What can a young woman’s new job tell us about America? A lot, apparently, if the young woman is Jenna Bush Hager, the 27-year-old daughter of the most recent President Bush, and the job is “Today” show correspondent.

Hager teaches at a charter school in Baltimore. She’s written a children’s picture book with her mom (“Read All About It!”) and a book about a young woman in Panama struggling with H.I.V. (“Ana’s Story”). Hager met the subject of “Ana’s Story” while working as an intern for UNICEF in Latin America a few years ago. Both books were Times bestsellers.

Yesterday the “Today” show announced Hager as its newest correspondent. She’ll be filing a story about once a month. Hager told the Associated Press that she wants to “focus on what I’m passionate about . . . education, urban education, women and children’s issues and literacy.”



Hager and her new gig are perfect grist for Gawker. “Jenna Bush is nice, and fun!,” wrote Foster Kamer. “And know what? This is actually somewhat likable in its complete and utter boldfaced stunt-casting nature. And while this might not exactly be a ratings boon — at all — educational it shall be: all you aspiring TV anchors, look to the stars! You apparently have a better chance of getting there than on Today.”

But this time around, Gawker’s not the only one bringing the snark. Take, for example, Glenn Greenwald at Salon:

They should convene a panel for the next “Meet the Press” with Jenna Bush Hager, Luke Russert, Liz Cheney, Megan McCain and Jonah Goldberg, and they should have Chris Wallace moderate it. They can all bash affirmative action and talk about how vitally important it is that the U.S. remain a Great Meritocracy because it’s really unfair for anything other than merit to determine position and employment. They can interview Lisa Murkowski, Evan Bayh, Jeb Bush, Bob Casey, Mark Pryor, Jay Rockefeller, Dan Lipinksi, and Harold Ford, Jr. about personal responsibility and the virtues of self-sufficiency. Bill Kristol, Tucker Carlson and John Podhoretz can provide moving commentary on how America is so special because all that matters is merit, not who you know or where you come from. There’s a virtually endless list of politically well-placed guests equally qualified to talk on such matters. . . . All of the above-listed people are examples of America’s Great Meritocracy, having achieved what they have solely on the basis of their talent, skill and hard work — The American Way. By contrast, Sonia Sotomayor — who grew up in a Puerto Rican family in Bronx housing projects; whose father had a third-grade education, did not speak English and died when she was 9; whose mother worked as a telephone operator and a nurse; and who then became valedictorian of her high school, summa cum laude at Princeton, a graduate of Yale Law School, and ultimately a Supreme Court Justice — is someone who had a whole litany of unfair advantages handed to her and is the poster child for un-American, merit-less advancement.

“Meh,” says Ta-Nehisi Coates, in response to Greenwald’s call for an special sons-and-daughters “Meet the Press.” “We’re too busy focusing on issues.”

Like Black Panthers who steal elections … from black people. Or why William F. Buckley had “half a point” when he claimed that the “White community” in the South was “the advanced race.” Seriously, move along. Nothing to see here.

At the American Propsect, Adam Serwer cast the hiring in terms of a recent blog debate over incomes and intelligence:

Last week, Greg Mankiw wrote a post casually asserting that people with “good genes” make lots of money and pass their intelligence off to their kids who then get high SAT scores. John Sides and Brad DeLong demolished Mankiw’s argument, but I think Mankiw’s assumption is informative here: The right doesn’t mind privilege being retained, by whatever means, within those groups that already have it, because it proves their theories about meritocracy. But when someone like Sonia Sotomayor goes from the South Bronx to Princeton valedictorian to the Supreme Court, it forces the question of how much people of privilege depend on their circumstances — their financial and social advantages — to succeed rather than their ability or intelligence. That’s uncomfortable for some people to think about, and it’s part of why Sonia Sotomayor provokes outrage over “merit,” while glaring examples of preferential treatment for the privileged do not.

At Making Light, Patrick Hayden goes with a failing empire, Russian-style theme:

Our children and grandchildren will remember these strutting second- and third-generation media peacocks they way we look back at the White Russian officer corps — as examples of astonishing decadence. They will wonder how these people, out of all those who could be discussing the day’s events, were the ones chosen to be on television, day after day, as the world careened toward ruin.

Andrew Sullivan, commenting on Greenwald’s post, works the late empire theme as well, but his concerns go beyond pique over ratings ploys by television networks. Nepotism, he writes, is a symptom of a greater national disease.