hired by Russert, and I have been impressed with

his knowledge and especially the difficult math skills involved with EVs and caucus information. I would not be disappointed at all if he was given the job. Again, Tim saw something in him, that has to mean something...

[Gabi Hayes]

7. ANYbody they have on will stink. anybody they choose will be bad for 'democracy.'

to rise high in that game it's necessary to be a sellout to corporate interests

they only exist to PUSH PRODUCT

anyone who rocks the boat is inimical to that process

Olbermann, to a certain extent, is an exception, but look at his own guest roster

you don't get 'news' on any major broadcast outlet anymore

[ccharles000]

8. I would be ok with that.

[jillan]

9. I'd be okay with that.

He's a smart guy, very quick thinking....and I believe a Dem.

And - blush - I wouldn't mind looking at him for an hour. Great eyes. :P

[Medusa]

10. I sure hope so.

Tom Brokaw is boring me to death.

[book_worm]

11. I don't think it means anything--Chuck Todd is on MTP nearly every week.

all Brokaw said is "we'll be seeing lots more of you"--so what?

[stuartw]

12. Shouldn't he cut his teeth first...and get a shave?

Chuck Todd seems OK to me but I have NEVER seen him conduct an
interview. You would think that'd be a prerequisite for the
MTP job. David Gregory, on the other hand, has extensive
interviewing experience. Not just on his own show but on the
Today Show as well. Indeed, the grillings he gave GWB and his
procession of press secretaries could also count as
interviewing experience. My vote would be for Gregory. Smart,
experienced, affable and no satanic-looking facial hair.

[RamboLiberal]

13. I think Todd has the inside track

but nothing will happen till after the election. Till then it is Brokaw and probably Brian Williams if Brokaw isn't available.

I think in this instance there was no inside baseball. Just that Todd will be on MTP (and MSNBC shows) a lot because it is election season.