Brian Williams, celebrity & the news

NBC dropped the hammer on Brian Williams last night.

The top-rated anchor of the NBC "Nightly News" was suspended six months without pay.

I can't say I'm surprised.

But I'm still trying to figure out what Williams possibly could have been thinking.

Actually, I have a theory. It hit me this morning when I heard that Jon Stewart, the insanely popular host of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," announced he was stepping down at the end of the year.

I started thinking about this business that has employed me for more than three decades, of the differences between print and TV, and the increasingly blurring lines between news and entertainment.

Brian Williams was not just a highly paid news anchor. He was a celebrity.

Most of the people who deliver news on the TV are. And it's not just at the network level. Why do you think we spend so much time detailing the comings and goings of the folks on our local TV stations. And don't even get me started on the weather. You think Cicely Tynan, Sheena Parveen, Glenn Schwartz, Kathy Orr, John Bolaris and all the others are not local celebrities.

It's not hard to figure out why. We welcome these people into our homes every day. They often are our dinner companions. For some people, they may be their only companion.

They make a connection that newspaper folks for the most part don't achieve. There is a bit of anonymity in writing for the newspaper, one I'm often grateful for. Sure, I get stopped once in awhile in the local Wawa by someone wondering, "Aren't you the editor of the Daily Times?" (The answer to that, of course, is: It depends on who wants to know!).

There used to be a clear line that separated news from entertainment. That line got blurred a long time ago. In addition, the explosion of the Internet, including social media, has changed the game. We're not all in competition for the same eyeballs.

Brian Williams didn't just read the news at night. He was a familiar face on talk shows - and he was very good at it, Glib, affable and likeable, he was always quick with an anecdote or a great story.

In the process, he was pushing the one word that all of us in the news business spend a lot of time doing these days. His "brand."

Today everyone with a laptop and a Twitter account has one. Of course, some are more high-profile than others. For some reason, more than 3,000 people follow me on Twitter. That is part of my "brand." I in turn am part of the Daily Times "brand."

Williams and other celebrities operate in another stratosphere. Millions follow their every move, not just during that 30 minutes he enters our homes every night, but on social media and his appearances as well.

We all love a good story, one that is newsworthy as well as "entertaining."

But there was a time when what defined news was sacred. I find it hard to believe Williams just decided to lie about his helicopter coming under fire. He didn't read it on the "Nightly News." But it was part of a story he told, and one he clearly embellished. His take on it made it a better story.

It also made it false. That's something you just can't do in this business.

Brian Williams, the anchor man, undoubtedly knows that. Brian Williams, the news celebrity, apparently did not.

He now has six months to think about how it all went wrong.

I don't know if people will ever be able to accept Brian Williams again. All we have in this business is our credibility, the belief readers have that what we are reporting is the truth.

People now are wondering if they can believe what Brian Williams says. It will take awhile for that to change.

That's the thing about "brands." When they're good, they're very good. But they work both ways. Brian Williams' "brand" just went off a cliff.

Restoring it will not be an easy task.

Comments

Unknown said…
Phil, doesn't it seem sort of, well, uninformed to believe that Brian Williams' personal credibility has anything to do with the accuracy of the information on the teleprompter he reads? He could be an inveterate liar, a cheat and cruel to puppies and it would not change one iota the accuracy of the copy he reads. I understand a civilian getting confused over the need for him to be perceived honest, but you are an insider, a news guy. Isn't a good voice and a pleasant visage all that he needs?