Dan Rather's lawsuit against CBS has caused me to revisit a speech that Rather's predecesor gave earlier this year.
As I reread an article I clipped from a newspaper earlier this year covering Walter Cronkite's comments to the Columbia School of Journalism on February 8, 2007 (http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/cs/ContentServer?childpagename=Journalism%2FJRN_Page_C%2FJRNSimplePage&c=JRN_Page_C&p=null&pagename=JRN%2FWrapper&cid=1175295260590), I am again reminded of how statements are made and assumed to be correct - even when they are not backed up by any facts.
Mr. Cronkite said news accuracy has declined because of consolidations and closures. I find that remarkable in that there are more daily newspapers available in Metro Phoenix than ever before, there are more news broadcasts on more channels - including 24-hour news networks - than ever before. Even college publications are more readily available to me (via the internet) than ever before. I believe that Mr. Cronkite has misstated the facts, and that a proper review of the facts might yield a completely different analysis than his stated conclusions.
Although I do not have any "hard data" to back up my following statement, it is my belief that the "story" Mr. Cronkite himself reported on the most - by a large margin - would have been the war in Vietnam. Growing up I watched him reporting virtually every weeknight about Vietnam for about a decade. Yet one of the largest stories of Vietnam - that the TET Offensive of 1968 was a victory for the Viet Cong - was ONLY a propaganda victory - that the Viet Cong and their allies were sounded defeated in the battles - and that such a propaganda victory was only possible because Mr. Cronkite and his peers did not accurately report the facts of what actually happened.
Regarding Mr. Cronkite's comments that "profits threaten democracy", I suggest that lack of profits is what has caused certain news outlets to close up shop - not an excess of profits - and that such lack of profits is what may lead to fewer-than-otherwise voices and sources. I'll bet that Mr. Cronkite asked his employers for a little more pay from time to time, and that he supported an increase in pay for his co-workers and suppliers from time to time. Where else would that little more come from but from profits - you need to have the profits first before you can afford increased payroll and other costs. Perhaps Mr. Cronkite needs a review of Econ 101.
Curious that the messenger and/or maestro of such egregious reporting errors such at the Tet Offensive would state that there is less accuracy in the media today. Mr. Cronkite's lack of attention to the facts in 1968 perhaps led to a wrong conclusion regarding those events, much the same as his lack of attention to the facts about the journalism industry today may be leading to yet another wrong conclusion on his part.
As I reread an article I clipped from a newspaper earlier this year covering Walter Cronkite's comments to the Columbia School of Journalism on February 8, 2007 (http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/cs/ContentServer?childpagename=Journalism%2FJRN_Page_C%2FJRNSimplePage&c=JRN_Page_C&p=null&pagename=JRN%2FWrapper&cid=1175295260590), I am again reminded of how statements are made and assumed to be correct - even when they are not backed up by any facts.
Mr. Cronkite said news accuracy has declined because of consolidations and closures. I find that remarkable in that there are more daily newspapers available in Metro Phoenix than ever before, there are more news broadcasts on more channels - including 24-hour news networks - than ever before. Even college publications are more readily available to me (via the internet) than ever before. I believe that Mr. Cronkite has misstated the facts, and that a proper review of the facts might yield a completely different analysis than his stated conclusions.
Although I do not have any "hard data" to back up my following statement, it is my belief that the "story" Mr. Cronkite himself reported on the most - by a large margin - would have been the war in Vietnam. Growing up I watched him reporting virtually every weeknight about Vietnam for about a decade. Yet one of the largest stories of Vietnam - that the TET Offensive of 1968 was a victory for the Viet Cong - was ONLY a propaganda victory - that the Viet Cong and their allies were sounded defeated in the battles - and that such a propaganda victory was only possible because Mr. Cronkite and his peers did not accurately report the facts of what actually happened.
Regarding Mr. Cronkite's comments that "profits threaten democracy", I suggest that lack of profits is what has caused certain news outlets to close up shop - not an excess of profits - and that such lack of profits is what may lead to fewer-than-otherwise voices and sources. I'll bet that Mr. Cronkite asked his employers for a little more pay from time to time, and that he supported an increase in pay for his co-workers and suppliers from time to time. Where else would that little more come from but from profits - you need to have the profits first before you can afford increased payroll and other costs. Perhaps Mr. Cronkite needs a review of Econ 101.
Curious that the messenger and/or maestro of such egregious reporting errors such at the Tet Offensive would state that there is less accuracy in the media today. Mr. Cronkite's lack of attention to the facts in 1968 perhaps led to a wrong conclusion regarding those events, much the same as his lack of attention to the facts about the journalism industry today may be leading to yet another wrong conclusion on his part.
No comments:
Post a Comment