OOTM
According to the Washington Post, Meredith Vieira is 49 years old. I’m not picking on the WaPo, because several other papers are also reporting Vieira as 49.
The problem? She’s 52.
The Hartford Courant reported that fact, probably before the talking points including the “49″ story hit the media.
According to a 1989 USA Today article (trust me, it’s in there, even though I can’t link to it), Vieira was 35 at the time.
“Both Kroft, 43, and Vieira, 35, are correspondents on CBS’ other newsmagazine, West 57th. Kroft will join 60 Minutes midsummer, in time for its 22nd season. Vieira, who recently had a baby boy, will join at summer’s end.
New faces will clock in on ‘60 Minutes’, Brian Donlon, USA Today, May 12, 1989 at D12.
I don’t bring this up to disparage Vieira’s character. I don’t even know if she is the one who is putting out the story that she is 49 - it could be NBC for all I know. The reason I bring it up is because it shows how shallow the news media is today. Who cares if Vieira is 52 or 49? Would people really choose to watch another show if they knew Vieira was three years older? On top of that, is a 52 year old too old, while 49 is a veritable spring chicken?
To tell the truth, I didn’t watch Today when Katie Couric (truly 49 years old) was on the show, and I don’t anticipate watching it when Vieira takes her place. The fact that either NBC or Vieira is lying about her age is symptomatic of the reason why…
Post a Comment