Whitewashing Russia: Apology required
Bob Costas either is on Vladimir Putin's payroll or he's astoundingly stupid and tone deaf to manipulation and atrocity. Given Mr. Costas is a highly paid sportscaster with NBC, we can only assume the latter.
Twice (so far) in his “reporting”/commentary from the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, Costas has offered some shockingly deferential characterizations of the Russian president and Russian history.
First up was Costas' depiction of the autocrat as some kind of grand peacemaker, brokering “a deal to allow Syria to avoid a U.S. military strike by giving up its chemical weapons” and helping “bring Iran to the negotiating table over its nuclear intentions.”
Never mind that Syria isn't living up to a deal that Putin brokered, one effectively designed to give Syrian henchman Bashar Assad time to crush his opposition. And that Iranian deal? It's an international joke.
Then there was Costas' Orwellian comments during the opening ceremonies that likened communism to “one of modern history's pivotal experiments.”
Egads, how many millions were slaughtered in the name of this dastardly 70-year exercise in total tyranny whose only end could be failure?
“If Costas thinks this cupcake coverage of Russia and Putin is going to cut it over the next few weeks, he's sadly mistaken,” writes Greg Pollowitz at National Review Online.
In the least, Bob Costas and NBC owe the world an apology.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.