Barbara Walters

 

Barbara Walters is a retired American broadcast journalist, television personality and author.  Walters has appeared on many television programs including but not limited to, Today, The View, ABC Evening News and 20/20.

Walters has interviewed the likes of Fidel Castro, Margaret Thatcher, Vladimir Putin, Indira Gandhi and the Shah of Iran to name of a few.   

Walters attended Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, NY, and graduated in 1951.  She briefly worked at an advertising agency, then became an assistant to the publicity director for NYC's affiliated TV station.  Shortly after, she was hired as a news and public affairs producer and writer by the CBS TV network.  

And in 1961, she became a writer for the popular NBC morning show 'Today' where on occasion she would do on-air feature stories.

Walters was the first female co-host of a major evening news and the first female morning co-host.  She was a skilled interviewer asking questions that drew out the personality of the interviewee and garnered the emotional responses from guests that spectators enjoy because it makes it real and authentic.

When people think of examples of journalists that do the job right, she is on the tip of their tongue and at the forefront of their mind.  And not only does she do her job well, but she's done it for so long.

Walters has an autobiography titled "Audition" (2008).  She named it that because she felt like she had to prove herself over and over again.  

Barbara Walters truly set the tone and set an example for female journalists to follow but also for all journalist to follow, regardless of gender.

Bernard Shaw

Bernard Shaw was born on May 22, 1940, in Chicago, IL.  His parents were Edgar Shaw and Camilla Shaw, formerly Murphy.  Shaw's mother, Camilla, was a house-keeper and his father, Edgar, was a railroad man and house-painter.

Shaw is a retired American journalist and former lead anchor for the Cable News Network (CNN) from 1980 to March 2001 when he retired at age 60.  Before joining CNN, Shaw worked for two of the three national television networks, CBS and ABC. In Shaw's storied career, he has covered some of modern history's most dramatic events.  Such events include China's Tiananmen Square student massacre, Nicaraguan Revolution, Watergate, the 1978 Jonestown mass suicide and American involvement in the Persian Gulf War. Shaw is widely regarded as the nation's most powerful black television journalist.  He retired from CNN in 2001 in order to pursue his interest in writing.

Shaw attended the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle and had memberships in the National Press Club and the fraternity Sigma Delta Chi.

While Shaw had a memorable career, he is mostly remembered for a few select moments.  One moment being in the second Presidential debate with George H.W. Bush in 1988.  Shaw knew that the Democratic U.S. presidential candidate, Michael Dukakis, opposed the death penalty so Shaw asked him a question.  

Shaw asked him, "Governor if Kitty Dukakis (Michael Dukakis' wife) were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"

To this question Dukakis responded, "No I don't Bernard and I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life.  I don't see any evidence that it's the deterrent, and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime."

Many people felt different ways about the situation.  Some people felt Dukakis answered the question too logically and robot-like and maybe wasn't emotive enough in his response.  Dukakis never really addressed or referenced the fact that his wife was used in the example.  Others felt that Shaw's question was inappropriate and not unjustified.

Although Shaw initially expressed doubts about the probability of war between the United States and Iraq, four months later he admitted that his prediction was purely bred from a place of hope. 

In January of 1991, Shaw was in Baghdad to interview Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein when things took a turn. Just one day after the cancelled interview, Shaw found himself stranded, along with CNN colleagues, Peter Arnett and John Holliman, in the enemy capital as the bombing attack launched the Gulf War. Shaw was one of the first reporters to announce to the world that the United States and its allies had gone to war, and CNN went on to provide continuous coverage for the conflict's duration. Even after every major newspaper had pulled out, after the Big Three's phone lines were cut, and after CNN lost its picture transmission, the network was able to make live reports from Baghdad via its secure phone line.

While the sounds of screaming, gunfire and air-raid warnings filled the air, the CNN trio crawled around the floor of their hotel room and delivered some of the most captivating audio reporting.

"By the time we stopped broadcasting to get some sleep," Shaw said, "I was so tired I was making no sense whatsoever. I was no sooner in bed and asleep when the bombing started again, and I stumbled down the hall in my pajamas to the suite where we broadcast and went back to work." 

Shaw was known as stoic and rather emotionless, but this experience flustered the normally composed Shaw, as it would most people. He announced: "Clearly I've never been there, but it feels like we are in the center of hell."

Shaw's reporting was so impressive that it garnered the following response.  

"We've been training for this story 24 hours a day for ten years," CNN's executive vice-president Ed Turner (no relation to Ted Turner) told the Chicago Tribune. Live wartime coverage from the center of enemy camp is unprecedented.

When Shaw returned he had a lot to say, "I came back from Baghdad a changed man," he told the Los Angeles Times. "I looked death in the eyes. No human gets many chances to do that twice."

On March 30, 1974, Bernard Shaw married Linda Allston.  Shaw and Allston had two children: Amar Edgar Shaw and Anil Louise Shaw.

Shaw retired from CNN at age 60 after over 20 years at the job.  His last newscast was February 28, 2001.  

Shaw said, "Harder than getting into this business is leaving it."

good night and good luck: Movie Review

Good Night and Good Luck takes place in the 1950s and was directed by George Clooney, who also acted in the film.

In the movie, CBS reporter Edward R. Murrow and his producer Fred W. Friendly decided to go against Senator McCarthy and expose him for weaponizing the fear of the people for his own gain. 

Throughout the movie, Murrow and others had to report are emotionally-charged stories, yet remove their feelings and do their best to just present the facts and report the truth.  Murrow and Friendly did journalism the right way, telling the truth and staying away from fabricated and or hyperbolized stories.

Bringing down one of the most controversial senators in the history of the United States government, this film shows the relationship between the government and the press that was present in the 1950's and still is in society today. 

The dilemma that the CBS news team faced was whether or not they wanted to do what was right for the country, and what their job description morally described, or if they wanted to remain silent to ensure the safety of themselves and their reputation. 

There were unfair trials regarding communism and one of those cases was centered around Milo Radulovich.  Radulovich was a big part of the movie.  Murrow and others believed that Radulovich was being persecuted and punished  for the true actions of Senator McCarthy.  Many workers at CBS fought against reporting on this case because of their fear of ruining their reputations or being hunted by Senator McCarthy.  Anyone that criticized the government could be looked at as a communist-sympathizer so they wanted to produced content that was very specific and stay away from topics that could hurt them in the long run.

The movie takes place Red Scare era.  The Red Scare was a frenzy about the perceived threat that Communists in the United States posed during the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the U.S.  The conflict intensified in the late 1940s and early 1950s.

While many within CBS were scared to report properly, Murrow and others did not let their fear and apprehension get in the way of them doing their jobs as journalists. They pushed through all the fear and hesitation that they were confronted with and did the job that signed up for.  They fulfilled their journalistic responsibility of informing the American people of what they had the right to be informed about the consequences be damned, despite the higher-ups not wanting them to do so.

Murrow and others that stood up for what they believed in, put their careers on the line, and quite possibly their lives.

The number one duty of the journalist is the pursuit of truth.  Sometimes it may be difficult but as long as journalists focus on that directive, they are on the right path.

The Chilling Effect

The chilling effect is a concept that can be used as tool to control a person or group of people.  The Chilling Effect refers to the limitation of expression that a group or individual feels that they have due to the fear of violating the law.  It doesn't just affect journalists, but it is designed to restrict free speech and expression, among other things, so it's inevitable that journalists would have repeated run-ins with the concept.

One of the many times the chilling effect has been used was against Australian journalist Julian Assange.  Assange founded WikiLeaks, an international non-profit organization that publishes news leaks and classified media provided by anonymous sources.  Assange wanted to spread the truth while protecting whistleblowers.  

In the early 2010s, documents regarding the war in Iraq and Afghanistan were released via WikiLeaks.  The classified documents showed the truth about United States and the truth wasn't so flattering.

Assange action angered the United States.  They did everything in their power to ruin, silence and possibly kill Assange without making their goal clear to the majority of the American  public.  They had a goal and they didn't care how long it would take.  To this day, the United States still wants Assange brought back.  

The government created allegations against Assange accusing him of sexual assault.  The timing of the accusations were random and seemed like a clear attempt to ruin Assange. 

In 2010, Assange was arrested in London and held without bail until 2011.  Then he was ordered to be extradited to Sweden.

He appealed to the Supreme Court in England but his appeal was denied.  In 2012, he fled to Ecuador to evade several different governments in varying countries.  In 2015, the sexual assault allegations got dropped.  Assange hid from different governments for years until a change in Ecuadorian government caused Assange's asylum to be taken from him in 2019.  Assange was taken to England in a maximum security prison with terrible conditions.

The main job of a journalist is to tell the truth.  The second job and is almost just as important as the primary responsibility is to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.  Essentially, journalists are called to hold the powerful (comfortable) accountable for whatever actions they may take: government officials, politicians, etc., while also looking out for the "little guy" andcomforting the afflicted, the afflicted being anyone not with great power.  The problem journalists like Assange face is that the comfortable often enjoy their comfort and some even think they are above the law.  And those people do not want journalists like Assange holding them accountable and making sure they are held to a standard.

The chilling effect is the government's way of forcing/coercing journalists into silence before they can expose secrets uncovered in their own investigations.  The one that sticks out the most to me being that of Julian Assange.

Anonymous Sources

In journalism, a source can be a person, persons a or publication with knowledge on a topic.

An anonymous source is no really no different than the average source. The only fundamental different is that the anonymous source chooses to remain anonymous.  An anonymous source is a person being interviewed for a newspaper or other piece but does not want to give their name out.

Having anonymous sources is “an easy way out.”  Utilizing anonymous sources can work two ways.  Sources can take advantage of reporters by remaining anonymous.  Anonymous sources can use reporters to push any agenda they see fit.  Also, if reporters get called out on their sources, they have some sort of excuse they can use. 

However, when the average person hears "anonymous source," they automatically shut down and immediately second guess whatever is being said.  Why believe a source that is unwilling to identify themselves?  Obviously, there are extreme circumstances where a source may choose to remain anonymous for fear of their life.  But generally speaking, it definitely strengthens public perception of a source if the public can put a face and name to the source.

The most famous anonymous source was known as "Deep Throat."  Deep Throat's real name was Mark Felt.  Felt was American law enforcement officer who worked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 1942 to 1973.  He was a FBI special agent who eventually rose to the position of Associate Director, the Bureau's second-highest-ranking post.  Deep Throat helped reporters Bob Woodard and Carl Bernstein uncover the Watergate scandal by feeding them information.  Felt's involvement led to 

In May 2005 an ailing Felt announced in a Vanity Fair article, “I’m the guy they used to call Deep Throat.” 

Judith Miller is an American journalist who went to jail for 85 days to protect her an anonymous source of hers and many journalists praised her for it.  She went to jail July 6, 2005 and on September 29 of the same year, she was released after agreeing to testify in the investigation into the leaking of cover CIA officer Valerie Plame. 

To this day, Miller denies the accusations that the President George W. Bush administration fabricated weapons on mass destruction (WAD) intelligence to take the country to war.

Judith Miller’s reporting essentially started a war in Iraq and resulting in the death of over 300,000 people.  Her anonymous sources were likely CIA agents.  

Today, she is spewing rhetoric of wanting, demanding that the U.S. get involved in the Russia-Ukraine dispute.  

Generally it is frowned upon in journalism to use anonymous sources.  If  a journalist can name their source, they should.  However, there are situations that allow for the usage of anonymous sources.

Journalists use four main rules for when to use anonymous sources. The first rule is that an editor must also know the source. An editor knowing the source create a filter preventing lies from being spread. The second rule is that the story must be important. To use an anonymous source, the story must be so interesting and important that the source has to be anonymous. The third rule is that anonymity should be a last resort and worst case scenario. Using an anonymous source can cause a lot of distrust and makes the source less credible, using other sources is a better option. The last rule is that when using an anonymous source, the reason for anonymity must be explained in the story. Giving context as to why that person was kept anonymous helps create more credibility. If the journalist is using an anonymous source, which is frowned upon, and then doesn't explain why, who will believe the source?

 People like Judith Miller should be used as an example of the danger of anonymous sources paired with poor reporting.

The North Star

Frederick Douglass is one of the most well-known abolitionists in American history. Douglass himself escaped slavery and used his freedom to help free slaves and bring an end to slavery altogether. Douglass helped end slavery utilizing his newspaper, “The North Star.” Douglass was able to find the money to start the newspaper by going on tour in Britain. He started the newspaper in Rochester, NY, one of the last stops in the underground railroad before Canada. The name “The North Star” comes from the star Polaris, which is what slaves followed to escape slavery.

The newspaper was able to help give freedom to the slaves and to help start abolitionist movements. The North Star was read by more than 4,000 readers in America and many other countries. One of the first editions stated, "To millions, now in our boasted land of liberty, it is the STAR OF HOPE." Douglass stresses the fact that the country was built on the idea of liberty and that this newspaper helps bring liberty to the slaves. 

The North Star soon merged with The Liberty Party Paper to form “The Frederick Douglass’ Paper.” In the first edition, it stated, “Much joy is expressed that you have settled down upon the anti-slavery interpretation of the federal Constitution." They had very different views than the anti-slavery paper, The Liberator, and different views than the anti-slavery public. “The Frederick Douglass’ Paper” actually accepted the constitution to support anti-slavery while “The Liberator” and the “Anti-Slavery Society” did not. Douglass started this paper as a weekly paper but it turned into a monthly paper during the Civil War. During that time, Douglass used the paper to help gain the acceptance of black troops and to help recruit people for the war.

Frederick Douglass soon stepped back from “The Frederick Douglass’ Paper” and became editor and renamed a paper “The New National Era.” This paper gave Douglass the platform to criticize the Ku Klux Klan. The paper also focused on topics such as reconstruction, Republican politics, and it addressed issues within the black communities. Douglass soon bought the company to help the paper keep going and gave the company to his two sons to carry it on. 
While Frederick Douglass was living in Washington, D.C., his house burned down and it was in this fire that all of the family members survived, but a lot of Fredericks's belongings were destroyed. 16 volumes of The North Star was lost as well.

Collateral Murder

On July 12, 2007, the U.S carried out a series of air-to-ground attacks conducted by a team of two U.S. AH-64 Apache helicopters in Al-Amin al-Thaniyah, New Baghdad during the Iraqi insurgency.

But why?  

Since high school,  I've known the U.S. was not sinless.  However, I was unaware of just exactly how shameless the U.S. government and military are.  The fact that things like this occur in the United States is saddening, and I say that as a United States citizen.  I often question how Americans can say they're American proudly when our country carries out heinous attacks like this one. 

Thanks to Wikileaks and Julian Assange I know about this and others do too.  Regardless, the lives of the people were taken in vain.  I'm sure most Americans are ignorant to events like this.  But this is exactly why other countries don't view the United States in the most flattering of ways. 

In the video at around 9:37, American soldiers are heard saying, “Come on, let us shoot.”

It was startling and scary to see soldiers so desensitized to murder that it’s almost like they’re playing a video game.  

And let’s be honest, it was an execution. 

Innocent lives were lost.  Were taken.

Thanks to Julian Assange and the organization that he founded in 2006, WikiLeaks, people were able to get a detailed look of what the soldiers who killed Saeed Chmagh, Namir Noor-Eldeen and others.  While Assange was not the whistleblower who initially leaked the information, he is the one who posted the information to WikiLeaks.    

The U.S. has been trying to extradite him.  Why?

The first duty of a journalist is the pursuit of the truth.  And that's exactly what Julian Assange did.  The U.S. should punish him for doing his job.  U.S. citizens and the world deserved to know what the United States military did in the country of Iraq.

I knew the U.S had blood on its hands in general, but I did not know that the U.S. committed so many heinous war crimes.  And for what?  

Things like President George W. Bush lying about weapons of mass destruction (WAD) in Iraq, leading to the death of 300,000 Iraqi civilians.

A complete disregard for human life.

And the U.S. gets away with things like that because of how powerful it is as a country. 

The Geneva Conventions, Article 35 states: 

"Unlike under Article 17 of the 1929 Geneva Convention on the Wounded and Sick, medical transports are covered by Article 35 even when they have not been specifically 'equipped' for that purpose.  Indeed, as the operational situation and casualty evacuation needs may require the use of any available transport asset for medical purposes, a restrictive definition of a medical transport would be contrary to the purpose of the article and to the overall humanitarian objectives of the Convention.  Only medical transports specifically protected by other treaty provisions are excluded from the scope of Article 35."

Essentially, this was a war crime.  One of many that the U.S. has committed.

Today, Julian Assange's health is declining.  He is currently in a prison in Britain where over 60 doctors believe he could die.  

The soldiers involved should have been held accountable because, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”