Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
Except theTimesendorsement was a failure.
ButThe Weeklywas also responsible for that failure.
There were few guidelines about the process, and little about the episode was compelling.
Throughout the episode, thats precisely what happens.
His tone, Aisha Harris says, disagreeing, thats not what people want right now.
Then the scene cuts to black, and its on to a new candidate.
Did others agree with her skepticism?
Was that the most valuable takeaway from Buttigiegs interview?
Is tone a significant facet of how the editorial board judges candidates?
When Alex Kingsbury describes feeling comforted by Joe Bidens interview, Charlie Warzel cuts in.
This is such an uninspiring argument just in general, he says.
Warzels point is telling because it doesnt quite fit with the comment that came before it.
(And, unlike with the candidate interviews, theTimeshas not published full transcripts of the editorial-board discussion.)
The same problem plagues all ofThe Weekly.
The Rudy Giuliani episode is just as frustrating.
Instead,The Weeklys additive value is entirely in nicely framed visuals and putting faces to theTimes names.
Instead, it was just infuriating.
