For Katie Couric—who replaced Bob Schieffer as anchor of The CBS Evening News nearly three years ago and has spent much of her time since as a television-press piñata—things are finally looking up. A small surge in the ratings for her third-place newscast has been accompanied by professional awards and critical raves, dispelling earlier rumors that Couric and CBS will part company well before the end of her five-year-contract.

“I never have judged any broadcast I’ve been involved with solely on ratings, and CBS has been in third place for many, many years.”

“If Couric stands a chance of elevating the newscast to second or first place in the nightly ratings, one reason may be that she's finally the right anchor for the times,” the Washington Post’s authoritative Tom Shales wrote the other day in the kind of media valentine that has been filling up her in-box lately. “Not simply because she is a woman, Couric has a warmer, more benevolent presence than her two competitors… That doesn't mean she tries to sugarcoat or prettify grim realities. She has proved her toughness time and again.”

Lloyd, Lloyd--she's not going to sleep with you.

Its actually rather amazing when you think about it. Couric is getting awards for being third place. She's being hailed as an "anchor for our times" because she has a one percent increase in the ratings--statistically meaningless when the gap between you and the number one nightly news cast is a whopping 40% of your viewership.

Even more amazing, when the Obama administration is capping bank executive salaries, Couric is getting 22 million dollars a year even as CBS closes news bureaus. No word about whether Mr. Obama plans similar measures for under-performing news anchors. Couric apparently doesn't understand why she is being paid.

Is that right? One percent? I don’t know. I know it’s the highest it’s been in two years. But I never have judged any broadcast I’ve been involved with solely on ratings, and CBS has been in third place for many, many years. I don’t think it’s hard-wired, but it’s one of those things that you can’t turn around overnight.

Its like those nightmare liberal school systems where everybody at the science fair gets a prize for participation. No winners, no losers and no reason to try very hard. Yet Couric has standards. In spite of the fact that her professional plaudits are based entirely on character assassination, she doesn't much like it when she's the target.

No, no, not at all. I’m really happy I took on the challenge. I mean, it’s frustrating for me when people misrepresent things I say in that manner. It makes me embarrassed for journalism at times, but no, I feel really positive that I took this challenge head on.

I used to be wonder how the liberal elites, such allegedly sophisticated people, could be so incredibly and obviously provincial in their world views, but interviews like this serve to clear up the dynamic. Its a colony of narcissists who believe themselves to be the center of the universe. Why bother trying to understand the world as it is, when everything important is in Manhattan?