ot: rip jim lehrer

[Red Tornado]

Agree with most of the sentiment on this thread. Classy guy and a true journalist.

Many of today's "journalists", both left and right leaning, could learn a lot from this man.

[redir]

That's too bad. I always liked him. He's one of the last straight shooters out there. Most of the talking heads today are too emotional and that goes for both sides.

[weisan]

Jim was a gentleman first before he became a newsman. And no, the order cannot be swapped.

[DCilliams]

The irony there is that "bothsiderism" is one of the reasons journalism today, particularly from the big fish, often obscures rather than clarifies.

[verbs4us]

Jim was from an era when it mattered that you didn't know, couldn't know, what the journalist's point of view was. You didn't know who Cronkite voted for and that was the point--it didn't matter. Reporting dispassionately and correctly mattered. Today I cringe when the headline reads "See Anderson Cooper respond to X." Not do I not care how Anderson Cooper responds, that's not news. When reporters became "news," instead of reported news, that signaled a new level of decay.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by verbs4us

Jim was from an era when it mattered that you didn't know, couldn't know, what the journalist's point of view was. You didn't know who Cronkite voted for and that was the point--it didn't matter.

I don't think that was ever completely the case. Taking your example of Cronkite - in the mid-1960's, the average middle American was not against the war in Vietnam. A key factor for the changing of the minds of Americans was when Cronkite (often called the most trusted man in America) opined on his national new show in 1968 that there was no point to the war, and that we should find a way out of it.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=106775685

[mbrtool]

Mark, I apologize for not knowing how to quote what you posted. Yes in the mid-sixties, '64/'66 most of the people I knew trusted LBJ in ramping up the number of our soldiers to fight. By '68 there was a steady decline in support of the war among the people I knew who were either upper lower class or lower middle class. Cronkite's assessment in '68 was just an affirmation of what the people I knew already knew.

Ray

[redir]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

I don't think that was ever completely the case. Taking your example of Cronkite - in the mid-1960's, the average middle American was not against the war in Vietnam. A key factor for the changing of the minds of Americans was when Cronkite (often called the most trusted man in America) opined on his national new show in 1968 that there was no point to the war, and that we should find a way out of it.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=106775685

That he flipped the American view on the entire Vietnam War that's pretty incredible. I think instead he was tapping into the nations sentiment over all. I was not alive back then so I cannot claim from experience but that would be pretty incredible if true.

It says a lot about us today too. I mean, if Walter could flip the nation then that means the nation actually trusted him. Not sure that's a good thing but today there is no trust in experts, the media, science, and so on and that is worse.

[Mark McM]

Well, a lot of commentators have written about the importance of Cronkite's words on American opinion of the Vietnam war, so it wasn't nothing.

In any case, the point was that even during the Golden Age of television news reporting, sometimes the best news men made the story about their own thoughts and opinions, when they thought it appropriate.

[thwart]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Well, a lot of commentators have written about the importance of Cronkite's words on American opinion of the Vietnam war, so it wasn't nothing.

In any case, the point was that even during the Golden Age of television news reporting, sometimes the best news men made the story about their own thoughts and opinions, when they thought it appropriate.

Although back then this was a very rare occurrence. Cronkite’s statement therefore had much more weight.

Did he change America’s opinion... ? Don’t think so but he made it okay for those ‘in middle America’ to voice their own doubts about our course there.

[redir]

Yeah it's impossible for anyone to be truly non-bias and people are very good at picking up on it too. It's that form of speech that uses no words like body language and so on. But today, and I am going to be fair here, with news casters like Maddow and Carlson they don't even try to hide it.

[54ny77]

Lehrer was a class act.

Bygone era.

RIP.

Speaking of Cronkite....met him one night very briefly at 21 Club in NYC many years ago (a handful of years before he passed). I was leaving and walked by him and his wife sitting down having dinner, and while largely out of protocol, I just had to offer a greeting and appreciation for his work over many years, apologizing for the interruption. It was for sure a once in a lifetime moment.

Instead of being dismissive, both he and his wife were so gracious and charming, thanking me for the kind words. Who knows, maybe they weren't used to seeing that from a younger generation (I was in my 20's). Have never forgotten that moment, it was pretty darned cool.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by redir

Yeah it's impossible for anyone to be truly non-bias and people are very good at picking up on it too. It's that form of speech that uses no words like body language and so on. But today, and I am going to be fair here, with news casters like Maddow and Carlson they don't even try to hide it.

Folks make the mistake of confusing people like them with news people. They’re not. They’re Op/Ed entertainers.