Hugging Doctor Death

287120Before they made news, Mike Wallace and Dr. Jack Kevorkian made waves.

The image of the "60 Minutes" correspondent and "Dr. Death" embracing upon Kevorkian's release from prison Friday was beamed up on the web within minutes of its occurrence and spread like wildfire, immediately raising questions about credibility and objectivity – including inside this writer's head.

After all, isn't this the "cozying up" problem that pops up in concerns about embedded reporters and the White House Correspondents Dinner? Particularly in light of Mike Wallace's favorable quote about Kevorkian in a USA Today interview last year:

"He's a decent and compassionate man who tried to help people get out of the suffering of their lives," says Wallace, whose interview showed Kevorkian ending a patient's life. That piece was used as evidence that sent Kevorkian to jail. Prison officials have refused to allow Wallace to see Kevorkian; Wallace says Kevorkian's incarceration amounts to "cruel and unusual punishment."

With both the image and this quote in mind, I spoke to the producer of the segment, Robert G. Anderson. Here's what he said about the hug: "They'd known each other for a long time and there's a mutual respect there. They're not friends in terms of exchanging mail or phone calls. They respect each other … You can interpret the hug any way you want. But what's important journalistically is whether Mike asked tough questions and did his job and asked the questions that people who disagree with Kevorkian would ask."

So I decided to go back, watch the segment and judge Wallace, as Anderson suggested, on the questions asked. Some were chummy to the teeth-gritting point ("What will you do to continue your crusade…" or "You're a happy man, aren't you …"), but more of them were relevant to the case at hand. Take for example this passage:

Wallace: You regret helping Tom Youk? [Youk is the man whose death prompted Kevorkian's jail sentence]

Kevorkian: No, why would I regret that? That's like asking a veterinarian, 'Do you regret helping that person's animal?'

Wallace: Wait a minute. Tom Youk was a man. And it was a compassionate murder, but you murdered him.

Kevorkian: But it was a man whose life didn't measure up anymore. You know, David Hume said it, 'No man ever threw away a life while it was worth keeping.'

Wallace: But you're the judge of whether it's worth keeping?

Kevorkian: No, the patient's the judge

When Kevorkian tried to make the comparison to putting an animal to sleep, Wallace pressed him appropriately. And then there was this exchange as well:

Wallace: Did making Tom Youk's death public, and the means by which, did that advance your cause or set it back?

Kevorkian: That's an iffy question. And I don't know if it advanced it more than it set it back.

There are other supporting examples, and I encourage readers to review the story for yourselves and see what you think. As far as this reader is concerned, while Wallace's interview with Kevorkian was more cozy than it was confrontational, he succeeded in getting the big questions asked.

[godi70]

Euthanasia option for ourselves and our loved ones is necessary like medecine to relieve pains.

There are countries in the world where is allowed the Euthanasia

But the thema is not for very body, like religion, moral, criteria or culture.

Is like to say: I understand Einsteins' theory.

My God, 99% of the world are only monkeys reapiting what others are saying and them also are wrong!

[newsguyrick]

I live in the Detroit area and watched one of our local TV stations follow the van with Kevorkian and Mike Wallace from the prison to the Townsend Hotel in Birmingham. It's one of the swankiest hotels in the metro area. Did CBS put Dr. Jack up there on the network's dime for a few nights?

[Michael Worsham]

Good going, Jane!

Your disrespect for Dr. Kevorkian (you say "Dr. Death") (and for those of us who want and require the regulated euthanasia option for ourselves and our loved ones) is so typical of right-wingers. I wonder if you are one of those who would keep and take such freedoms away from the rest of us.

If you placed freedom on a higher priority tier than your selfish, arrogant mindset of "If I don't want euthanasia, and I don't want anyone else to have it either", those of you who often feel that way might be able to wrap yourselves in the flag of freedom that you pridefully crow about, and appear justified!

You apparently don't even understand the essential differences between hard news and a more subjective magazine piece.

Because you "don't want to hear the opinion of the person doing the news to make me listen to their's [sic] either", I'm positive you don't listen to Fox "news". Even Walter Cronkite, hardly an extremist conservative or liberal, has critiqued Rudolp's Fox News as sub-objective on any balanced scale of objectivity.

[Michael Worsham]

Wallace Shows Insufficient Respect to his Dr. Kevorkian

I respect both Dr. Kevorkian and Mike Wallace very much (aside from Wallace's fearful lapse over publishing the tobacco industry's shameful revelations).

I do not want, nor do I expect to see a totally objective journalistic magazine piece on 60 Minutes in which multiple sides are aired to suit the FCC.

But I object strongly to Wallace and the "Hugging Doctor Death" Internet story by Matthew Felling referring to Dr. Kevorkian as "Doctor Death."

Wallace said " . . . Doctor Death, as he is known . . .". Known by whom? The media? The National Review? Other right-wingers? Exactly by whom, Mike Wallace?

If Wallace respects the doctor so much, let him omit pejorative references to this hero. Kevorkian doesn't deserve to be referred to in such a sneering way,
in a possible nod to his detractors, or unintentionally. Kevorkian has simply relieved the suffering and hopelessness of too many people to catch hell from 60 Minutes in this voice-over reference.

As for poster Felling's headline editor, he/she must not respect the good doctor either. His poor word choice immediately raises "questions about credibility and objectivity-including inside this writer's head."

[kaiyo4u]

I certainly do not want to be a guinea pig for medical practice... If I have an incurable illness, I want to go to rest in a way that is comfortable to me and for me. Being a pin cushion for the medical community is definitely not one of those ways. I do not agree with Kevorkian's methods. I think he is there to fill the gap the medical community fails or refuses to fill. It was just two short generations ago when my great-grandparents died at home... I am of the same mind. How short America's collective memory is...
We give all our hope to the medical community and yet all they want to do is experiment and... drain all the resources we acquired in our life.
I do not give western medicine any kudos as they don't speak to the spirit of the patient nor do they deal with the illness except for the symptoms. They look only to the symptoms and never to the root of the affliction.
Why do you think the medical community calls it a practice...?

[averjane]

As long as he asked the kinds of questions he should have asked (for those of us who disagree with what Dr. Death did)then we could care less whether they're chummy or not. The questions were asked; that's all the information I needed. I don't need to know anything about their relationships; don't want to know. If he showed a biased opinion one way or the other, then it would not be acceptable reporting to me. Too many do that and I don't like it. If I can't tell the world my opinion on the news then I don't want to hear the opinion of the person doing the news to make me listen to their's either.