Tag broadcast journalism

Giants Of Broadcast Journalism

Not one, but two major figures in the history of broadcast journalism passed away this week:

Joseph Wershba, who was one of Edward R. Murrow’s team on “See It Now” and was the principal reporter for the famous Joseph McCarthy takedown reports and the equally-crucial program about Milo Radulovich, has passed away at the age of 90. Wershba was also one of the original producers on “60 Minutes”, working on that show for 20 years.

Jeff Gralnick, Wershba’s colleague at “60 Minutes”, who also was the executive producer of all three nightly network news broadcasts at one time or another, passed away at the age of 72 on Monday. Gralnick was the on-duty producer at CBS News the day John F. Kennedy was assassinated, which would turn out to be a pivotal event in the evolution of television journalism.

Broadcast journalism is a much diminished beast in this age of Twitter and FOX News and 24/7 punditry, and the passing of these two legends makes that weakening all too clear.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Five Notes About Bin Laden’s Death

1. Dear American news media: it is totally unnecessary to keep reporting the same single factoid every ten minutes for 36 hours straight. We got it. William and Kate did get married….er, Obama did release his birth certificate…um, they finally killed Osama Bin Laden…Donald Trump is a monster asshole (oh, wait, that’s tomorrow’s obsession).

2. Dear American college students: you were only 10 years old when 9/11 happened. I realize there usually aren’t any good parties on a Sunday night, but please stop with the debauchery as if your school just won the NCAA tournament. According to Yahoo, most of you don’t even really know who Osama is (well, was).

3. Dear every other American who has behaved like the aforementioned college students over this news: remember how pissed off you were about the Palestinians cheering in the streets on 9/11? That’s you. Shut the fuck up, take a minute to soberly remember the dead — not just the 3,000 Americans but the tens of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan who have been sacrificed for our moment of revenge — and hope that Bin Laden’s death really DOES mean something more than an excuse for you to behave like gorillas in heat.

4. Dear Asif Ali Zardari: you are the biggest lying piece of shit in the world. You make George W. Bush look good in comparison if you really expect a single person anywhere to believe the assertion that the Pakistani government did not know that Bin Laden was living next door to a military base FOR SIX YEARS. The American government has far too long put up with the charade that Pakistan isn’t the actual driving force behind the Taliban and Al Quaeda, and maybe with Bin Laden out of the way there will be little reason to pretend much longer.

5. Dear Barack Obama: at what point do you stop being a pale imitation of George W. Bush? Is this that moment? Now that you’ve actually trumped Bush (see what I did there?) at the one thing he couldn’t claim as “Mission Accomplished”, is it even remotely possible to step away from a decade of war, the crumbling edifice of civil liberties, the encroachment of a police state, the fear-mongering, the jingoism? Please? PLEASE!?!?! I know that this country will never again be the same, but you gave up so quickly and so thoroughly and almost gratefully accepted the mantle of despot that Bush left behind. You seem like such a smart man that I have a hard time understanding what political calculus you’ve gone through that made it seem okay to you to carry on the same way things had been going for the eight years prior. It’s not okay. You can have as much credit as you want for being the guy who gave the order to pull the trigger on that sonofabitch, but you also get to own all the blame for the trillion dollars wasted to accomplish that, the lives lost or ruined, and the legacy of a greatly diminished nation. If you really think it was worth all that, maybe you’re not as smart as you look. I shudder to think that maybe Donald Trump is right about you.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

It’s Like They Read My Mind, Or My Blog

The Washington Post has this grab-bag of op-eds from a variety of commentators ranging from Elizabeth Warren to Turd Blossom to Ed Begley Jr.. The theme of the collection is “!2 Things The World Should Toss Out”, and several of them are about topics near and dear to my heart such as lawns, Internet memes, and bullshit political journalism.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Wires And Lights

This year marks the 50th anniversary of a speech given by Edward R. Murrow to the Radio and Television News Directors’ Association (RTNDA). Murrow’s speech is sometimes called the “Wires and Lights” speech but is generally simply known as “the RTNDA speech”. Already in a precarious position with CBS for having caused so much controversy with his broadcasts about Joseph McCarthy the year before, Murrow did not hesitate in the slightest to generate entirely new waves of controversy with his remarks. Murrow openly chastised his fellow television reporters and editors for neglecting their role as watchdog of the halls of power at a very troubled time, and upbraided the entire television industry for its unwillingness to deliver the hard messages of truth in favor of insipid entertainment. His words have echoed for half a century but are as true or truer now than that day:

Our history will be what we make it. And if there are any historians about fifty or a hundred years from now, and there should be preserved the kinescopes for one week of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or color, evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live. I invite your attention to the television schedules of all networks between the hours of 8 and 11 p.m., Eastern Time. Here you will find only fleeting and spasmodic reference to the fact that this nation is in mortal danger. There are, it is true, occasional informative programs presented in that intellectual ghetto on Sunday afternoons. But during the daily peak viewing periods, television in the main insulates us from the realities of the world in which we live. If this state of affairs continues, we may alter an advertising slogan to read: LOOK NOW, PAY LATER.

It may be that the present system, with no modifications and no experiments, can survive. Perhaps the money-making machine has some kind of built-in perpetual motion, but I do not think so. To a very considerable extent the media of mass communications in a given country reflect the political, economic and social climate in which they flourish. That is the reason ours differ from the British and French, or the Russian and Chinese. We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent. We have currently a built-in allergy to unpleasant or disturbing information. Our mass media reflect this. But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.

Murrow, like so many other critics of television then and now, had a somewhat idealistic view of what television should be — a source of genuine information and serious debate. In his mind there was indeed room for entertainment, but not at the expense of mature, informed, realistic discourse. He felt obligated, he said, to make his concerns about the seductive and sensational side of television known because he felt there would come a time when the public’s ability to engage in an open an intelligent forum about the issues that would face them might be totally corroded by the meaninglessness of constant entertainment. Television, he concluded, would be little more than “wires and lights in a box”.

Keith Olbermann’s regular homages to Murrow notwithstanding, Murrow’s Cassandra-like words came true a hundred times over. I’m sure his body is spinning in the grave so fast that it makes an audible hum that can be heard clear into outer space. This week just happens to be the annual RTNDA meeting, held in conjunction with the convention for the National Association of Broadcasters and the Broadcast Education Association (the academic organization affiliated with the NAB). TVNewser reports that after the big Correspondents’ Dinner last night, which featured Dick Cheney as the keynote speaker, there was a panel discussion to commemorate Murrow’s speech and to consider whether or not broadcast journalism still has a vital role. According to TVNewser, the panel went to great pains not to focus on the current state of broadcast journalism — a wise decision to be sure, since if they had I have little doubt the Ghost Of Murrow himself would have haunted the hall and melted the plastic-perfect faces off of every anchormonster and blowdried reporterchick in the room.

While Murrow would have given an arm and a leg for the sheer volume of news coverage that presently fills the endless hours of cable channels, local news blocks, and broadcast network news programming, he could be nothing short of appalled at the self-referential echo chamber that it has devolved into. Countless hours wasted arguing about flag lapel pins, the “War On Christmas”, “elitism”, haircuts, cleavage, recipes, and dozens of other utter inanities. Last night a “debate” that seemed to consist only of Charlie Gibson insulting the intelligence of Barack Obama AND Hillary Clinton with questions about being a “regular person”. An entire cable news network that exists only as a mouthpiece for one political party and makes no bones about their distortions, lies or slants. Local news that consists of rehashed corporate PR videos, fear-mongering features, and overblown animated graphics. And, most of all, a slavish devotion on the part of each and every person to maintaining the fabricated idea that Everything Is Perfect As Long As We Keep Shopping.

Murrow brilliantly reused the words of William Shakespeare to hit home the idea that it was our own complacency that created a monster like Joseph McCarthy: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.” To this I would add a few lines from Macbeth:

Life’s but a walking shadow; a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Murrow’s own true legacy is half a century of prophecy I am sure he would have wished would never come to pass.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

The BKO News Briefing: New Hampshire Primary Edition

Carrier Pigeon Carrier

A few bits and pieces I’ve seen today wrapping up yesterday’s New Hampshire primary:

1. Probably the best thing I read this morning was this op-ed at Salon by Glenn Greenwald about a bit of conversation between Chris “Tweety-Bird” Matthews and Tom Brokaw during NBC’s live coverage. It’s Greenwald’s assertion that despite the high-falutin’ Murrow-esque platitudes from Brokaw, it’s Matthews who makes the most revealing statement. The 24-hour news media have absolutely nothing of significance to say, and yet they blather on around the clock about the political horserace, spewing total speculation as “fact” and reducing an incredibly complex situation into nonsensical absurdities such as days’ worth of arguments about the price of haircuts, the color of neckties, and (when it’s Hillary) necklines and crow’s feet.

My own feeling is that the 24-hour news channels have been incredibly destructive to the public sphere of information. In the “good old days” when each network had exactly 22 minutes of news time per day, they under-covered important news out of necessity, and we all longed for more time to permit better coverage. But 24 hours a day times 3 full-time news networks PLUS the traditional half-hour nightly shows and assorted other news programs is complete overkill, and they simply can’t make adequate use of it.

2. One of the important stories coming out of New Hampshire and Iowa is the significantly-increased voter turnout, especially among younger and Democratic voters. Obama’s win in Iowa last week is credited to a 77% increase in voter turnout for the caucuses, which traditionally only attract party die-hards. And most of the people who turned out in Iowa were the demographically-critical 17-25 year-olds, who in turn were predominantly Obama supporters. Last night in New Hampshire. voter turnout was so far above expected numbers that the NH Secretary of State’s office nearly ran out of ballots to send to towns that were experiencing shortages.

High voter turnout is almost always good for Democratic candidates and bad for Republican candidates. Republicans pray for rainy or snowy election days, and the party does whatever it can to limit voter enrollment, to purge voter lists, and otherwise prevent people from voting. Democrats, on the other hand, would send a schoolbus to a graveyard if they thought they could get fifty people to the polls. But even the Republicans turned out yesterday in more numbers than expected; personally, I think they were making sure Mitt Romney got a great big FUCK YOU from our Neighbor to the North. The high turnout on the Democratic side shows that Clinton’s organization in New Hampshire had deep roots and could get the job done when it was needed the most.

What I hope the high turnout numbers mean is that the people of this country have been shocked back into realizing that VOTING COUNTS. That Karl Rove’s dirty tricks weren’t just the usual electioneering shenanigans, but that the nation has been brought to its knees politically by a system that was designed to be easy to rig.

3. Across the pond, British political writer Mick Hume tries to put an outsider’s perspective to what the “Change vs. Experience” meme really means. What he comes up with is tantamount to the old Texas saying “all hat, no cattle”. Our political system was designed purposefully to drive to the middle to prevent single-interest or extremist issues from dominating the electoral process. So “Change” isn’t particularly about any real change at all, merely a reaction to the dissatisfaction with the present keepers of power, which is why Hillary (and even Mike Huckabee) can make a legitimate claim to offering “change” just as much as Obama.

4. TV Newser found itself in the middle of a rumor mill yesterday, posting word that Bill Clinton’s two main campaign advisers, Paul Begala and James Carville, were signing on to the Hillary campaign. They had to post several updates throughout the day as Begala and then Carville both denied the story, and it appears that the blog was being given an insider story as conflict about the two men was going on inside Hillary’s camp. Finally, just about an hour ago from the time I am writing this, TV Newser has posted a firm denial from Begala. No more word from Serpent-Head yet.

5. So the race between Hillary and Obama will definitely continue into MegaTuesday on February 5 and might not be decided by then, even though we’ve all thought it would be for some time. If they stay this close, trading victories and keeping apace in the delegate count, it is possible that the DNC convention might actually be where the nomination is decided for the first time since, oh, 1960. If that’s the case, the Progressive Review says that the convention rules give Hillary Clinton the advantage in being able to put together the number of delegates needed to win. That means Hillary doesn’t need to knock Obama out completely, but Obama better hope he can pull in a few more Iowas than New Hampshires.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Must-Read Links

Link-dump in progess! Here are a bunch of things I’ve seen posted around the web over the last week or so that don’t really tie together in any particular way but are too worthwhile to miss. Take notes, you will be quizzed on this material later.

1. Former Dateline reporter John Hockenberry has left NBC and joined the MIT Media Lab as a professor. He has written this article for MIT’s Technology Review about his disillusionment with the content biases in the major news operations. Every place I’ve seen it linked, it has been described as “scathing”, but it also needs to be described as “disheartening” and, sadly, as “unsurprising”.

2. Science fiction writer and all-around genius guy Bruce Sterling gave his annual “State Of The World” Q&A on the community site “The Well” this week. Just the introductory post by forum moderator Jon Lebkowsky would be worth reading on its own for its summation of the “state of the world”, but Sterling has a lot to say about terrorism, the collapse of nation-states, the impending ecological holocaust, and a couple of other interesting tangents. The dialogue is not over — people are still posting questions and he is still responding — but what’s been posted already is excellent reading.

3. This just about made me blow a gasket yesterday: a judge in New Jersey has ordered an atheist couple to relinquish custody of their adopted daughter because they do not believe in God. His reasoning is that they are depriving the baby from “…the inestimable privilege of worshiping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience.” The couple and the ACLU have appealed the decision to the New Jersey Supreme Court. Very honestly, I am chilled to the bone by the title of the article — “Can Atheists Be Parents?” — let alone the actual court ruling. Has the Christian Right’s goal of turning this country into a theocratic authoritarian state succeeded to the extent that I need to fear that my child might be taken from me by an overzealous judge because my personal beliefs do not match someone’s prescribed belief in God?

4. Shamed by the news reports of the video of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, the Pakistan government has backed off their earlier story about the cause of her death, but now there is the report that Bhutto had an appointment later that same day with Senator Patrick Leahy and Congressman Patrick Kennedy where she planned to deliver to them a copy of a report showing that the Musharraf government has been funneling American aid intended for “fighting terrorism” into efforts to rig the now-postponed January 8 election. In other words, she may have been about to give the American politicians the very smoking gun that killed her.

5. I think we’ve pretty clearly established the degree to which TSA airport security measures are nothing more than “security theater”, but just in case you still had any doubts, they should be wiped away once and for all by this blog post by Patrick Smith in last week’s NYT “Jetlagged”. Smith is a former airline pilot who also writes the “Ask The Pilot” column at Salon, and has plenty of first-hand experience with the “follies” of airport security.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Something Else To Freak Out About, Film At Eleven

Wolf! Wolf!

I enjoyed this post by Nashville-area blogger Lindsay about the over-reliance of local news media on fearmongering (via Brittney Gilbert).

She has first-hand knowledge of the subject, having been an on-air television reporter for a number of years, and I have to say I am with her 100%. For a long time, these stories were more or less limited to sweeps periods — the teaser promos would draw people to the newscast for ratings, but the overall newscast wouldn’t be anywhere near such a fear-fest. But, especially since 9/11, the shift in tone of local newscasts to a steady diet of outrage, paranoia, “empty calorie” news (Hey, another moose in someone’s pool!), and daily reminders of things you have to be afraid of has gone way beyond the pale. Sadly, we invite it on ourselves to the extent that people will choose to watch prurient and sensational programming over more measured coverage, but the push-me-pull-you dynamic between viewers and broadcasters is a sort of mutually-assured-destruction scenario. Somebody needs to back down first, and that somebody is the local news media.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

She Don’t Get No Respect

Katie Says Fuck You Keith!

A couple of weeks ago I posted about NBC making the decision to feature Keith Olbermann’s show on Sunday evenings, right before the Sunday Night Football broadcast. Though his ratings don’t exactly make the folks at 60 Minutes worry about their jobs, the show is doing well enough that Media Bistro reported last week that at least one observer has suggested that CBS consider stealing Olbermann away from NBC and using him to replace Katie Couric on the CBS Evening News.

Writing in “The Nation”, Marvin Kitman says that Olbermann’s Murrow-esque editorializing and his offbeat and irreverant style might be the right way to reinvent the evening news format in an age where young people get their news from comedy shows like “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report”.

Meanwhile, the New York Daily News reports that Miss USA Rachel Smith (no, not Miss South Carolina, the girl that actually won) says that she’d like to go into television news, but says “I just don’t want to end up like Katie Couric. I want people to take me seriously.”

I tell ya, that Katie, she don’t get no respect!

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Prime Time Olbermann

The media blog Media Bistro reports that NBC will be putting Keith Olbermann on in prime time this weekend. His usual overnight show will air just before the premiere broadcast of this season’s Sunday Night Football.

On one hand, it’s great that the suits at NBC are responding to Olbermann’s widespread popularity online as a champion of truth. On the other hand, maybe putting this show on before a football game doesn’t really hit the right audience. Olbermann’s probably not all that popular with the pickup-truck-beer-and-power-tool crowd, I’m guessing.

His show will be on at 7:00 p.m. Eastern, which does put him head-to-head against “60 Minutes”, which the press release Media Bistro quotes does not seem to mention. Now there’s the meat of it — placing a man who regularly channels the spirit of Edward R. Murrow directly up against the most venerated news program of all time. “60 Minutes” is decidedly in its waning years, but so are its viewers (not to mention Mike Wallace), and Olbermann’s show is as much a product of these times as “60 Minutes” was of the late 1960s and early 1970s. “60 Minutes” proved that people would watch intelligent journalism on TV, let’s hope Olbermann proves that there is still a taste for it, even when it’s paired up with the ultimate American jingofest of professional football.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

Where Are We Going, And Why Are We In This Handbasket?

cablechart.jpg

onlinechart.jpg

Former Boston Globe media columnist Mark Jurkowitz, writing for the Project for Excellence in Journalism, looks at last week’s news coverage and notes that the story of Anna Nicole Smith’s death ate up more than 20% of the “newshole” on the cable news networks for the entire week, and more than 50% of the time on Thursday and Friday (the story broke late in the afternoon on Wednesday).

Fifty percent. For two solid days. And they’re not done yet, either.

(By contrast, the Anna Nicole story only took up about 5% of the newshole at online news sites, and about 8% of network news broadcasts.)

I think the only person who should be glad about this particular statistic is Lisa Nowak.

EmailStumbleUponRedditFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Related Posts:

All Original Content Copyright © BrianKaneOnline
All Other Content Copyright © Its Original Authors

Built on Notes Blog Core
Powered by WordPress

Switch to our mobile site