Ann Curry Officially & Tearfully Bids Goodbye To "Today"

http://www.pjstar.com/free/x1660540674/Ann-Curry-out-as-co-host-of-NBCs-Today-show

Anybody else think she was railroaded...? Yes, I know the ratings argument re: GMA winning a couple weeks after Today having years of domination. But to single-handedly blaming Curry for their fall is scape-goating, it sounds like.

OK.....Have at.

 

I think Curry is better at hard news than hosting a touchy-feely shitshow like Today.

 

I heard a rumor that Garam Masala could be a replacement.

 

So, what's the deal? Why have Today Show threads been deleted like crazy, while healthcare threads are going over 40 pages?

Is Ann Curry sleeping with one of the Mods?

 

That's the way it works in TV. I felt bad when they railroaded a true professional like Jane Pauley all those years ago because she was amazing at her job.

Ann Curry was an epic failure as Today Show host. She's still a good journalist, but was beyond horrible on that show.

 

I don't watch this show, but why do people keep saying she's good journalist? Wasn't she basically a news reader?

Did she have a strong journalism career before she joined the show? I can't imagine this reputation came from being on the Today Show.

 

She's getting like $7 million for leaving. She will be fine.

 

It takes a certain level of mediocrity to succeed in morning TV.
Anybody know if they made her come back out for the West Coast feed open for the SC decision or did they pre-tape it?

 

A few thoughts:

-- It's not scapegoating. The show was number one when she took over, and had been for something like 17 years. It's now essentially tied with GMA. The only thing that changed was she became host. That's a gots-to-go situation.

-- To your question, YF, she did a lot more than just read the PrompTer. She's done interviews with world leaders. She's done a lot of stuff to show off her journalistic chops. She's good. She's just a bad fit as the host.

-- Here's the deal with TV anchors: you get paid a hell of a lot of money once you make it to the big jobs, and with it comes the understanding that it can all go away tomorrow. Maybe the ratings go down. Maybe the new boss thinks your lip curls funny when you smile. It doesn't have to be fair. When you take the millions of dollars, you'd better understand that your ass could be kicked off the set tomorrow. It's part of the gig, so it's hard to feel too much sympathy. It sucks to work on a show for 15+ years and then get tossed, but when you're paid the GDP of a small country, you don't get to complain about it.

-- Dan, the "level of mediocrity" line is wildly unfair. I've said it before -- being good at hosting morning TV is HARD. Really, really hard. Ann Curry has been on that show for 15 years waiting her turn, and she couldn't do it. You have to be able to interview the Secretary of State, the mother of a dead soldier, Lady Gaga, and the owner of a singing dog -- frequently in the course of one show -- and be informed and engaged and compelling in each setting. You need to be likeable, trustworthy, authoritative, perky and funny, and you need to seem natural as you do it. You need to be attractive in a way that won't aggravate female viewers. And, you need to do all of that after waking up at 4am (or earlier).

There are very few people who can pull it off. Jane Pauley and Katie Couric are pretty much the gold standard. I've seen countless morning anchor/hosts on the local level, and one, maybe two were really great at it.

-- Having said all that... holy shit, was the send-off maudlin and overdone this morning. They acted like she was Gandhi and she'd just been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. She's a millionaire anchor who's being moved to a better shift with a fraction of the work she does now. I suspect she'll survive it OK.

 

PC ... I got nothing to add. You nailed it. But I agree -- it is much harder than it looks. Making it look easy is what the very best do in many fields, this included.