When she’s not too busy bungling the basic details of stories that fall under her purview as NBC News’ chief foreign affairs correspondent, Andrea Mitchell is often engaged in her own clownish brand of advocacy journalism. And this is to say nothing of the beyond-kid-glove treatment she gives certain interview subjects.
Take, for example, Mitchell’s sit-down this week with outgoing Planned Parenthood chief Cecile Richards, who has a new memoir out titled, Make Trouble. It wasn’t so much a news interview as it was like one of those gloriously awkward Chris Farley sketches from “Saturday Night Live.” It was all compliment and fawning and no substance.
“How have clinics, which provide healthcare, I mean, and it’s not abortions – this is not abortion, this is about basic healthcare, particularly in rural areas,” Mitchell said toward the beginning of the interview.
Richards chimed in, “That’s right! That’s right!
Don’t mention Planned Parenthood’s 350,000 abortions per year — more than one-third of all the abortions in America.
“And as clinics were being closed, women were in Texas and other places were having to drive great distances,” the host added.
“That’s right!” Richards said.
The longtime Planned Parenthood chief went on to repeat the lie that her organization offers breast cancer screenings. It does not. Mitchell applied exactly zero pushback on the widely debunked claim.
During the interview, Mitchell’s producers also played old footage of Richards’ mother, former Texas Gov. Ann Richards.
“She was such a natural politician,” the MSNBC host cooed.
“She was,” Richards beamed.
“It wasn’t logical that a woman would be elected governor of Texas,” Mitchell said in a broadside aimed at the Lone Star State and its women in particular.
“Absolutely,” Richards continued to beam.
Mitchell continued with the hard-hitting questions: “What about you? Is there elective politics in your future.”
“Who knows? Never say never,” Richards responded.
At the interview’s conclusion, a grinning Mitchell encouraged Richards to go out and, “continue making trouble.”
The interview was all compliments and talking points. There wasn’t anything even resembling a tough question. Yes, it was a book interview, but if you’re a reporter, and a subject outright lies on your show, maybe you should, you know, act like a reporter. It’d be one thing if Mitchell were just a cable news commentator. It’d be one thing if her sole purpose on television was to push her opinion, like Sean Hannity or Rachael Maddow. But Mitchell is branded differently. She’s supposed to be a reporter.
Mitchell is held up by the press corps as a model of what a tough and daring journalist ought to be. But her interview with Richards says otherwise.
At least Hannity is honest about his reason for being on television.
