Ted Koppel and journalists examine media coverage of foreign affairs
A return to the kind of civic-minded style of reporting pioneered by legendary CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow is unlikely given the technological advancements and financial restraints of a fragmented industry, according to a panel of distinguished journalists moderated by Ted Koppel.
Distinguished representatives from many sides of the world of journalism – print, broadcast and academia – spoke to a standing-room only crowd at The Fletcher School’s ASEAN Auditorium Monday afternoon. The event, entitled “What Would Murrow See Now? The U.S. Press and the World,” discussed such topics as the impact of patriotism in newsrooms after 9/11 and in the lead-up to the war in Iraq and the problems of making foreign reporting appealing to viewers.
“Murrow has had a huge influence on my life,” said Koppel, 66, who recalled listening to Murrow’s radio broadcasts from London when he lived in England during World War II.
But journalism has changed in the decades since then, the panelists agreed.
Instead of covering the kinds of stories that are important, Koppel said, “We are covering stories on what your pets do when you’re not there to see them.”
He cited the financial success of 60 Minutes, which premiered in 1968, as being a catalyst for the downward spiral of quality journalism because networks began expecting to profit from the news – hitherto a rare occurrence.
“Part of my job…was to make money and achieve growth,” said panelist Neal Shapiro, former president of NBC News, and a Tufts alumnus. But he objected to any suggestion that major decisions on covering the news were ever made at the corporate level.
During an extensive Q&A session with the audience, panelists offered their critiques on contemporary journalism and its lackluster analysis during the months prior to the Iraq conflict.
Crocker Snowe Jr., a veteran foreign-affairs journalist and director of The Fletcher School’s Murrow Center, said, “I don’t think that being patriotic is the role journalists should play.”
His sentiments were shared by all the speakers.
“I don’t think the lead up to the war was journalism’s finest hour,” said Keith Richburg, foreign editor for The Washington Post. Instead, he described it as the “lousiest hour.”
Richburg, a former correspondent in Africa, stressed the need to have foreign bureaus instead of parachuting in journalists to cover events about which they know little.
“There is no substitute for being there on the ground in the community” before a big story breaks. As an example, he said correspondents in Nairobi were an “early-warning system” for the humanitarian crisis in Darfur.
Koppel illustrated the evolution of technology in the business with an example from his storied career in broadcast news. He said that as a reporter during the Vietnam War, it would often take 2 ½ days for his filmed accounts to find their way into the TV sets of American households. As an imbedded reporter in the Iraq war, Koppel said, the lag time was a mere 2 ½ seconds.
He noted one mark of technological advancements is the proliferation of the 24-hour news cycle and cable news networks. “They are in this endless rush to be the first with the obvious,” Koppel said.
For first-year MALD student Michael Wagner, his greatest concern is that many consumers of the news “expect that they’re getting the truth.”
“I think I’m getting a part of [the truth], and that’s my fear – it’s not the whole truth,” said Wagner, who served with the U.S. Army in Iraq.
Panelist Louise Lief, deputy director of the International Reporting Project at Johns Hopkins University, said the best way to effectively educate American audiences is to “look for the truth and tell the truth.”
In order to do so, she said, “You need the resources and people who will take risks.”
The discussion was co-sponsored by the Communications and Media Studies Program at Tufts University, the Murrow Center at Fletcher, and the University College of Citizenship and Public Service.