Review: 'Washington Week With Gwen Ifill'

Before there was cable news channels or even the Internet, there was the PBS show "Washington Week In Review." If you want to see how far even the most centrist current news show has gotten from its roots, it's instructive to note that PBS still describes "Washington Week" with the almost quaint tag of a "public affairs" show.

As much as I have fond memories of "Washington Week," I recently realized that it's been years since I've seen an episode. It airs on Friday nights locally, which makes it an inconvenient viewing choice for me. And I suppose that the fact that it is so aggressively non-partisan and even-handed made it less attractive to me. Recapping the most important stories of the week and trying to impart some expertise while not being opinionated is a tough job for anyone in this hyper-partisan atmosphere and my sense was that particular dance was not enough to convince me to tune in.

But I decided to tune in to this week's show and I suppose I'm relieved to discover that while the entire world of political reporting has gone crazy, there are still small parts of political journalism that are still rocking it like it's 1985.

The look and feel of "Washington Week" hasn't really changed since it became a panel show in 1970. There's a host (Gwen Ifill) and three or four Washington-based political reporters seated around a table. Ifill introduces a topic and generally asks a specific question to one reporter. What interplay between the reporters that does take place is calm and rational. Even more contrarian, when a follow-up question is asked, it typically comes from another panelist instead of Ifill.

The only thing that has really changed in the past few years are the places where the panelists work. NY Times/CNBC reporter John Harwood is there, but so is someone from Real Clear Politics and Slate. But the feel of the show and the conversation has barely changed in forty years.

Given the show's efforts to be observers but not makers of the news, I hesitate to criticize the show too much. "Washington Week" is what it is and obviously that's what the show's fans are looking for each week. But after watching an episode, I found myself thinking that I didn't really hear any insight or observation than I hadn't already heard somewhere else. Maybe "Washington Week" caters to viewers who don't pay much attention to the news all week and are looking for a calm and comprehensive recap. But for me, I found myself thinking when it was all over that it was a pleasant but not all that helpful show.

I wish Gwen Ifill well, although since she's hosted the show since 1999, she really doesn't need my help. But I can't say I'll be watching anytime soon and for what it's worth, that's a bittersweet decision for me.