This Week with George Stephanopoulos is always a target for conservative media members, and justifiably so. The ABC News anchor previously worked for the Clinton administration, so it’s hard to argue that he’s impartial (despite the fact that those same people criticizing aren’t impartial, either, but that’s a different column for a different day.
On Sunday, Stephanopoulos stopped a conversation with Vice President JD Vance after a contentious back-and-forth about border czar Tom Homan and whether or not he allegedly accepted a $50,000 bribe from undercover FBI agents.
For brevity’s sake, the recap goes something like that: Stephanopoulos asked Vance if Homan kept the money. Vance retorted by saying that he didn’t know what Stephanopoulos was talking about, saying that he didn’t accept a bribe, then suggested that Homan could have been paid for services he provided to someone. He continued by deflecting, saying that Homan is only being criticized because he’s being successful, and stated that it would be a more interesting question to find out why Homan is being so roundly criticized for doing his job.
George Stephanopoulos attempted to clarify the answer, pointing out that Vance had failed to answer the question that had been asked. Vance was clearer in his answer the second time, stating that he didn’t believe Homan accepted a bribe, and that there was no evidence he had done anything illegal.
Again, Stephanopoulos asked whether or not Homan kept the $50,000. Vance then claimed ignorance, before Stephanopoulos reiterated the question, with Vance continuing to assert he didn’t understand the question. The Vice President ultimately shared that he did not know the answer to the question, but that he knows that Homan did not commit a crime.
At that point, the ABC News anchor ended the interview. While ending the discussion, Vance attempted to retort. But was cut off, with the show moving to a different topic.
In the aftermath, plenty of reactions poured in, mostly along party lines. On one hand, conservative commenters argued that Stephanopoulos acted unprofessionally by hounding Vance about the topic, especially when the subject of the interview was supposed to be about the situation in Gaza between Israel and Hamas.
On the other hand, commenters shared their beliefs that Vance was purposefully being contentious in an effort to avoid answering direct questions about a member of the Trump administration.
I don’t especially care about Vance’s stances in the matter, because this isn’t a political column, it’s a news media column (although, I do think it’s worth noting that you can’t say you don’t know whether or not Tom Homan kept $50,000, but you’re certain he didn’t commit a crime. I don’t think it can be both.)
I care about the reaction to how George Stephanopoulos handled the interview. And I have one question for those criticizing the ABC News anchor: what else was he supposed to do?
It’s not an exaggeration to say that Stephanopoulos asked the question four times. And Vance continually failed to answer it. Holding someone’s feet to the fire, whether they’re a member of your favorite political party or not, isn’t an indictment on the ABC News anchor’s character: it’s his job. Too many confuse public relations for journalism today. George Stephanopoulos isn’t supposed to be lofting softballs to the Vice President to make him look better. That’s not the gig.
It’s also not the gig to ask softball questions of those Stephanopoulos finds more favorable, either, for the record.
But when you’re interviewing someone who very clearly does not want to answer the question, and their responses range from “he did nothing wrong” to “well, wait, I don’t even know what you’re asking me”, when the question was not strangely worded or confusing, you have two choices: keep asking the question or move on.
That’s it. Those are the options. And since George Stephanopoulos is an experienced news anchor, he moved on. Because it was clear that JD Vance was never going to answer the question. Now, it could be that he truly did not have the information to respond accurately, but he wasn’t ever going to say that, either.
I have no issue with the criticism of any news anchor or interviewer when they truly have acted unprofessionally, when they’ve been slanted, inaccurate, or intentionally attempted to mislead the audience. Furthermore, I think we all should call that out.
But I don’t think it’s fair to simply state that because someone — whose job it is to ask important questions of those in power — followed through with their task, and in the process made a member of one political party look like they were backed into a corner. If you want to criticize the host for not doing that to Democratic lawmakers, I’m here for it and I’ll stand beside you in that criticism.
However, Stephanopoulos didn’t badger Vance. He didn’t attack him. He remained firm and steadfast in asking the same question again and again. It was a question that members of the Trump administration had routinely sidestepped, avoided, and failed to clarify.
Asking it, firmly and fairly, is the job. That isn’t cause for criticism. It should be celebrated, if anything.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.
Garrett Searight is Barrett Media’s News Editor, which includes writing daily news stories, features, and opinion columns. He joined Barrett Media in 2022 after a decade leading several radio brands in several formats, as well as a 5-year stint working in local television. In addition to his work with Barrett Media, he is a radio and TV play-by-play broadcaster. Reach out to him at Garrett@BarrettMedia.com.
George Stephanopoulos obviously has a double standard depending on who he is talking to. In the same show, he did abruptly end an interview with JB Pritzker for Pritzker not answering questions, but he didn’t push back on Pritzker near as hard as he did with Vance.
JD Vance was avoiding direct answers from the start. It’s what he does, avoid, change topic and bloviate. His responses are usually but…but…and bringing up something about the democratic party.
No he wasn’t. You and George just don’t like the answer.
You are absurd. He is to blame. The left including George and YOU are so biased you can’t stand it when given an explanation you don’t like. That is why no average person believes you or watches you anymore. Shame on you. We need UNbiased news. Not this crap.