'Journalism' on the Today show

My expectations are never high when I watch a Today show 'exclusive.' Newsreader Ann Curry can barely read a teleprompter. My husband and I would have created a drinking game out of her hard news reaction -- she furrows her brow, nods, and says, "Mmmmmmmmmmmmm," when the going gets serious -- except that she is on the air at 7:00 a.m. and we aren't in college anymore. Matt, Meredith, and Al are affable, but let's face it, their jobs require gravitas one day and broadcasting in Halloween costumes the next.

Overall, my hopes were not high for Dr. Wakefield's interview this morning. I was disappointed, but not surprised, by Matt Lauer. He had a script and he stuck to it. Was he that constrained by time, or is he, like many journalists, so uncomfortable with science topics that he can't improvise? Dr. Wakefield brought up the vaccine court cases the government has settled not once, but twice. The follow-up questions were practically dancing in front of Matt's teleprompter wearing gold spandex and fishnets and Matt left them hanging. Ask him what he means, what cases he's citing, if he's claiming the government is lying. Whether you think Andrew Wakefield is a genius or a quack, ASK THE QUESTION. Journalism 101. Reporters can bore you to tears about it.

Unfortunately, the cornerstone of American journalism, objectivity, was also lacking. The pre-interview piece included comments from British journalist Brian Deer about Dr. Wakefield's alleged conflicts of interest related to his GI studies. For the moment I'll concede that there is not sufficient time on the Today show to examine everyone's conflicts of interest related to vaccines. However, since they used Deer as their talking head and mentioned the Sunday Times stories he wrote about Dr. Wakefield and his case, they should also have mentioned that Deer is one of the people who initiated the complaint against Dr. Wakefield in Britain. In the United States, no one worthy of the title 'editor' would have permitted Brian Deer to write news stories about a complaint he had a hand in filing. He would have been nowhere near that story. So which is more inexcusable -- knowing about Deer's conflict of interest and leaving it out, or not knowing, because you didn't vet Brian Deer thoroughly before you quoted him?

The possibility that researchers will shy away from asking the legitimate questions that still surround vaccines is the saddest possible consequence of Dr. Wakefield's fate. Hopefully his quote at the end of the interview will invigorate his colleagues: "These parents aren't going away. Their children aren't going away. And I'm most certainly not going away." We still need more study and more answers.

-- Alison Hamilton

P.S. Watch the interview, below:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy