A rather fluffy article in the LA Times discusses Katie Couric's "perkiness" which is another way of saying its a problem for a news anchor.

Oddly enough, the approach seems to be to scold those who reflexively attached the "perky" modifier to any mention of Couric, or to suggest ways in which she could be less perky.

Nobody seems to buy the proposition that Couric can make the transition from monring television to evening news anchor "as is".

I don't think the media's editing out of "perkiness" as a descriptor is going to work--millions of people watch her everyday--they know what it means in the Couric context, and even if you don't call her perky, people will be thinking, "gee, that woman is perky..."

On the other hand, a contrived "gravitas" isn't going to fly either. People are still making fun of Dan Rather's ostentatiousness. Undoubtedly one of the reasons See-BS Evening News ratings improved with Scheiffer is that his gravitas is so clearly authentic.

Perhaps Couric can find her "inner gravitas", but I doubt it. Gravitas isn't a dark business suit, a grave tone and solemn stare--its a way of looking at the world, and Couric just doesn't have that kind of intellectual wattage.

Do you think there's a 30 day cooling off period See-BS can use?