They first called in the early winter of 1996, when I was living in Los Angeles and working in the movie and TV business writing scripts. The voice on the other end of the phone was that of a young booker at Fox News. Was I familiar with the Hannity and Colmes show?
What a sense of humor you have, Lucian. The Foxhole. Not at all what I expected. Very clever.
An item of interest. My husband, Paul, was in the Battle of the Bulge, and he and his partner had just dug their fox hole in the frozen ground, when the buddy yelled at Paul to run away from it immediately. A mortar landed in it. He had a premonition that saved Paul's life. As a result, there are more than 20 more humans on the planet. His children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and there will be more in the future.
Boy oh boy! You have had some kind of life!!! I was reading this in shock that you had been put through the meat grinder at Fuks Not News and that it is always and forever will be a sinister bullshit corporation. I hate to even refer to it as media, when it is a propaganda machine that is daily brainwashing an enormous audience. Jim Jones would have been jealous. Please please please, may Dominion take them down.
Thank you for sharing this experience with faux media with us. They have always been lying liars. I am afraid you are correct about them never admitting their lies about Dominion on air for their cult to hear. Rupert Murdoch was not born in this country and I would like to see him and his family deported for their role in the coup to stop the peaceful transfer of power. They have done great harm to our country for the sole purpose of making money. They must be stopped.
(Adding w/o substracting) Don't forget the linchpin in the Reagan-Murdoch matter, Roy Cohn (lead counsel for Joe McCarthy's Army Hearings). Later, the self-proclaimed America's Mayor, Rudy Giuliani played a major role in FOX getting a foothold in NYC.
The stench and rot runs long, broad, and deep. Infects the entire fabric of society.
As much as I might say I can't be surprised by anything these days, I had a jaw-drop moment reading this. Those damned liars, of course, you had to go through it with them. I have mixed feelings, sorry you went through that, and at the same time, glad it was you - someone who could stand up to them. Glad you shut them down and ended up with the apology, even though it was weak on the part of Hannity. That bag of hot air probably almost choked getting the words out. Fox Not News poisoned my parents' minds, and they are both deceased, so I can't make sure they know what is coming out now. My older sister has been warped by it as well. I did tell my dad they were lying when he would grumble about something he heard on one of the shows. He couldn't quite believe what I was telling him. He said it didn't seem like they would be allowed to lie, as I suggested. He did say a few things, though, that indicated he had grown tired of some of it and felt like something didn't add up. This was in the early days of the pandemic, and no one could visit him in long-term care. It still hurts and will bother me, perhaps for the rest of my life, that my kind, decent parents were warped into being paranoid, fearful, and more negative since those crap shows started airing in the mid-'90s. I finally put it all together but looking back, beyond trying to shine a light on it, what could I have done? I am angry and want them to pay a heavy price. Monetary damages are one thing, but I want them off the air and unable to do this. I am unsure what can or will happen, but it is personal. Good lord, I loathe that group and all of the lying liars that continue to poison the minds of far too many of our citizens.
When my husband and I moved in together, he sat down one night and turned on Fox News. It was Bill O'Reilly, and he was enjoying it. This was in the mid 1990's. I stood between him and the TV set and said, "these people offend me and we won't be watching Fox News in this house." He respected me enough to comply with my wishes. THANK GOD! I don't like to believe that my reasonable, intelligent husband would have been one to be brainwashed, but who knows? You watch the same hateful messages delivered into your home for decades, it changes you. They know this. And may they all burn in hell for it.
So Hannity helped invent the form. In a way, print guy Rupert learned from him. … I doubt the Dominion case will end with no public apologies. Dominion will require them along with the first-borns they'll get.
I've occasionally done a little experiment with Fux Noose. I turn it on (after having tried my best to pretend to "empty my mind" or whatever the relevant phrase is) and make myself watch (again pretending I'm some kind of "naive viewer," which is a pretty dubious thing to attempt from the get-go). ordinarily, I get too pissed off to carry on, curse, and change stations.
but in one time out of--I dunno, say six, eight, ten, whatever--I let it sort of wash over me, reminding myself that I'm also pretending I don't watch anything else.
the thing is, occasionally I've been able to do this sort of role-play thing successfully enough that I understand how the thing works; the extent to which it really IS a closed system designed to discourage looking elsewhere.
now, I figure that if I can manage this (starting out as a champion Fux-hater), there is something very powerful about their "algorithm." the guys in charge at this level might be evil and completely unscrupulous, but on the level of knowing how to hook people in and have their way with them before letting go...they really do seem to know what they're doing.
btw, I do not recommend my approach to anyone else. my father-in-law was afraid of bridges and I thought it was a strange phobia. one time, in an attempt to "understand" the phobia, I started to pretend I had it myself one time when I was on the 59th Street Bridge. in about three minutes, I realized I'd been much TOO successful and all I could think was "get me the fuck off this bridge...NOW!"
obviously, I managed. but I also decided to reserve these experiments for when I was home...
The "algorithm" of which you speak is the appeal to the emotive, the very opposite of the appeal to Reason. And predates FNC by decades. The primary vehicle is certain words. The secondary vehicle is the use of shading in imaginary.
Two familiar names focused on certain words, Lee Atwater (later his disciples, then theirs) and Frank Luntz. Both reject appeals to Reason (for example Policy) claiming emotion is far easier to get across and far easier to manipulate. Both have extensively written/spoken on the subject. When it comes to the mind/brain of right leaning folk (affirmed by neuroscience) they are correct.
The use of manipulated imaginary (making a person of their choosing look menacing, less than attractive, sickly, darkening skin tones, overuse of black and white filming in an era of color, etc. are also an appeal to emotion, Keep in mind the appeal to emotion is a fallacy, therefore an invalid argument.
Again, Rs/cons and RWNJs embrace and advance all the fallacies. For example, false comparisons galore, either/or aka binary choice (as if there were nothing in between), straw man, red herring and on and on. All work... in their minds and in their like-minded world. Another way of saying this is, sounds good yet lacks all soundness.
An early example of this is the Magniloquent Mouth aka Buckley v. Vidal. Buckley sure sounded smart due to his throwing of sesquipedalian words yet did so to cover his lack of knowledge on the subject. R/con pols use another technique, shouting and shooting down valid questions. Makes them sound tough to the right. Christie rose to fame doing so and today DeSantis does the same. Since when is rudeness same-same as tough?
So, in the broader discussion of today's journalism how many times have you witnessed TeeVee cable hosts allow nonsense to spew from their guest, then say thanks for joining us? And the few times they have the entire network personalities go gaga for the day. OH MY let's replay Tapper or Todd interview...
Mainstream media/journalism has failed to adapt to the rise of rightwing media. Nor are they equipped to take them on and regain cred. A good place to start is re-reading the Founders and Framers on a free press. Bon chance to them finding passages on personal gain (capitalism) at the expense of the public and greater good (democracy).
In my mind that which is in the US governing docs speaks to service to the nation including judges, pols, military, and yes the press. Not to self. Is an honor to serve a nation and its people, not the other around.
Your presence of mind is impressive, David. So one needn't be old or uneducated, absolutely anyone can be subverted—and that's scary. Is anyone working on deprogramming? George Soros, are you listening? Seriously, if indoctrination is that easy, surely reversal is possible. But you never hear of it happening.
The rise and proliferation of AM-TALK shock jocks is an often-overlooked inflection point in post-modern US History.
As an aside, still chuckle at Fox News Channel old motto that was a tell how little they knew about journalism, Fair and Balanced. Journalism is about objectivity.
There is no equilibrium of wrong w/right (fair) nor can a truth be balanced with a falsehood/lie. My nod to them for dropping such nonsense. Waiting for them to simply declare self, Fox Viewpoint Narrative.
Do you think "objectivity" is possible where humans are concerned? As an editor, writer, and former journalist (weekly newspaper division), I don't, so I wonder what people mean when they call for objectivity in journalism, science, or any other human endeavor.
I believe the means whereby something is disseminated (Washington Post, CNN, the Nation, the Intercept—whatever ) implies framing that by definition is subjective. I don't remember much stress on objectivity during my journalism schooling. I think it was simply agreed to be crucial. Where it became an issue in my training was The Village Voice: reporting was expected to be truthful and factual, but founding editor Dan Wolf didn't just expect point of view as well from his writers, he required it. A J school degree was a disqualification for employment; he felt it squeezed out writers' points of view. I think you and Dan would have hit it off, Susanna.
OMG, Aside to Susanna: I just remembered: I spent some time in Hyannis several falls ago, and was amused to see campaign posters everywhere for Dan Wolf. I believe Cape Cod Dan, a pilot, was elected but by now is out of politics? Just wanted to clarify: No connection. —d
Lol about the other Dan Wolf -- he served IIRC three terms state senator from my district (Cape & Islands) till Jan. 2017; he didn't run for re-election, and he was replaced by our current state senator, Julian Cyr, a gay millennial from Truro, who is great. Dan no longer holds elected office but he's not completely out of politics: he was the honorary campaign chair for Rob Galibois, our new DA (the first Dem elected to this position ever). Dan was the founder and longtime CEO of Cape Air, a regional airline, and I think he's still chairman of the board.
Respect and my nod to you for your career achievements in multiple roles.
Is a good question. Reporting the facts w/o comment or editorializing is achievable in journalism (granted journalism is a broad subject) as well as other professions. People who are fact-based or knowledge based do so instinctively and do so first. The same group avoid or minimize flowery prose ripe with highfalutin adjectives. Both are the tools of the storyteller.
Said another way, limiting self to writing or speaking to only what is known, (could include identifying what isn't) versus what one thinks or believes. The latter is commentary or editorializing, no? (I write this as someone who subscribes to opinion is the lowest form of hooman knowledge and/or of hooman intellect.)
Walter Cronkite along w/other Murrow Boyz, was a master at objective journalism and commentary because he kept them separate and apart (with a few notable exceptions).
I'm too young to remember Murrow, but I did grow up watching "Uncle Walter," Harry Reasoner, Eric Severeid, and a bunch of others. They undoubtedly did their best to be accurate and fair, but by no stretch of the imagination could they be called "objective." They were, not surprisingly, US-centric and limited to the English language. They, like most of the press corps at the time -- especially the ones who anchored TV news shows -- were all white men. That alone affected what they could see and what they considered important. So -- "objective?" Definitely not. But a significant portion of the viewing audience at the time was predisposed to trust white men of a certain age and with a certain range of "non-accent" accents -- something that wasn't distinctively regional. Anchors and journalists who regularly reported live were almost certainly chosen with that in mind. (This of course became a rationale for keeping women and people of color out of those positions: they didn't present as avuncular enough.)
Oh, I agree with you that "reporting the facts w/o comment or editorializing is achievable in journalism," but there's a lot more to objectivity, or even fairness, than that. Any writer worth her salt can take exactly the same facts and write them in half a dozen ways, each of which will create a different impression in the reader or listener. She doesn't have to add anything, change anything, or leave anything out. Just the facts. A radio broadcaster can influence the delivery with phrasing and tone of voice. On TV the tools expand to include facial expressions.
Whatever the medium, delivery of a story can be influenced by a myriad of choices, some made more consciously than others, and most of which the reader or listener may be totally unaware of. Short version: "Objectivity" in journalism is impossible, and IMO it's not even a worthy goal.
in her excellent new book, "Newsroom Confidential," Margaret Sullivan is very eloquent on this whole "objectivity" issue. she maintains that the kind of self-conscious "objectivity" (leading to the eternal and misleading "bothsides-erism") practiced by the Washington Post and NY Times is fundamentally misguided and, finally, even dangerous.
it's not a particularly radical or unique position, but she makes it very well.
Thanks for the lead!! I think -- I hope! -- more attention is being paid these days to the drawbacks of bothsidesism (I never can figure out where to put the damn hyphens so this time I'm leaving them out). But it's mainly because the GOP has gone so far beyond democratic norms that more people are seeing the problem. When a major political party calls for restricting freedom of the press, one hopes that the press would refrain from cutting its own throat -- or perhaps that's seen as evidence that it's not "objective" enough?
Some few years before Al Franken became a Senator, he wrote several books and in one of them (Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them--2003) was the story of Sean Hannity over-talking his co-host and portraying Colmes to be a weak ass liberal on almost every show. Both Alan and Al would fervently agree with you that Hannity isn't only Not Nice but is, in fact, a loud-mouthed bloviator who is quite stupid but also pugnacious about pushing the Fox credo.
Wow What a story! So interesting to read. Just shows a leopard doesn't change its spots. Karma seems to be kicking in now with this Dominion lawsuit. I was thinking the other day that John Kluge wouldn't be happy with his old company. After I took an early retirement from the phone company I worked for a top executive at Metromedia as his personal driver. After he retired he and Kluge would meet periodically for lunch when he visited Los for a board meeting as he was on the board of Occidental Oil. I would pick him up at LAX private jet area and drive him to the Bel Air hotel where they'd meet. The last time I saw him he said to join his bodyguard for lunch at the next table. As a side note I had lunch once with his crew members on his 210 foot yacht docked at the Marina. They said Frank Sinatra had bee there at a party the night before. .
In 1986, Kluge sold the Metromedia television stations to 20th Century Fox (then controlled by News Corporation), for a reported US$4 billion. Those stations would later form the core of what would become the Fox television network, (spun off from News Corporation/20th Century Fox with Fox Corporation decades later) which launched on October 9 of that year. The following year, Forbes placed Kluge at the top of its list as the richest man in America.
In retaliation for a lawsuit brought by Paul Winchell, who sought the rights to his children's television program, "Winchell-Mahoney Time", Metromedia management, under orders from Kluge, destroyed the video tapes. Winchell was later awarded nearly $18 million as compensation for Metromedia's capricious behavior.
Following the Fox disposal, Kluge's activities had been carried out through a private venture named Metromedia Company in which he was a partner with Stuart Subotnick.
Lucian, as a funny sidenote, I too got a call from a booker :) at CBS. Would I be interested in appearing in a skit on The Late Late show. By way of explanation, after my second retirement at 79 I started doing extra work on TV and in the movies which led to a little acting gig now and then, Now aat 90 I just stay home, but it was fun,
Anyway the director on this particular skit had recommended me as n they needed one more old man (I had worked on one of his previous College Humor projects "If you're 20 Something Stop Saying You're Old" ) This is the link to the Late Late Show bit: (I play Milton) https://youtu.be/e6eDFf-ezXU
Wow! That is a blast from the past. I had forgotten about Hannity and Colmes. I watched it sometimes and was always disgusted by Hannity. He was a lying bully and still is. Poor Colmes could hardly get a word in. And proof that some things never change but they do get worse is the email the bully was waving around with supposed information about you. So it was an email from some self proclaimed wackadoodle that the queen of wackadoodle, Sydney Powell, gave to Maria Bartiromo, who maybe at some time in her life was not wackadoodle but certainly is now, that “proved” the dominion voting machines were rigged by someone in Spain, or was it Italy....you just can’t trust anybody. They were rigged so that Trumps votes would automatically be switched to Biden. Of course this woman had reliable resources. She just listened to the wind and it told her everything. Right....but Maria sucked it up and spouted it off on her show along with her pal Sydney Powell. It seems I’ve gone off on a tangent Lucian, but your description of the bully waving around the email reminded me of this. But this time there will be no apology. They have sunk too low in that Fox hole for that.
I used to watch that show ... Colmes didn't last to long around there ... I always thought hannity colmes was knock off of the pbs show with pat Buchanan and various liberals such as Kinsley ... I think pbs was better at it
FNC selected Colmes to become the rightwing's posterchild of how a lib looks as well as thinks. If FNC was genuinely interested in 2-siding things, they woulda replaced Colmes w/Lucian and the ratings woulda soared. Hannity after 2 consecutive shows? Simply sore and soiled.
Maybe he was an idiot I don't know he was setup to fail... Shocked to find that show lasted about 13 years... Apparently fix news is always in need of filler lol
In the early ‘90s, Hannity was working at WGST in Atlanta, in harness with raving right-wing goobers like “The Kimmer.” The station set up a meet and greet at Manuel’s Tavern, a bar favored by reporters, writers and cops, run by the feisty, hardcore liberal, Manuel Maloof.
In ten minutes, I’d pegged Hannity as a loudmouth suburban punk, like so many of the Young Americans For Freedom types I’d come across. Dorks who sat brooding in the back of class and couldn’t get laid to save their lives In twelve minutes, Hannity was shouting that Pres. Bill Clinton was a “scumbag,” in Brooklyn, as you know, a used condom.
I raised my hand and we got into a furious exchange. Next day, I’m driving my 8-year-old son to school, and here’s Hannity calling me a “scumbag” on the radio and distorting our clash.
I was a well-known reporter in Atlanta, but hardly a public figure. I called the station manager to remind him of this and that I planned to sue the station for slander—unless Hannity issued a public apology. Sure enough, punk that he is, he did.
What a sense of humor you have, Lucian. The Foxhole. Not at all what I expected. Very clever.
An item of interest. My husband, Paul, was in the Battle of the Bulge, and he and his partner had just dug their fox hole in the frozen ground, when the buddy yelled at Paul to run away from it immediately. A mortar landed in it. He had a premonition that saved Paul's life. As a result, there are more than 20 more humans on the planet. His children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and there will be more in the future.
Boy oh boy! You have had some kind of life!!! I was reading this in shock that you had been put through the meat grinder at Fuks Not News and that it is always and forever will be a sinister bullshit corporation. I hate to even refer to it as media, when it is a propaganda machine that is daily brainwashing an enormous audience. Jim Jones would have been jealous. Please please please, may Dominion take them down.
Thank you for sharing this experience with faux media with us. They have always been lying liars. I am afraid you are correct about them never admitting their lies about Dominion on air for their cult to hear. Rupert Murdoch was not born in this country and I would like to see him and his family deported for their role in the coup to stop the peaceful transfer of power. They have done great harm to our country for the sole purpose of making money. They must be stopped.
Not to mention he got Reagan to fast track his citizenship
Reagan and Karl Rove RECRUITED Murdoch to set up their propaganda outlet.
(Adding w/o substracting) Don't forget the linchpin in the Reagan-Murdoch matter, Roy Cohn (lead counsel for Joe McCarthy's Army Hearings). Later, the self-proclaimed America's Mayor, Rudy Giuliani played a major role in FOX getting a foothold in NYC.
The stench and rot runs long, broad, and deep. Infects the entire fabric of society.
As much as I might say I can't be surprised by anything these days, I had a jaw-drop moment reading this. Those damned liars, of course, you had to go through it with them. I have mixed feelings, sorry you went through that, and at the same time, glad it was you - someone who could stand up to them. Glad you shut them down and ended up with the apology, even though it was weak on the part of Hannity. That bag of hot air probably almost choked getting the words out. Fox Not News poisoned my parents' minds, and they are both deceased, so I can't make sure they know what is coming out now. My older sister has been warped by it as well. I did tell my dad they were lying when he would grumble about something he heard on one of the shows. He couldn't quite believe what I was telling him. He said it didn't seem like they would be allowed to lie, as I suggested. He did say a few things, though, that indicated he had grown tired of some of it and felt like something didn't add up. This was in the early days of the pandemic, and no one could visit him in long-term care. It still hurts and will bother me, perhaps for the rest of my life, that my kind, decent parents were warped into being paranoid, fearful, and more negative since those crap shows started airing in the mid-'90s. I finally put it all together but looking back, beyond trying to shine a light on it, what could I have done? I am angry and want them to pay a heavy price. Monetary damages are one thing, but I want them off the air and unable to do this. I am unsure what can or will happen, but it is personal. Good lord, I loathe that group and all of the lying liars that continue to poison the minds of far too many of our citizens.
Thank you - then and now.
When my husband and I moved in together, he sat down one night and turned on Fox News. It was Bill O'Reilly, and he was enjoying it. This was in the mid 1990's. I stood between him and the TV set and said, "these people offend me and we won't be watching Fox News in this house." He respected me enough to comply with my wishes. THANK GOD! I don't like to believe that my reasonable, intelligent husband would have been one to be brainwashed, but who knows? You watch the same hateful messages delivered into your home for decades, it changes you. They know this. And may they all burn in hell for it.
So Hannity helped invent the form. In a way, print guy Rupert learned from him. … I doubt the Dominion case will end with no public apologies. Dominion will require them along with the first-borns they'll get.
Di, guess who just subscribed! Carman Moore!
Cool!!! Hi, Carman! —diane (shhhh)
I've occasionally done a little experiment with Fux Noose. I turn it on (after having tried my best to pretend to "empty my mind" or whatever the relevant phrase is) and make myself watch (again pretending I'm some kind of "naive viewer," which is a pretty dubious thing to attempt from the get-go). ordinarily, I get too pissed off to carry on, curse, and change stations.
but in one time out of--I dunno, say six, eight, ten, whatever--I let it sort of wash over me, reminding myself that I'm also pretending I don't watch anything else.
the thing is, occasionally I've been able to do this sort of role-play thing successfully enough that I understand how the thing works; the extent to which it really IS a closed system designed to discourage looking elsewhere.
now, I figure that if I can manage this (starting out as a champion Fux-hater), there is something very powerful about their "algorithm." the guys in charge at this level might be evil and completely unscrupulous, but on the level of knowing how to hook people in and have their way with them before letting go...they really do seem to know what they're doing.
btw, I do not recommend my approach to anyone else. my father-in-law was afraid of bridges and I thought it was a strange phobia. one time, in an attempt to "understand" the phobia, I started to pretend I had it myself one time when I was on the 59th Street Bridge. in about three minutes, I realized I'd been much TOO successful and all I could think was "get me the fuck off this bridge...NOW!"
obviously, I managed. but I also decided to reserve these experiments for when I was home...
The "algorithm" of which you speak is the appeal to the emotive, the very opposite of the appeal to Reason. And predates FNC by decades. The primary vehicle is certain words. The secondary vehicle is the use of shading in imaginary.
Two familiar names focused on certain words, Lee Atwater (later his disciples, then theirs) and Frank Luntz. Both reject appeals to Reason (for example Policy) claiming emotion is far easier to get across and far easier to manipulate. Both have extensively written/spoken on the subject. When it comes to the mind/brain of right leaning folk (affirmed by neuroscience) they are correct.
The use of manipulated imaginary (making a person of their choosing look menacing, less than attractive, sickly, darkening skin tones, overuse of black and white filming in an era of color, etc. are also an appeal to emotion, Keep in mind the appeal to emotion is a fallacy, therefore an invalid argument.
Again, Rs/cons and RWNJs embrace and advance all the fallacies. For example, false comparisons galore, either/or aka binary choice (as if there were nothing in between), straw man, red herring and on and on. All work... in their minds and in their like-minded world. Another way of saying this is, sounds good yet lacks all soundness.
An early example of this is the Magniloquent Mouth aka Buckley v. Vidal. Buckley sure sounded smart due to his throwing of sesquipedalian words yet did so to cover his lack of knowledge on the subject. R/con pols use another technique, shouting and shooting down valid questions. Makes them sound tough to the right. Christie rose to fame doing so and today DeSantis does the same. Since when is rudeness same-same as tough?
So, in the broader discussion of today's journalism how many times have you witnessed TeeVee cable hosts allow nonsense to spew from their guest, then say thanks for joining us? And the few times they have the entire network personalities go gaga for the day. OH MY let's replay Tapper or Todd interview...
Mainstream media/journalism has failed to adapt to the rise of rightwing media. Nor are they equipped to take them on and regain cred. A good place to start is re-reading the Founders and Framers on a free press. Bon chance to them finding passages on personal gain (capitalism) at the expense of the public and greater good (democracy).
In my mind that which is in the US governing docs speaks to service to the nation including judges, pols, military, and yes the press. Not to self. Is an honor to serve a nation and its people, not the other around.
Your presence of mind is impressive, David. So one needn't be old or uneducated, absolutely anyone can be subverted—and that's scary. Is anyone working on deprogramming? George Soros, are you listening? Seriously, if indoctrination is that easy, surely reversal is possible. But you never hear of it happening.
The rise and proliferation of AM-TALK shock jocks is an often-overlooked inflection point in post-modern US History.
As an aside, still chuckle at Fox News Channel old motto that was a tell how little they knew about journalism, Fair and Balanced. Journalism is about objectivity.
There is no equilibrium of wrong w/right (fair) nor can a truth be balanced with a falsehood/lie. My nod to them for dropping such nonsense. Waiting for them to simply declare self, Fox Viewpoint Narrative.
Do you think "objectivity" is possible where humans are concerned? As an editor, writer, and former journalist (weekly newspaper division), I don't, so I wonder what people mean when they call for objectivity in journalism, science, or any other human endeavor.
I believe the means whereby something is disseminated (Washington Post, CNN, the Nation, the Intercept—whatever ) implies framing that by definition is subjective. I don't remember much stress on objectivity during my journalism schooling. I think it was simply agreed to be crucial. Where it became an issue in my training was The Village Voice: reporting was expected to be truthful and factual, but founding editor Dan Wolf didn't just expect point of view as well from his writers, he required it. A J school degree was a disqualification for employment; he felt it squeezed out writers' points of view. I think you and Dan would have hit it off, Susanna.
OMG, Aside to Susanna: I just remembered: I spent some time in Hyannis several falls ago, and was amused to see campaign posters everywhere for Dan Wolf. I believe Cape Cod Dan, a pilot, was elected but by now is out of politics? Just wanted to clarify: No connection. —d
Lol about the other Dan Wolf -- he served IIRC three terms state senator from my district (Cape & Islands) till Jan. 2017; he didn't run for re-election, and he was replaced by our current state senator, Julian Cyr, a gay millennial from Truro, who is great. Dan no longer holds elected office but he's not completely out of politics: he was the honorary campaign chair for Rob Galibois, our new DA (the first Dem elected to this position ever). Dan was the founder and longtime CEO of Cape Air, a regional airline, and I think he's still chairman of the board.
I bet I would have hit it off with VV Dan Wolf!
Respect and my nod to you for your career achievements in multiple roles.
Is a good question. Reporting the facts w/o comment or editorializing is achievable in journalism (granted journalism is a broad subject) as well as other professions. People who are fact-based or knowledge based do so instinctively and do so first. The same group avoid or minimize flowery prose ripe with highfalutin adjectives. Both are the tools of the storyteller.
Said another way, limiting self to writing or speaking to only what is known, (could include identifying what isn't) versus what one thinks or believes. The latter is commentary or editorializing, no? (I write this as someone who subscribes to opinion is the lowest form of hooman knowledge and/or of hooman intellect.)
Walter Cronkite along w/other Murrow Boyz, was a master at objective journalism and commentary because he kept them separate and apart (with a few notable exceptions).
I'm too young to remember Murrow, but I did grow up watching "Uncle Walter," Harry Reasoner, Eric Severeid, and a bunch of others. They undoubtedly did their best to be accurate and fair, but by no stretch of the imagination could they be called "objective." They were, not surprisingly, US-centric and limited to the English language. They, like most of the press corps at the time -- especially the ones who anchored TV news shows -- were all white men. That alone affected what they could see and what they considered important. So -- "objective?" Definitely not. But a significant portion of the viewing audience at the time was predisposed to trust white men of a certain age and with a certain range of "non-accent" accents -- something that wasn't distinctively regional. Anchors and journalists who regularly reported live were almost certainly chosen with that in mind. (This of course became a rationale for keeping women and people of color out of those positions: they didn't present as avuncular enough.)
Oh, I agree with you that "reporting the facts w/o comment or editorializing is achievable in journalism," but there's a lot more to objectivity, or even fairness, than that. Any writer worth her salt can take exactly the same facts and write them in half a dozen ways, each of which will create a different impression in the reader or listener. She doesn't have to add anything, change anything, or leave anything out. Just the facts. A radio broadcaster can influence the delivery with phrasing and tone of voice. On TV the tools expand to include facial expressions.
Whatever the medium, delivery of a story can be influenced by a myriad of choices, some made more consciously than others, and most of which the reader or listener may be totally unaware of. Short version: "Objectivity" in journalism is impossible, and IMO it's not even a worthy goal.
in her excellent new book, "Newsroom Confidential," Margaret Sullivan is very eloquent on this whole "objectivity" issue. she maintains that the kind of self-conscious "objectivity" (leading to the eternal and misleading "bothsides-erism") practiced by the Washington Post and NY Times is fundamentally misguided and, finally, even dangerous.
it's not a particularly radical or unique position, but she makes it very well.
Thanks for the lead!! I think -- I hope! -- more attention is being paid these days to the drawbacks of bothsidesism (I never can figure out where to put the damn hyphens so this time I'm leaving them out). But it's mainly because the GOP has gone so far beyond democratic norms that more people are seeing the problem. When a major political party calls for restricting freedom of the press, one hopes that the press would refrain from cutting its own throat -- or perhaps that's seen as evidence that it's not "objective" enough?
The human species is a disgrace.
I mourn for the Elephants and all other living species.
Some few years before Al Franken became a Senator, he wrote several books and in one of them (Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them--2003) was the story of Sean Hannity over-talking his co-host and portraying Colmes to be a weak ass liberal on almost every show. Both Alan and Al would fervently agree with you that Hannity isn't only Not Nice but is, in fact, a loud-mouthed bloviator who is quite stupid but also pugnacious about pushing the Fox credo.
Wow What a story! So interesting to read. Just shows a leopard doesn't change its spots. Karma seems to be kicking in now with this Dominion lawsuit. I was thinking the other day that John Kluge wouldn't be happy with his old company. After I took an early retirement from the phone company I worked for a top executive at Metromedia as his personal driver. After he retired he and Kluge would meet periodically for lunch when he visited Los for a board meeting as he was on the board of Occidental Oil. I would pick him up at LAX private jet area and drive him to the Bel Air hotel where they'd meet. The last time I saw him he said to join his bodyguard for lunch at the next table. As a side note I had lunch once with his crew members on his 210 foot yacht docked at the Marina. They said Frank Sinatra had bee there at a party the night before. .
In 1986, Kluge sold the Metromedia television stations to 20th Century Fox (then controlled by News Corporation), for a reported US$4 billion. Those stations would later form the core of what would become the Fox television network, (spun off from News Corporation/20th Century Fox with Fox Corporation decades later) which launched on October 9 of that year. The following year, Forbes placed Kluge at the top of its list as the richest man in America.
In retaliation for a lawsuit brought by Paul Winchell, who sought the rights to his children's television program, "Winchell-Mahoney Time", Metromedia management, under orders from Kluge, destroyed the video tapes. Winchell was later awarded nearly $18 million as compensation for Metromedia's capricious behavior.
Following the Fox disposal, Kluge's activities had been carried out through a private venture named Metromedia Company in which he was a partner with Stuart Subotnick.
Lucian, as a funny sidenote, I too got a call from a booker :) at CBS. Would I be interested in appearing in a skit on The Late Late show. By way of explanation, after my second retirement at 79 I started doing extra work on TV and in the movies which led to a little acting gig now and then, Now aat 90 I just stay home, but it was fun,
Anyway the director on this particular skit had recommended me as n they needed one more old man (I had worked on one of his previous College Humor projects "If you're 20 Something Stop Saying You're Old" ) This is the link to the Late Late Show bit: (I play Milton) https://youtu.be/e6eDFf-ezXU
Damn! You are a hero to all of us on this site. Thank you!
Wow! That is a blast from the past. I had forgotten about Hannity and Colmes. I watched it sometimes and was always disgusted by Hannity. He was a lying bully and still is. Poor Colmes could hardly get a word in. And proof that some things never change but they do get worse is the email the bully was waving around with supposed information about you. So it was an email from some self proclaimed wackadoodle that the queen of wackadoodle, Sydney Powell, gave to Maria Bartiromo, who maybe at some time in her life was not wackadoodle but certainly is now, that “proved” the dominion voting machines were rigged by someone in Spain, or was it Italy....you just can’t trust anybody. They were rigged so that Trumps votes would automatically be switched to Biden. Of course this woman had reliable resources. She just listened to the wind and it told her everything. Right....but Maria sucked it up and spouted it off on her show along with her pal Sydney Powell. It seems I’ve gone off on a tangent Lucian, but your description of the bully waving around the email reminded me of this. But this time there will be no apology. They have sunk too low in that Fox hole for that.
You have the best real-life stories. Seriously ;-))
I used to watch that show ... Colmes didn't last to long around there ... I always thought hannity colmes was knock off of the pbs show with pat Buchanan and various liberals such as Kinsley ... I think pbs was better at it
FNC selected Colmes to become the rightwing's posterchild of how a lib looks as well as thinks. If FNC was genuinely interested in 2-siding things, they woulda replaced Colmes w/Lucian and the ratings woulda soared. Hannity after 2 consecutive shows? Simply sore and soiled.
Maybe he was an idiot I don't know he was setup to fail... Shocked to find that show lasted about 13 years... Apparently fix news is always in need of filler lol
In the early ‘90s, Hannity was working at WGST in Atlanta, in harness with raving right-wing goobers like “The Kimmer.” The station set up a meet and greet at Manuel’s Tavern, a bar favored by reporters, writers and cops, run by the feisty, hardcore liberal, Manuel Maloof.
In ten minutes, I’d pegged Hannity as a loudmouth suburban punk, like so many of the Young Americans For Freedom types I’d come across. Dorks who sat brooding in the back of class and couldn’t get laid to save their lives In twelve minutes, Hannity was shouting that Pres. Bill Clinton was a “scumbag,” in Brooklyn, as you know, a used condom.
I raised my hand and we got into a furious exchange. Next day, I’m driving my 8-year-old son to school, and here’s Hannity calling me a “scumbag” on the radio and distorting our clash.
I was a well-known reporter in Atlanta, but hardly a public figure. I called the station manager to remind him of this and that I planned to sue the station for slander—unless Hannity issued a public apology. Sure enough, punk that he is, he did.
+100, great storytell
How could you sit there and resist the urge to throttle the SOBs. You are a far better man than me, IV,
That's why the guests are remote!