Online journalists can learn from Walter Cronkite
When I was first hired as CBS News technology analyst in 1999, I remember thinking what an honor it is to be working for the news organization that Walter Cronkite helped build. CBS, and indeed, the entire media landscape, have gone through big changes since Cronkite retired in 1981, but the basic principals he brought to news coverage remain intact. Journalists--and I include bloggers as well--need to be honest and accurate and--whenever possible--serve as an eye witness to unfolding events. New media journalists have a lot to learn from Cronkite.
I've heard it said over and over that today's journalists and bloggers are working in a more tightly compressed time environment thanks to modern technology. But the Internet and cable TV didn't invent the need for the immediate recitation of the news.
Cronkite was on the air live during many of our most important events. He certainly didn't have time to sit back and analyze the significance of the JFK assassination as he brought the tragic news of the president's death--as it unfolded--into America's living rooms. His ring-side coverage of the space program was often real-time. When former President Lyndon Johnson died in 1973, Cronkite was on the phone and on the air at the same time, reporting the news as it was being told to him by Johnson's press secretary. It can't get more real time than that.
Point of view
Cronkite was first a reporter who, for the most part, didn't opine about the news. But that doesn't mean that he had no point of view. During World War II, he was a staunch supporter of the Allied cause. As NASA officials and former astronauts have reported, he didn't just cover the space program, he was its champion. The day Neil Armstrong stepped on moon, his exclamation, "oh boy" summed up his pride and excitement. And there was deep--and appropriate--emotion as he told the nation of the President Kennedy's death.
In almost all situations, Cronkite reported the news without expressing his opinion, but he wasn't afraid to interpret what he learned from his 1968 reporting trip to Vietnam. After he returned to New York, he proclaimed the war unwinnable, telling the nation--and the president--"it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could." As Bob Schieffer pointed out on Face the Nation, one difference between Cronkite's 1968 proclamation and much of today's opinion journalism is that Cronkite witnessed the war first hand, "he took the time to go and find out for himself before he took that position."
Lessons for creators and consumers of online news
So, what does Cronkite's career mean for new media journalists? It means that we still have the responsibility to base what we say on facts. And even those of us who are expected to give opinions and analysis have something to learn from "the most trusted man in America." It's OK for commentators, bloggers and talk-show hosts to express an opinion, but it's not OK to base it on speculation and innuendo or to be unfair or demeaning of those you cover, even if you disagree with them. Cronkite might have practiced his career in the 20th century, but what he stood for as a journalist still stands.
Today's media environment also puts more responsibility on those who consume the news. In an era when the media goes way beyond those three trusted networks and local papers, it's up to everyone to be just a bit more critical of what they read, hear and see. Consider the source and weigh the facts. We no longer have Walter to assure us, "That's the way it is."
Larry Magid is a technology journalist and an Internet safety advocate. He's been writing and speaking about Internet safety since he wrote Internet safety guide "Child Safety on the Information Highway" in 1994. He is co-director of ConnectSafely.org, founder of SafeKids.com and SafeTeens.com, and a board member of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. Larry's technology analysis and commentary can be heard on CBS News and CBS affiliates, and read on CBSNews.com. He also writes a personal-tech column for the San Jose Mercury News. You can e-mail Larry or follow him on Twitter @larrymagid. 
"online" and now most "on air" jounalists first need to learn if they are "entertainers" or "journalists"...many believe Jon Stewart is "both", but he keeps telling us hes an "entertainer" and Cronkite "was" the Journalist.:)
What is the Cnet blogged News.com? what is Current.TV..? What is the Huffington Report? or DMV.?
Time = Money--- money =Time.. The question "new journalism" has to answer is what is the VALUE of "bad news" .... news that doesnt make one feel like they have been entertained to a smile and rewarded with a cookie;)
Fox News should read this.
not entertaining enough;)
But be careful how you admonish people to follow in his footsteps. Human beings have an almost unlimited capacity to rationalize almost anything. When one person says the "truth" is "X", another person will passionately claim the "truth" is "Y". The devil is in the details. For example, most of today's "embedded" reporters surely will like to claim that "they were there" - while neatly ignoring the fact that what they saw was a carefully-crafted slice that is designed to weight their impressions.
I think Larry touched upon it when he pointed out that a reporter needs to have respect for all people, even those one disagrees with. But it's much more than that. One needs to be guided by critical thinking, by rationality and calm reflection - rather than ideology. If a person is incapable of ever admitting that they were wrong about something, then they are probably incapable of critical thinking. Because a true gentle(wo)man and scholar will live by the maxim: "The more I know, the more I know how little I know".
Only when you can reach that state of grace, are you even able to talk about "objectivity".
You were the last decent journalist, the last one I really respected. That was a long time ago, sadly.
The problem with many of the current digerati is they have no idea what journalistic ethics are. This was the state of journalism in the 1920s. As a result, there was such a backlash that journalists in the 1950s were obsessed with "objectivity." What that lead to was that they never interpreted (explained) anything. Something Cronkite was a master at in a (truly) fair and balanced way.
So what was the result of this backlash? Sen. McCarthy was able to take papers from his trash can and put them in his briefcase and wave them at his HUAC committee meetings saying he had proof of communists in the administration. Journalists were so afraid to be thought of as not objective that they would not call him a liar by challenging his nonsense. That was until Edward R. Murrow had had enough, took McCarthy on and beat him.
Murrow recruited Cronkite from the United Press (I worked for them while was in in journalism school) to work at CBS. That was the way it was.
I wish I was still getting only 30 minutes of news per day. You must get all of your main points out there in a confined amount of time. A typical Cronkite show would have focused on Michael Jackson for three to five minutes - and that's all! Today's news is treated much like Microsoft and its programmers treat cheap RAM and hard disk space - nothing but bloated, poorly written content, and their focus on entirely the wrong things. I liked it when Headline News (HLN) had its 30-minute shows. And now even that's gone. I truly believe that not only are we swamped with too much information.
What cable TV is doing today is not only filling us up with too much crap, but the crap is delivered in a strategic matter where it is designed to actually further divide all of us. For example, a 16-year old girl wasn't the 2nd youngest to cross the U.S. in an airplane solo - she was the youngest black girl to pull it off. See what I mean? Today's TV news just takes something that is clear cut, and re-word it and re-package it so that it fits a demographic. The major network TV news programs didn't do this until CNN came along in 1979. And now even the likes of CBS, ABC and NBC each have their own slant on everything. Blogging hides behind the fact that they're opinions and not news. And, even Twitter makes this 100-times worse because now people are only following other people and news sources that fit their own ideologies.
The people are only getting divided even more. The Internet and its contributions to news is only making matters worse.
- by evilbughead July 20, 2009 9:54 AM PDT
- Nothing to learn from this Mocking Bird Asset. Walter may he rot in hell Cronkite was a Government Shill who embraced Eugenics and Global Governance ( read: World Slavery).
- Reply to this comment
-
(9 Comments)