Good Night, and Good Luck.
Last week, I went and saw Good Night, and Good Luck. I realize that some of you might think this doesn’t have much to do with the general topic of my blog, but I think it does. It gives meaning to what we as bloggers are doing. I went into this movie thinking it was going to be another L.A. Confidential – a crime film based in the 50s, but instead of focusing on cops, this movie was going to focus on reporters. I was wrong in a few aspects. The movie did revolve around reporters in the 1950s, but more importantly a CBS reporter named Edward Murrow and his coverage the McCarthy trials. Another mistake I made was thinking this movie was fiction.
What struck me about this film and why I mention it today is the impact Murrow had on journalism, and the media’s responsibility to be a political watchdog.
The film begins with Morrow being honored at the Radio-Television News Directors Association & Foundation Convention on Oct. 15, 1958. He begins his speech:
This just might do nobody any good. At the end of this discourse a few people may accuse this reporter of fouling his own comfortable nest, and your organization may be accused of having given hospitality to heretical and even dangerous thoughts. But the elaborate structure of networks, advertising agencies and sponsors will not be shaken or altered. It is my desire, if not my duty, to try to talk to you journeymen with some candor about what is happening to radio and television.There is a flashback, and the audience is in the newsroom years ago with reporters bustling around and secretaries delivering coffee. The movie goes on to tell of Murrow’s convictions that what McCarthy accusation was doing was wrong and unconstitutional. The problem during the time was reporters and journalists were afraid to do stories disagreeing with McCarthy because then they to would be black listed.
In Murrow’s awards speech, he mentions many things that are so relevant now.
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.These are excerpts from the speech he gave in 1958. I believe that blogs and the Internet have become to voice of the people. It is the place where people are saying things that others don’t want to hear but need to.
For surely we shall pay for using this most powerful instrument of communication to insulate the citizenry from the hard and demanding realities which must be faced if we are to survive. I mean the word survive literally.
I am entirely persuaded that the American public is more reasonable, restrained and more mature than most of our industry's program planners believe. Their fear of controversy is not warranted by the evidence. I have reason to know, as do many of you, that when the evidence on a controversial subject is fairly and calmly presented, the public recognizes it for what it is--an effort to illuminate rather than to agitate.
But this nation is now in competition with malignant forces of evil who are using every instrument at their command to empty the minds of their subjects and fill those minds with slogans, determination and faith in the future. If we go on as we are, we are protecting the mind of the American public from any real contact with the menacing world that squeezes in upon us. We are engaged in a great experiment to discover whether a free public opinion can devise and direct methods of managing the affairs of the nation. We may fail. But we are handicapping ourselves needlessly.
George Clooney is the director of this movie and a staunch liberal. I’m positive the Clooney’s main purpose in making this film is to illustrate the parallels between the Red Scare and current Iraq war. During the McCarthy era, if you disagreed with what the government was doing or how McCarthy was singling out people without evidence, you were considered a communist. Currently, the situation is very similar. If you oppose the Iraq War and disagree with Bush, you might be called unpatriotic or disloyal.
The final part of Murrow’s speech had a definite ring of truth and timelessness.
To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost.I strongly suggest reading Morrow’s entire speech.
This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. There is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television could be useful.
The reason I mentioned this movie and Murrow is because it brought to my attention the importance of what we as bloggers are doing – especially the bloggers who are doing investigative reporting and discovering important things that aren’t being reported on the news. It is not always popular to believe the truth, but it is still the truth, and someone needs to say it. I believe Murrow was one of those people for radio and television, and unfortunately I cannot name one journalist now that I feel has done the same thing.
posted by Casey at 2:44 PM
6 Comments:
My take is different on this topic. Many in journalism today will speak of Morrow as if he is some type of patron saint of journalist. In fact, he was simply honest and neutral in his reporting. Those same journalists will then do everything that Morrow warned against.
Today’s media is hype driven – every bit of it. We do not report on legislation by providing an explanation and with the purpose of educating the populace because this would be seen as boring and might cause a viewer to switch to another station. Instead we blister the news cast with rape, murder, fallen icons and celebrities and hype and discussion as a war of words.
In Morrow’s speech he says,
“I have reason to know, as do many of you, that when the evidence on a controversial subject is fairly and calmly presented, the public recognizes it for what it is--an effort to illuminate rather than to agitate.”
What McCarthy was doing was riling people up and using fear to motivate them into actions of hatred. The “Red Scare” was just that, a scary fearful time for “Average Joe citizen” - anyone could be a communist, your mother, your uncle, your priest!
After some 40-50 years of hype driven news where negative sells advertising and information is left on the cutting room floors because it may upset advertisers we have created a society where controversy is anything but calm or fair. Controversy is driven down the throat of the audience and is fear based.
Parents keep their children inside for fear they will be kidnapped because a child was kidnapped last night and we saw it on the news. One would believe that every non-church going woman has had an abortion and every woman who died before Roe V Wade dies in a backroom abortion. Because of this, abortion, not economics, boarder controls, education and healthcare is at the top of people lists when it comes to voting for a politician.
At other times we hear that the problem in society is our failing public schools and yet others believe it is because pray no longer exists in public schools. When the truth of the matter is that children who have parents that are involved with their education do well where ever they go and the problem children in our society most often come from broken homes or homes with drug or alcohol problems.
You mention that,
“These are excerpts from the speech he gave in 1958. I believe that blogs and the Internet have become to voice of the people. It is the place where people are saying things that others don’t want to hear but need to.”
This in many ways is the outcome of what Morrow warned about. Blogs represent any person with an opinion. It makes no difference whether you are expressing your opinion based on fact or feeling – it is that you are going to the window and screaming, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!” You can say anything and none of it has to be based on any factual data which is how Morrow directed his news broadcasts and it is this mission that gave him the courage to report the truth about McCarthyism.
Lastly you mention the slogan:
“If you oppose the Iraq War and disagree with Bush, you might be called unpatriotic or disloyal.”
Who says this? The media and politicians using the media. Here is the slogan that Morrow warned against working its fear upon the masses – forcing a reaction based on feeling instead of fact.
The Bush administration has never once made reference to this. Do the research and you will find that this is a twist and a spin created by media outlets and Republican opponents. The Republicans did the same thing with Clinton and the Lewinski issue – they preyed upon the public’s moral fear and the potential embarrassment of the country. Clinton was not the first, nor will he be the last, to have extra-marital experiences in the office of the President, but the media and the Republicans targeted fear and feeling to move a mindset.
No, Morrow if anything is dead. Journalism schools may teach his brand of journalism but the market place demands the hype. Hype equals viewers and viewers equal dollars in advertisements. And Bloggers, they predominantly knee-jerk reaction where a modern day Morrow may be hidden like a needle in buzzing haystack of hype.
The comment I made regarding people being patronized about the Iraq War did not come from media stereotypes. It came from first-hand experience. Whether I agree with the war or not, it is my right to express that opinion without getting an earful about being unpatriotic or being stupid if I do agree with the war. I have talked with people that are so furiously against the war and are so angry about it, and they feel that America is turning their heads and ignoring the war. I’ve also talked with people who are completely for the war and believe we are doing a great thing. Anything I say here you can turn around and say I’m making generalizations, but I’m just stating what I have witnessed firsthand, and not from the media, but from my family and friends and co-workers. And honestly, how do you think most of the people form opinions? By observing the people around them and the news and hopefully making a rational decision.
I posted about Murrow because I had never heard of him, and I was really impressed with the movie, and what he stood for.
I do believe anyone can spout off about anything on blogs yet once in a while someone comes along that has something to say, and it truly means something. Murrow was one of those people. Perhaps we will find that next person on a blog.
You made some good points--I feel that there are strong parallels between this country's blind, knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 (Iraq) and the Red Scare (Vietnam).
Hollywood can stimulate interest in history, but nobody should get his or her history from Hollywood. "GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK" is problematic because it suggests that just because some maniacs like McCarthy hyped up a Red Scare for their own ends, it follows that there was nothing scary about Reds in 1953. Actually many liberals (JFK, Hubert Humphrey) were strong anti-Communists and worried about Communist subversion because it was not a myth. At that time, the Soviet Union was indeed a superpower bent on world domination and led by a monster who had killed tens of millions of his own people. There was a huge and active spy Soviet ring in the U.S. that was trying to infiltrate every part of American life and especially steal defense secrets--which they did, like the atom bomb. See:
Harvey Klehr. Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America. NH: Yale University Press, 1999.
Herb Romerstein. The Venona Secrets: Exposing America's Cold War Traitors. DC: Regnery, 2005.
Allen Weinstein. The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America--The Stalin Era NY: Modern Library Paperbacks, 1999.
John Earl Haynes, Harvey Klehr. In Denial: Historians, Communism, & Espionage. SF: Encounter, 2003.
The movie questions the role and responsibility that journalists have in news reporting, and Im glad you picked up on that. With all of the hype today, it seems sometimes that reporters are creating the news instead of reporting it. The movie was financed by Participant Productions, a company dedicated to making movies with a social impact... which also says a lot about the credibility of the film. The website www.participate.net explains their ideology as well as the movies they back. They've built this online community of people who want to get active in a cause, check out the site to read more. I think its a very well-intentioned idea, because like some news, some movies are just hype... its always refreshing to see a movie with depth, history and a conscience.
Another interesting part of why George Clooney made the movie was that his dad was a big news reporter, and in sort of a tribute to him, he wanted to show a "real story" of journalists as responsible and motivated to report the facts. Murrow says this often throughout the movie, as he tells the viewers and Mr. McCarthy that what he reports are the facts, plain and simple.
I have a post that deals with this, its not really about the movie but more about the production company... its titled "Ebay Movies" on my site if you ever want to check it out.
Great blog though, Im really excited that you were able to see the movie. And isnt that Patricia Clarkson just the best darn actress around!?!
I grew up watching TV newsmen, such as Walter Cronkite, Eric Severeid, David Brinkley and the revered Edward R. Morrow. Cronkite was considered the most trusted man in the U.S. Yes, at one time, newsmen were trusted. Murrow is credited with firing the first salvo at the bully McCarthy, a senator who proved he could and would ruin the life and reputation of anyone by using rumor and calling it evidence. These men, and columnists such as Walter Lipppman, were giants.
Today, we suffer through Fox News (MOTTO: WE SUPPLY THE INNUENDO, YOU MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND), CNN (MOTTO: AT LEAST WE’RE NOT FOX) and the network media who report what is handed out by the White House without a “by the way, this isn’t true” disclaimer.
The mainstream media seems to have been cowed by the relentless attacks of conservatives who impugn their patriotism and professionalism. Some writers of editorials, authors, and talk show hosts must be on the Republican payroll the way they keep repeating the party’s talking points as if these sound bites are gospel.
I still watch TV news and read newspapers and hope that either they or the bloggers will rise to the status of Murrow, et al, and become true media watchdogs.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home