Katie: Meeting The Edwards
(CBS)
I’d interviewed Elizabeth two and a half years ago, when she was first diagnosed with breast cancer, and I had been impressed ( as I’ve written before) by her strength, and no-nonsense unpretentiousness.
I also felt that I have an inherent understanding of the physical and emotional toll that cancer takes on a family, given that I have lost both my husband and my sister to this disease.
Flying on the plane to Las Vegas, I was surprised at the repercussions of the Edwards' decision-–the ripple effect that had caused so many conversations among so many people about family, love, commitment, responsibility, priorities, mortality. In other words, the real stuff that transcends politics.
I was also surprised to read an article in the New York Times about how people viewed this story through their own personal prisms – some in a negative way. I really used some of those voices as a framework for my questions. I knew that everyone was reacting differently to this, and I wanted the Edwards to have a chance to elaborate and respond to issues people were raising. When the interview was over, the biggest complement came from Senator Edwards, who thanked me and said: “You asked all the questions that were out there.” I think they appreciated having an opportunity to respond.
I found them both in really good spirits, but clearly completely sanguine about the prognosis. I understood exactly what they were talking about when they recounted the story of looking at the bone scan and seeing the so-called “hot” spots. I understood the pacing, the anxiety, the willing it to go away. The anguish and fear that the worst would happen.
In some ways, I feel it’s their decision and no one else’s. But their eyes are wide open when it comes to the ramifications of their choice. They understand that some people will feel more comfortable than others as they continue their campaign.
But they also feel very strongly about service to their country. They were united, resolute, and clearly after 30 years of marriage, very much in love. No matter where you stand politically, you can see that they are, at their essence, two people dealing with a tough situation in the way that is right for them.
I know from personal experience that maintaining a sense of normalcy is very important for dealing with a life-threatening disease. I think for John and Elizabeth Edwards, serving their country is their “normal.” I get the sense that stepping away from politics, and the opportunities it offers, would just feel wrong to them.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 113 CommentsI find it astonishing that, given the personal history that you mentioned, you would be so dismissive of their choice to carry on with their usual lives. As Elizabeth Edwards said last night, the choice is either to go on with life as usual or to start dying. You seemed to be saying, with your questions (which are fair game, regardless of what your co-workers might say), that Elizabeth just ought to start dying.
Never again.
Dr. Joseph A. Bice-Jones
SUNY Upstate Medical University
750 E. Adams St. Syracuse. NY
13210
Spiritual Care Center
Chaplain Associate
Clinical Psychologist
www.universityhospital.org
Andy B
Durham, NC
intelligence. Both my husband and myself were more than agitated at her tactics with John and
Elizabeth Edwards. Even after they had answered
her questions, openly and frankly, she kept asking the same, over and over again. I felt it
was unnecessarily brutal and showed a complete
lack of compassion. They do not want pity, but perhaps some empathy might have been demonstrated. They made it very plain that they
were not going to let cancer rule their lives...
they plan to live with it and carry on their dream. Good for them. They showed love and devotion that we would hope reflects all that is
good in humanity. I really felt so saddened by
the questioning and relentless probing into the
same issue. Shame on you.
Bob Aronin
John and Elizabeth Edwards are two more courageous individuals who are looking to contribute to and serve this country. Many great leaders have served their communities or the country while facing great personal difficulties including--FDR (personal illness); JFK (personal illness); John McCain (cancer survivor); Gerald Ford (Betty Ford's breast cancer and addictions); Ronald Regan (Nancy Regan's breast cancer); Richard Daley (recently re-elected Chicago mayor, while his wife, Maggie Daley has battled advanced breast cancer). The list goes on and on.
So many individuals are living with and through great health challenges. They become limited only when people like you create negative perceptions and prejudice by amplifying their personal challenges while ignoring their potential for contribution. You abuse the privilage that you have been given to positively influence and educate the American public.
began to find her self-righteousness distracting at the best and downright insulting to the viewers at worst. It got to the point where I could no longer watch Katie at all.I do not watch the news to hear an anchor express his or her own personal views, but to get unbiased and professional reporting.
I have not and will not watch the CBS evening news since Ms. COuric signed on, but was curious enough
to watch her interview with JOhn and Elizabeth Edwards. I was floored by her callousness and insenstivity. How the Edwards family chooses to proceed with their life and John's campaign is just about the most personal decision I can imagine. While Ms. COUric has been through losing a loved
one to cancer on more than one occasion, so have many of us. It is impossible to put ourselves in anyone elses shoes at a time like this. No one can or should have any say in the way the Edwards decide to go on. Ms. Couric may be trying to prove that she's tough during an interview, but she proven once again that she is incapable of keeping her own feelings to herself. I will certainly continue to get my news elsewhere.
I can't believe I actually used to admire you, your hit job on the Edwards was beyond despicable. What a sorry excuse for a journalist you've turned out to be, a real pathetic disgrace.
Mayor Daley kept running and Paul McCartney kept singing as his wife Linda was battling this.
I say go for it Edwards, there will be plenty of time to be in NC, if things get worse but I am praying for you and the family.
i had always been a fan since the"todays show."
but now i must speak up, and tell you i am sadly
disappointed, as i watch you, going by the
" politcal views way ". you are supposed to report the news ,not give an opinion on it.
like soo many of the " news " shows.
you lost your pizzaz,and i am sorry to say
a fan. wrong career decision.
donna hernandez
The following open letter expresses my sentiments exactly.
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/877
You really should read it, Katie.
I think some people here need to be a bit more appropriate and decent with their comments. Hiding behind a computer doesn't give you license to be rude and condescending!
Buh-bye!
The Edwards' knew what was coming in the interview. They wanted the interview, and after it was over, they thanked Katie for asking the right questions.
When it comes to CANCER, Katie has been there -- TWICE!! I have BEEN THERE, and STILL AM after four years of this horrendous roller coaster. The questions Katie asked came from the heart and her own experience and were right on the money and John and Elizabeth Edwards were right on top of it all because they know.
Millions of Americans in this situation, victims and family, are helped by an interview like this. Katie's conduct of the interview brought out the best from John and Elizabeth in a way that inspires hope and courage in those of us for whom that is a daily struggle.
If you don't like Katie for legitimate reasons, then fine, leave. If you aren't a cancer victim or survivor - or family member - JUST SHUT UP and hope to God it never happens to you.
Isn%u2019t it completely obvious%u2026? After the interview was over (and the Edwards were gone) Katie put the camera on herself and asked the questions again. Checking her hair and tilting her head, just so, she punched up her questions to include her signature flare. It was then spliced together in post.
C%u2019mon folks....do you really think that John and Elizabeth would have stood for the insipid tone (that we heard)...?
If I%u2019m right, Katie should be fired.
And just what does she do that couldn't be done as well or better by any other reporter? She is nothing special. Her days as a popular television personality are over. She's has bombed on the nightly news and now on "60 Minutes." They should have left her in her "fluff" role in the mornings. She nows comes across as an embittered whench on the attack. Even her recent facelift makes her look nasty.
I am surprised by the negative responses to your interview--you were doing your job, which is to ask questions. In no way did I find your interview "sensational" or did I find that you played on the Edwards' emotions. You were respectful and professional. The Edwards know what they are facing: their willingness to continue the campaign, and the good answers they gave to your tough questions!, shows they haven't underestimated what they faced. How else could they have showed Americans that, were it not for forums such as your excellent piece?
Thanks again.
I have never once tuned into CBS evening news with her as anchor. I really miss Bob Schiffer, he was an excellent anchor , what a shame CBS had to go with the fluff of Katie Couric, neocon poser.
Why weren't your efforts focused on helping those who have not faced this type of situation to understand how life-affirming their commitment to continue actually is? Learn from your own experiences.
Some people might say..Ms. Couric why do you put your career before your family.
Some people might say..Ms. Couric why do you have such a drive for power that you have nannies raising your daughters.
Some people might say..Ms. Couric how can you be such a finger pointer without passing the mirror.
Some people might say..Ms. Couric no wonder your ratings are so sad. Tsk..Tsk..!
Katie,
My initial criticism of this interview was merely that your body language was more disturbing than the actual questions. I thought that you could be trying not to be soft because of you went through with your husband's colon cancer. I didn't know. Then, after watching this for a second time, I realized that you didn't even show sympathy for the Edwards's situation. The vast majority of the posters here are correct. These ARE the questions brought up by Rush Limbaugh and his ilk. But it's more than that. The body language exhibited by you showed a hardened callousness. As one who, herself, is a survivor of a husband who succumbed to cancer and as one who continued HER career ambitions in the face of that tragedy, you really should have been more sympathetic.
Now, this is not to say that the hard questions do not need to be asked. They do. It is the manner in which they were asked that I really have a problem with. ...And the questions should definitely not be the same repeated questions worded slightly differently.
I think Katie did a great job.
The choice to continue the presidential campaign was a decision made between John and Elizabeth Edwards. They are obviously a team.
Their children have living grandparents, a sister in her mid-20s, and other relatives and friends that I'm sure are already taking care of the kids due to the campaign schedule. The positive example that the Edwards seem to be giving to their children is that life goes on - you cannot just cower in the corner. You must keep moving and living your life as you have been. Not to do so WOULD be death. Those living with cancer usually do not want to be considered victims and it has been my experience that they want to keep living life as fully as possible for as long as they can. This is the path that the Edwards have chosen together and we should respect their decision.
I admire the integrity in which they have handled this issue now and in 2004. I was really impressed with how the Edwards handled the questions in this interview and their positive attitudes about living with cancer.
I came out early in my support of John Edwards because his views on social and domestic issues closely mirror my own. My support for him has been further solidified. We would be lucky to have him as President of the United States. And Elizabeth Edwards would make a wonderful and inspiring First Lady.
Scott Easterly
Little Rock
"some people say" that children learn the deepest lessons from their parents' actions. I am one who says that their children are learning (and will learn more as they see this as adults) about how deep their parents' commitment to work is. There is nothing wrong with that, if it's the Edwards's family value. As many have pointed out, by Katie's actions in her own situation with her husband, Katie demonstrated a similar family value.
It is odd that Ms. Couric did not present her own point of view as one of the valid ones that people might be considering. Just as with John and Elizabeth, Katie did not have to work full bore when her husband was dying - her children will also learn deeply about her deep commitment to excellence, to success (not an evil concept, btw), to continuing what was a normal life for her.
Remember, too, that the Edwards's will probably see more of each other than many married couples with a similar cancer scenario. I dare say they'll also have the freedom to have their kids go with them a good bit. Again, this is their decision.
So I say, in conclusion, that Katie alluded to almost every thing "some might say" except what she herself actually said through her own actions.
and presently undergoing hormone treatments to control the cancer. I strongly believe that anyone with cancer must continue with their life with a positive attitude. For me, this attitude is an important part of survival for any cancer patient. For this reason, I am appalled by the questions Katie Couric asked the Edwards on 60 minutes last night. Their decision for John to continue on with his presidential campaign under the situation with his wife battling cancer is important for every cancer patient in this country. Cancer is not a death sentance. I was lucky to learn that lesson when my wife had lukemia in 1989 and that lesson did me well when it was my time to deal with cancer. (My wife is still alive and doing quite well.)
The lowest point of the interview was when Ms. Couric insinuated that the Edwards made this announcement to get sympathy for their campaign. Cancer patients do not need sympathy from anyone. Ms. Couric should know that.
that Katie Couric doesn't hide her political leanings very well.
I was very offended by her assault on John and Elizabeth Edwardson Sunday. It seemed callous and self-aggrandizing.
The use of the phrase "some people", to ask a question may be easier than asking taking direct responsibility for a query in questionable taste, but it smacks of ducking responsibility. Ms. Couric didn't do herself any favors by coming across as tough and unfeeling.
Of Abraham Lincoln's sons, two died in childhood, one while he ws in office. His wife Mary, was often highly irrational and difficult. Four of her brothers fought for the Confederacy with one wounded and another killed in action. Lincoln himself suffered from profound bouts of melancholy. Perhaps we can be grateful that the journalistic phrase "some people" wasn't in vogue then.
Have we devolved into a culture believes that only people who appear to have no personal problems, are the only ones qualified to hold high office? Doesn't happy-go-lucky, George W. Bush, belie that?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 113 Comments