http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04272007/watch2.html

On that site you can also see the interview with Jon Stewart and JS’s Daily Show clip of McCain’s appearance…McCain, revealing the poverty of his position on the war, so afraid of Stewart’s truth-telling that he launched into a strange mode of non-stop talking trying to prevent Stewart from saying anything. Of course one can’t keep that up……….

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04272007/

The transcripts are on the site.

By the way, thanks for your other comments.

hug — I enjoyed your posts. Yes, they were happy to name Joan Didion, Gay Talese, etal, of course to have been at David Halberstam’s last dinner, but not to come out in a serious way against what passes for journalism these days. I liked your idea about the ad. I’ve contributed to similar ads in the Times and I don’t have a cent. Somehow, I don’t see journalists signing any such thing.

I wasn’t a fan of Bill Moyers until he left public television and, then, he gave some electric speeches and interviews. Maybe you have to die a little first.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/7080

The other point, and I may be repeating the obvious and what has been said already beyond noting that journalists “did not want to be left out”, is that they concurrently forgot who they were working for ultimately: the people. It’s as if doctors were working for the insurance and the drug companies, not their patients.

If The New York Times won’t run the open letter mentioned in my earlier post (i.e., from the concerned deans of schools of journalism, etc.) as news (although it should), and if the deans or schools cannot otherwise afford the money for a full-page ad in The Times to contain the letter, and if a wealthy concerned citizen cannot be found to pay the tab, then the deans should perhaps approach The Annenberg Foundation. The Foundation’s web site says: “The Annenberg Foundation exists to advance the public well-being through improved communication.” Isn’t that what we are all talking about? And, on the Foundation’s site, they describe a recent gift from the Foundation to the Metropolitan Opera, in N.Y., of $10 MILLION!, to help support the Met’s 2009-2010 season. As much as I like the opera, my guess is that an excellent series of full-page ads, containing the open letter and other helpful info, would cost much much less and ultimately benefit many many more people — if they ultimately have an impact on the quality of journalism (or the management of journalistic organizations/media) as they should. If we don’t improve journalism/media, that may contribute to real-life tragedy — not merely watching a tragedy at the opera.

Again, I’m rooting for journalists to improve the profession, and I’m rooting for the Dean. Go Bears!

I believe it was Mark who paraphrased Halberstam’s point about “power” by saying something like, “many people essentially relinquish their judgment to their desire not to be left out.”

This comment, combined with the following several quotes from others, says alot about the situation and about the media’s role and responsibility . . . .

“The average man is destitute of independence of opinion. He is not interested in contriving an opinion of his own, by study and reflection, but is only anxious to find out what his neighbor’s opinion is and slavishly adopt it.” — Mark Twain

(quoted from “The Perils of the Imitation Age,” by Eric Bonabeau, Harvard Business Review, June, 2004.)

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” — Thomas Jefferson

(from Jefferson’s letter to Colonel Charles Yancey, Jan. 6, 1816, as quoted from The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations)

“The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them.” — Albert Einstein

People in the show also mentioned things like the “positions of influence” and “huge platform” enjoyed by many members of the press/media.

Earlier in the show, someone (I believe it was the Dean) quoted Halberstam as recently saying that, in the 1960s he was “deeply dissatisfied with my own reporting”, that he was “deeply depressed”, that “I had done well enough for myself, sure”, and that he had “won the right prizes.”

Now that David Halberstam has spoken, — and surely the Dean seems to understand — can the press/media do something so that the problem doesn’t just perpetuate itself and get even worse?

Towards the end of the program, the Dean says, “I can’t tell you when the last time I ran into somebody who was proud of what they’re doing.” Of course, there is apparently much truth in that comment. The truth of the comment was effectively underlined by the laughter of one of the other guests in the background — that type of laughter often being a signal that what is being said has much truth in it.

So, what can be done? If that feeling is shared among many of the Deans of the prominent schools of journalism, and if those Deans also understand the vitally important role of education and (responsible and informed) journalism in a democracy, then (among other things) why not send an open letter to The New York Times expressing some concern and critique of the state of journalism and the press/media today, signed by the Deans themselves and other members of faculty? The Times prints open letters frequently on other issues. Or, if the Times won’t print the open letter for free (as news) — which would of course say alot about the issue — then run the letter in a full-page ad in the Times. Today’s New York Times’s Section A (Thursday, April 26) contains substantial ads from Chanel, Cartier, Gucci, Green Godess, Lord & Taylor, De Beers, verizon (full page), Porsche (half page), a full-page ad for a book about pasta, Bose, a full-page ad from “Cigar Aficianado” and “Wine Spectator” magazines, a large Op-Ed page ad from ExxonMobil, and a full-page ad from Sprint, among others. All in Section A. All in today’s paper.

If the Deans of journalism schools were to write an open letter, to the Times, regarding these concerns (these general concerns, not singling out the Times), then that letter would and should appear (without cost) in a prominent place, and if the Times won’t run it as news, then someone would/should help pay for it. There is no reason not to do it. Can you think of one?

Of course, there is one reason, but it’s not a good one in this situation, and that is reflected in Halberstam’s comment as paraphrased by Mark, “many people essentially relinquish their judgment to their desire not to be left out.”

I will add one other thing, perhaps understandable (but also very telling): The guests were much more willing to name the names of people they applaud and are happy to be associated with (there were many named, including Halberstam himself, the Didions, Talese, Pinkus, etc. etc.; sorry if I got the spelling wrong!) than they were to name anyone involved in less responsible journalism. There is apparently a big difference between the way journalists mention names of people in stories regarding other professions and aspects of life, but only want to name names of the more admired members of their own profession.

As critical as this message is, I am rooting for journalists to improve their profession, and I am a significant consumer of media. I think the show was great, and the guests were very honest. Now it’s time to take action based on that honesty. I’ll look forward to the open letter in the Times.

As usual, great show ROS.