Sie sind auf Seite 1von 14

Wires and Lights in a Box: How Edward R.

Murrow Invented Broadcast Journalism

Steven Chen
Sally Cloninger
Ready Camera 1
The Evergreen State College
13 November, 2009

Chen 1
Public service broadcasting and minority interest programming was not an idea that was

new to early television. Even in radio, the large networks were morally obligated to include a

certain amount of “public service” programs in their schedule. This encompassed programming

on religious, educational and newsworthy subjects. Because of their assumed inability to bring in

profits through advertising, they were considered “sustaining programs” and were not granted

ideal time slots on the air. Edward Murrow was one of the only people who understood the

principle of public service programming. “Investment bankers run the networks. To them, they

own CBS or NBC or ABC as they might own a lumber company or as they might own a mining

company or as if they own an automobile company. They don’t think they owe anything back.

Ed thought they owed a lot,” said Fred Friendly, Murrow’s co-producer for See it Now (This

Reporter – DVD). Because it was not intended to be watched for its entertainment value but as

an informative program for the people, Murrow felt dedicated to showing and producing the

truth for his audiences. He was so committed to upholding these public service standards, in fact,

that he sometimes risked his career and even his life.

Edward R. Murrow was hired in 1935 as the director of talks and education for CBS. In

1937, Murrow moved to London to become the chief, and only employee, of European

operations (This Reporter). At the annexation of Austria in 1938, Murrow’s career took a sharp

turn. He traveled to Vienna trying to expand his one-man team by recruiting a journalist to cover

the Anschluss, which turned out to be much more difficult than he had anticipated (This

Reporter). He recruited William Shirer, but ended up having to send him to London (Sperber

103). “From then on I started broadcasting myself,” Murrow said, “not because I had any ability

at it, but because all the reporters were so busy we couldn’t get them to stop doing their own

jobs” (This Reporter). History had been made. Murrow’s broadcast from Vienna was joined by
Chen 2
Shirer in London, and several other reports from Paris, Berlin, Rome, and New York (Murrow

20). This was the first time that a news program made up of short reports from around the world

had ever been broadcast to the American public (Murrow 20). “This…is London” was being

heard more and more frequently as Murrow headed back to London and began reporting

regularly. Right from the beginning, Murrow’s words, and almost more importantly his pauses,

were instantly powerful. “They came over shortly after blackout time,” said Murrow during one

of his broadcasts, “and at a veritable show of flares and incendiaries. One of those nights where

you wear your best clothes, because you’re never sure that when you come back home you’ll

have anything than the clothes you were wearing” (Bernstein). Ed Murrow was fearless

(Edwards 155). During the Blitzkrieg, Murrow stayed in London despite the obvious danger.

One night, Murrow suggested to his wife, Janet, that they stop in at a nearby pub. She was too

tired so they went home instead. Several minutes later, the pub was destroyed and everyone

inside was killed (Bernstein). Murrow reported from the rooftops, describing the bombings in his

reports. He even flew along in a bomber on a mission to bomb Berlin (This Reporter). “I never

forgot that Murrow did all of this because he wanted me and my family, and all of us back home

in America to know …the truth,” Dan Rather said, “for that, for our knowledge of the truth, he

risked his life” (Rather). Even though Murrow knew he could be killed at any moment, he chose

to stay in London and continue to report the news to the American people.

Murrow’s own ethics are what made his reporting stand out (Godfrey 104). He believed

that “to be persuasive, we must be believable. To be believable, we must be credible. To be

credible, we must be truthful” (Kendrick 466). His dedication to these modest values are what

helped to keep Murrow trusted and respected by his listeners and viewers. He tried to break the

tradition of bringing the story to the audience and instead transported them into the story itself

Chen 3
(Bernstein). “You burned the city of London in our houses and we felt the flames that burned it,”

said poet and librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish of Murrow, “you laid the dead of

London at our doors and we knew the dead were our dead – were all men’s dead […] you

destroyed the superstition of distance and of time” (Persico 191-2). Murrow had made himself

welcome in every American’s home.

Now that the war was over, Murrow teamed up with his new partner, Fred Friendly, to

produce three albums entitled I Can Hear it Now (Kendrick 316). The albums were an “aural

history” which documented recent events, such as FDR’s famous first inaugural address, Hitler,

and even some of Murrow’s own reports as they had been broadcast over the radio (Kendrick

316-7). The series was quite a success. The first installment alone sold more than 250,000 copies

(Kendrick 317). CBS decided to take the lucrative Murrow-Friendly news team and do a live

broadcast version of I Can Hear it Now in a program they shortened to Hear it Now (Sperber

352-3). Six months later, CBS proposed another program idea – this time on television.

Murrow was skeptical of the new medium. Like many other early critics, he felt that it

would never become as explosively popular as it did. In a speech Murrow gave to the Radio-

Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) in 1958, he said “this instrument can teach, it

can illuminate; yes it can even inspire. But it can only do so to the extent that humans are

determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is just wires and lights in a box” (Edwards 135).

He first proved his point seven years earlier, November 18, 1951, on the first broadcast of See it

Now. “This is an old team trying to learn a new trade” he started (The Best of See it Now –

DVD). Within minutes the show revolutionized broadcast journalism. Murrow had teams ready

in San Francisco with live images of the Golden Gate Bridge that he put on a split screen with

another team in New York shooting the Brooklyn Bridge, both panning around the skyline of

Chen 4
their respective cities at Murrow’s command (The Best of See it Now). Never before had both the

Atlantic and the Pacific oceans shared space on a live broadcast. The program went on to report

from London, Paris, and Korea which would almost equally transform the medium. (Sperber

355). Murrow sent the Korean reporting crew not only to document the usual daily events of the

war, but to go deeper, and took footage of the night they spent with Fox Company, 19th

Regiment, 14th Infantry Division (Sperber 355). “We wanted to see the faces [and] hear the

voices” Murrow said (Sperber 355). The program focused on the individual soldiers, allowing

them each to introduce themselves to the camera. They showed the everyday hardships of the

Company (The Best of See it Now). As his sign off, Murrow listed the names of casualties since

the filming and added “They may need some blood. Can you spare a pint?” (Sperber 355). In the

days following, the Red Cross reported hundreds of thousands of viewers showing up to donate

(Finkelstein 119).

At the beginning, See it Now’s main concern was informing the public and shied away

from many controversial topics (Finkelstein 121). It was televisions “first attempt to report on

political and social themes” (Finkelstein 117). Murrow accomplished this by focusing on the

“little people” and using them to make a bigger point. “He had a moral code rooted in populism

and justice, taking the side of the underdog” (Edwards 154). In one episode, Murrow focused on

the efforts of the townsfolk in Omaha, Nebraska who were working incredible hours to protect

their town from the flood waters of the Missouri River (Sperber 386). “Last night I came back

from a few days on the Missouri river. We have often maintained that this people is never so

great as when it has dirt on its hands. We came back with considerable respect and admiration

for the people who fought and beat the river” (This Reporter). Murrow loved to report on the

every-man because of his own humble roots, growing up in Eastern Washington (This Reporter).

Chen 5
Friendly described that Murrow “believed that this was a nation of little people […] He loved

little people who stood up against the crowd. And I think that’s the essence of what Ed, who

came from a very modest beginning; who had to fight for a place in the sun, believed in” (This

Reporter). Reporting on the “little people” would become a trend for See it Now.

Another broadcast that changed the course of broadcast journalism was in December of

1952. For this one-hour special, Murrow, four other correspondents, and five 35mm camera

crews (nicknamed “the thousand pound pencil”) travelled to Korea to cover the war (This

Reporter). The goal, Friendly described, was to shoot “a lot of little pictures and together those

mosaics, together, would make up the big picture of the war” (This Reporter). “This is Korea,

where a war is going on,” Murrow started. It then cut to a soldier trying to dig a hole and his

shovel bouncing off of the frozen ground. “There is a marine, digging a hole in the ground. They

dig an awful lot of holes in the ground in Korea” (This Reporter). Murrow followed with a report

from the sky, describing the landscape, and went on to interview men about their opinions on the

war. “We didn’t cover the war, we covered the soldier” said Mili Lerner Bonsignor, film editor

for See it Now (This Reporter). Murrow, Friendly, and their team shot 77,000 feet while in

Korea, which, for the final broadcast, had to be edited down to 6,000 feet (Finkelstein 119).

Murrow’s understanding that his newscasts were a public service, influenced the way he reported

the news. He was the first to cover a war on television, and he did it in the See it Now way, by

focusing on the triumphs of the average man.

Murrow and Friendly’s friendship grew stronger with each episode, as well as their

relationships with the rest of the team. However, Murrow was definitely leader of the pack.

“There are those who say that I sometimes put words in Ed’s mouth that he never said. I think

that’s probably true. I didn’t do it to be dishonest, I did it to get things done because I knew that

Chen 6
Murrow’s word was more powerful than mine,” said Friendly (This Reporter). His voice was so

strong that the shows would be powerful enough, even if he only did the narration (Wershba).

That isn’t to say that Murrow’s influence wasn’t evident in other aspects of production. “I

absorbed all of Ed’s values,” Friendly said, “every scrap of film I edited, I edited with his eyes.

Everything I wrote, I wrote with his fingers” (Finkelstein 118).

In 1953, the Red Scare was in full stride. “Edward R. Murrow set the standard for

courageous reporting. William Paley called him the conscience of CBS. But, as the country

entered the McCarthy era, Murrow’s conscience would get him into trouble and his courage

would be tested (This Reporter).” Murrow and Friendly decided to take on a story that, to them,

symbolized McCarthyism’s clutch on the American people. The program was called The Case of

Milo Radulovich. “A few weeks ago, there occurred a few obscure notices in the newspapers

about a lieutenant, Milo Radulovich, a lieutenant in the Air Force Reserve” (See it Now – DVD).

Radulovich who, after eight years of active duty with the Air Force, had been asked to resign

after being “classified as a security risk under Air Force Regulation 36-52 because of his close

association with Communists or Communist sympathizers” (Kendrick 37). Milo’s sister and

father had been accused of reading “subversive newspapers and engaging in questionable

activities (Kendrick 37),” however, “there was no question whatever as to the lieutenant’s loyalty

(See it Now).” During the hearing Milo had demanded, the evidence against Radulovich and his

family was presented in a sealed envelope which, ironically, was not allowed to be opened or

shown to anyone, including Milo and his lawyer or the board members overseeing his case (See

it Now). The board recommended that the Lieutenant “be severed from the Air Force” (See it

Now). Murrow presented that facts and interviews from Milo, his sister and father, even people

from his hometown. One man said “if the Air Core or the United States Army or whoever they

Chen 7
are that are purging this man, and I believe they are purging him, gets away with it, they are

entitled to do it to anybody. To me, to you, to anybody else” (See it Now). Once again, Murrow

had taken the story of a “little person” and used it to attack the “big man.” Five weeks later, the

Air Force reversed their decision and reinstated Radulovich stating that “the lieutenant was not a

security risk, that his association with his sister was not a vital matter for the air force and that

his father’s newspaper reading did not really peril the nation’s safety (Kendrick 39).” See it Now

had proved the power of television.

Murrow and Friendly were victorious. They had seen that their television program really

could make a difference. The “weapon of television”, as Murrow put it in his speech to the

RTNDA, was cocked and loaded (Edwards 135). “If it hadn’t been for the Milo Radulovich

program, I don’t think we ever would have had the intestinal fortitude to do the McCarthy

program,” commented Friendly (This Reporter). They waited a while before broadcasting an

attack on McCarthy. Murrow “knew when to pause and when to speak,” one of his colleagues

said, “and he knew the time was coming for McCarthy to be vulnerable – and he hit (Sperber

429).” The program was slated for March 9th, 1954. However, there was much to do. First, CBS

refused to put up money for advertising or let Murrow and Friendly even use the CBS eye logo

(Sperber 430). Like the Radulovich program, Murrow and Friendly again self financed an ad in

The New York Times (Sperber 430). “If this program goes on the air tomorrow night…the one

that McCarthy and his friends will go after is none of us, but Murrow. But weakness in any of

our characters or our history would be used against Ed,” describes Friendly, “One person said his

wife had once been a part of the young communist league. Ed laughed, sort of somberly […] and

he looked up and he said, ‘the terror is right here in this room. We go tomorrow night (This

Chen 8
Reporter).” Edward Murrow was ready to sacrifice his career in order to bring the truth to the

American people.

At 10:30pm, Murrow took a deep breath and looked into the camera (Sperber 436).

“Good Evening,” he started, “Tonight’s See it Now devotes its entire half hour to a report on

Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, told mainly in his own words and pictures (See it Now).” For the

entire program, Murrow read directly from the script as to “say exactly what we mean to say”

(See it Now). He also added that “if the Senator feels that we have done violence to his words or

pictures, and desires, so to speak, to answer himself, an opportunity will be afforded him on this

program (See it Now).” The program used audio and film recorded from McCarthy’s own

speeches and hearings. After taking one of McCarthy’s pieces of evidence and skillfully

discrediting it, Murrow said “We read from this document at record, not in defense of Mr.

Stevenson but in defense of truth (See it Now).” Murrow discredited McCarthy’s attacks

throughout the broadcast. “It was the first time McCarthy’s allegations had been systematically

dissected in the full glare of the mass media (Sperber 437).” Murrow closed the program saying:

We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age

of unreason. […] This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy’s

methods to keep silent – or for those that approve. […] The actions of the Junior

Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad

and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not

really his. He didn’t create this situation of fear, he merely exploited it; and rather

successfully. Cassius was right. “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in

ourselves.” Good night and good luck. (Sperber 438-9)

Chen 9
The response was instantaneous. “The calls were pouring in at a rate that made the

Radulovich response look stillborn (Sperber 439).” CBS reported more than 12,000 calls and

claimed a 10:1 response in favor of Murrow (Thornton). While the rest of the crew was

celebrating, Murrow had his mind on other things. He knew that this was just the beginning.

McCarthy was quick to accept his invitation but asked for some time to prepare (See it

Now). The Junior Senator was scheduled to appear on April 6th, but in the meantime, See it Now

broadcast another attack on McCarthy’s methods (Sperber 447). Once again, Murrow chose to

document another “little person”. Annie Lee Moss, a low-level code clerk in the pentagon, was

being questioned in front of McCarthy’s committee about her ties to the Communist party (See it

Now). McCarthy ended up leaving shortly after the hearing had started and left the floor open for

John McClellan (See it Now). McClellen took this opportunity to speak out against the hearing.

He stated that all of the evidence was hearsay (and in reality, they probably had evidence against

one of the other three Annie Lee Moss’ in the DC area) and that whether she was actually a

Communist or not, they were not following due process (See it Now). Through this segment

about Annie Lee Moss, Murrow was able to show that McCarthy’s methods had gone out of

control and had no regard for the people whose lives they were destroying, just by having them

appear in front of the questioning panel.

Three weeks later, it was McCarthy’s turn on See it Now. Instead of trying to refute the

claims made on March 9th, he attempted to smear Murrow personally (See it Now). The entire

hour long broadcast, with no interjections from Murrow other than a short introduction and

closing, was McCarthy trying to discredit the claims made against him by discrediting the man

who made them (Sperber 449). “Murrow’s follow up the next week pointed these facts out.

McCarthy’s broadcast had proved Murrow’s point. Jack Gould, a television critic for The New

Chen 10
York Times, wrote that “Mr. Murrow only reported as best he could on the use of innuendo,

insinuation, the half-truth, and the frantic smear. The Senator, on the other hand, gave the

expert’s own version. It may take some time before the Senator realizes he was had (Sperber

449).” While the seeming successes of the battle against McCartyism were evident in Murrow’s

work environment, his personal life was in peril. He had not only put his career and reputation on

the line when doing these programs, he was receiving threats to himself and even his Son, Casey.

While that didn’t mean he would give up on broadcasting controversial news, it would certainly

make things harder.

Shortly after the McCarthy episodes aired, things took a turn for the worse. “The thanks

See it Now received for doing the most significant program in broadcast journalism was to lose

both its sponsor and its slot in prime time (Edwards 125).” First, ALCOA, their sponsor from the

beginning, dropped their sponsorship (Edwards 125). They no longer needed Murrow to boost

their respect and also did not wish to get involved with controversial and political issues,

especially after See it Now did a program about a land scandal in Texas that ALCOA was

involved with (Edwards 125-6). At the same time, network television had discovered “the game

show”. See it Now’s current position in the prime-time schedule as a money losing program

stood no chance against the ridiculously profitable imitators of The $64,000 Question (Edwards

126). Murrow’s program was moved to the “Sunday Ghetto”. While this was a less than ideal

time slot, Murrow and Friendly continued to produce programs but on a much more irregular

basis (Edwards 126). Some of their last broadcasts included following a single pint of blood from

a donor all the way to a soldier in Korea, flying through the eye of a hurricane, and even a 2 hour

special on the health hazards of smoking, despite Murrow’s habit of smoking four packs a day

(Edwards 126, This Reporter).

Chen 11
The risks he had taken and the freedoms he had been awarded with See it Now, finally

caught up with him during an argument with William Paley over a segment about Hawaiian and

Alaskan statehood (Sperber 407). A young Senator from Buffalo had brought a complaint about

not receiving equal time during the segment directly to top management. In response, the Senator

was granted a time slot for rebuttal without consulting Murrow (This Reporter). He felt that this

action “undermined his relationship with the company, and that he could not continue with See it

Now under such conditions (Sperber 407).” After a long argument with William Paley, Paley

decided that the Senator would keep his time slot (This Reporter). “Ed said to him, don’t you

want us? Don’t you want to have an instrument like See it Now” recounts Friendly, “Bill Paley

patted his stomach and said ‘Yes but I don’t want a pain in my belly every time you do a

program’. Ed strode in across the room [and] said ‘that’s the price you have to pay, Bill, it goes

with the job’ (This Reporter).” See it Now was cancelled after 7 year of being on the air (Sperber

408). “Paley was trying to make money, not save the world; Murrow believed CBS could do

both (Edwards 158).” The recent success of the game shows had made the networks greedy.

“Money became the medium’s single driving force (Grossman).” Murrow was so entrenched in

creating informative television for the sole purpose public service that he was devastated by the

networks disregard for that same type of programming. “He feared that the drive to sell, sell, sell

– and nothing but sell – was overwhelming the potential for good, the potential for service of

radio and television (Rather).” Murrow had been squeezed out to make room for more profit

(This Reporter).

On October 15th, 1958, Murrow gave a speech in Chicago at the annual convention of

the Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) (Sperber 412). “The speech Ed

Murrow gave […] was a risky speech, and he knew it. It was a bold shot, and he knew it

Chen 12
(Rather).” The speech was very important to Murrow. It brought together all of his experiences

with radio and television and threw his biggest frustrations at some of the most important people

in the industry. Murrow criticized the networks for breaking their promises to operate in the

public interest but instead had made television into a “money-making machine” (Grossman). He

asked that “news divisions and departments not be held to the same standards of ratings and

profits as entertainment and sports (Rather).” Murrow’s passion and anger was hidden by his

seemingly calm and collected expression. Murrow persisted: “if radio news is to be regarded as a

commodity, only acceptable when saleable, then I don’t care what you call it – I say it isn’t news

(Edward R. Murrow).” As the speech continued, it was evident that this speech was Murrow

putting himself and his beliefs on display in the most vulnerable setting he could. However, this

was also the most effective setting. He continually reminded his audience of their failure to

uphold the foundational beliefs of public service:

There is no suggestion here that networks or individual stations should operate as

philanthropies. But I can find nothing in the Bill of Rights or the Communications Act

which says that they must increase their net profits each year, lest the Republic

collapse. We are wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent […] our mass media reflect

this. But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television […] is being

used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it,

those who look at it and those whose work it is, may see a totally different picture too

late. (Edward R. Murrow)

Murrow closed his speech saying, “this instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, it can

even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those

ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box (Edward R. Murrow).”

Chen 13
Murrow’s dedication to public service broadcasting is inspiring. Not only because he was

dedicated to bringing us honest information over our radio and television air waves, but also

because he was devoted to making networks continue to provide that information. “Murrow was

talking to David Schoenbrun one day in 1945,” author David Halberstam explained, “and he

looked to him and said ‘hey kid, what are you going to do after the war?’ and Schoenbrun said ‘I

guess I’ll go back to Brooklyn and teach high school French’ and there was a pause and Murrow

said ‘kid, how would you like the biggest classroom in the world?’ I’d feel a lot better if the

people who owned the networks today thought of it as he did – as the biggest classroom in the

world instead of the biggest cash register in the world (This Reporter).” Edward R. Murrow used

television to the furthest extent that he could and ended up revolutionizing and inventing many

of the journalism norms we have today. He brought truth to the screen but attempted to create

honesty and truth behind the screen as well. Murrow’s modesty and dedication to his values are

things that I will continue to be inspired by throughout my life. His attempts at

decommercializing the news for the sake of public service should never be forgotten. Murrow’s

fearlessness to take on “the big man” eventually led to him getting forced out of the industry, but

not before he could change history and influence the future of broadcast journalism.

Chen 14

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen