In the days of the late
The Jan. 27 program on which
The president said of Ms. Clinton, "...a lot of the successes we've had internationally have been because of her hard work." Mr. Kroft should have asked if one of those successes included
Late in the interview, the president rattled off his administration's foreign policy successes. He mentioned
Ms. Kroft should have followed up with: "Different from
Mr. Kroft brought up the 2008 presidential campaign during which Ms. Clinton had some tough things to say about Barack Obama, including that he had little or no accomplishments to speak of. That would have been a good moment to remind viewers what she said. Instead, Mr. Kroft said, "I'm going to spare you reading some of the things that you said about each other..." Why? He might have asked, "Did you mean it then, or was this a political game?"
Mr. Kroft did concede that there had been no big foreign policy achievement in Mr. Obama's first four years in office, though the president maintained that winding down two wars, keeping pressure on terrorists and "dismantling"
Mr. Kroft could have countered with: "Terrorism appears not to be about leaders, but followers of an ideology. Is your policy simply to keep killing terrorists? Do you think you can kill them all?"
Mr. Kroft mentioned the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi,
Before conducting the interview, Mr. Kroft should have read several questions tweeted by
Politicians go on shows that won't confront them with hard questions they don't want to answer. If those questions are asked, they'll likely not appear on those shows again. The media need ratings and to get them they need high-profile guests. Politicians know this. That's the unholy alliance between much of big media and political leaders.
Something similar occurred on Sunday's edition of
The primary role of journalists is to question authority. In these two instances, Mr. Kroft and Ms. Raddatz fell short.