The Media Interview

In Cindy Adams column in the New York Post today, she quotes Barbara Walters on why, when Paris Hilton’s people withdrew demands for payment for the heiress’s first post-jail interview, Walters turned down a free interview. After all, ABC had originally offered $100,000 for the “get”:

Look, I’ve done prison interviews before, but people like the Menendez Brothers were really important news stories. This wasn’t. And even though I’d already written my questions, when all that pay-for-play stuff happened, I suddenly felt this was not up to my standard. It . . . felt . . . sort of . . . tawdry. The whole thing somehow was beneath me. Besides, it was a no-win. If I did a tough piece and her tears started to flow, it would be, ‘Oh, there’s Barbara Walters making people cry again.’ Too soft, and I’d be criticized.

If the context and accuracy of this quote are right, it seems that Walters is standing on some shaky ground:

1. The importance of the story didn’t change between the time of the ABC offer and Hilton’s decision to not seek any payment.

2. The no-win problem also didn’t change in that time frame.

3. How is the haggling over different offers any less “tawdry” than making an offer of $100,000 for an interview with a famous-only-for-being-famous celebrity?

I can perfectly well understand Walters coming to realize that she had been party to a struggle to perpetuate and cash in on the Hilton phenomenon, and wanting no part of it any longer (I could applaud that), but it would require a very different explanation than the one she’s apparently giving here.