By Dan Kennedy • The press, politics, technology, culture and other passions

WGBH’s ‘Beat the Press’ wins national award

beat-the-press-210x210“Beat the Press,” a weekly media program on WGBH-TV (Channel 2) that I’ve been part of for about 15 years, has won the national Bart Richards Award for Media Criticism from Pennsylvania State University. Here is the announcement from Penn State.

Television is a team sport, and I’m proud to be part of the amazing group of people that is responsible for “Beat the Press” every Friday, starting with host Emily Rooney. At the risk of leaving out names, I want to mention one who’s not in the announcement: Jeff Keating, who produces the show and keeps us all on the straight and narrow.

Congratulations to Jeff and everyone for making us look good.

Previous

Brian McGrory on the future of The Boston Globe (II)

Next

Globe makes move into TV with ‘5 Runners’

4 Comments

  1. Congratulations Dan, Jeff, Emily

    I love the show.but it really needs to a full hour. And more than once a week.

    • Dan Kennedy

      @Bob: Thanks, but yikes. What am I going to do about the day job?

  2. Bill Schweber

    COngratulations, yes–but I feel BTP has become more “squishy” in the last year: less pointed, less willing to make direct and focused criticisms, too “comfy” and close to its subjects, uses too much time giving plaudits and kudos to journalists (don’t we have enough of that already?), and spends too much time explaining “this is how the press/media works” (which comes across to me as an attempt to excuse bad behavior and shoddy work).
    OK, maybe it’s just me? Still, I find each week’s topics and coverage to be less and less compelling or meaningful

  3. For example: on tonight’s BTP (4/11), one topic is “Will Stephen Colbert ditch his conservative persona when he takes over for Letterman?” I don’t get it: what does this have to do with how the press does its job (good, bad, or both)? Answer: actually, it has very little to do with it, IMO; it’s a non-BTP topic. We’re seeing a lot of these lately, they are “soft subjects” with mostly speculative discussion, and no clear relevance or stance needed.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén