How “Livid” Is Charlie Gibson About Diane Sawyer?

In the sea of congratulatory quotes and jolly press releases about Diane Sawyer’s ascendence to the World News throne, Daily Beast reporter Rebecca Dana’s report that Charlie Gibson was “livid” that Sawyer was taking his anchor slot on ABC stood out. But was it accurate?

Variety TV blogger Brian Lowry doesn’t seem to think so. Lowry recalls that in 2008, Dana ran a Wall Street Journal story on Katie Couric’s immanent departure from CBS that turned out to be bogus. Like her story on Gibson, Dana’s Couric story was heavily based on anonymous industry sources.

Newsday blogger Verne Gay agrees, though Gay writes that according to his own industry sources, Gibson was angry because he wanted the news to come out after Labor Day, when it would have the most impact, and that Gibson believes that Sawyer was the source of the leak.

It’s always refreshing when one story goes against the grain. And while Lowry and Gay both take Dana to task for relying on anonymous sources, they both rely on anonymous industry sources of their own.

But the point transcends the specifics of Charlie Gibson: do you think that reporters nowadays rush stories onto the web, regardless of whether they’re true, just to make a splash?

Both Lowry and Gay have a lot more to say on the subject; it’s worth reading their full posts.

share this post

filed under