The words honest and journalism being in quotation marks is telling.
Honesty in journalism stopped being required on March 9, 1964. Not to say all journalism is dishonest. Honesty has just not been a requirement since (checks notes) you were in grade school.
Which (combined with Citizens United v. FEC) is how we got to where we are at. The best lies which raise the most money, win.
I will respectfully disagree on Sullivan. Public officials SHOULD have a higher legal bar to clear. That promotes robust debate about those in power. A significant distinction between us and repressive countries is the ability for all Americans, not just journalists, to criticize their leaders.
I agree with you on Citizens United. But it’s difficult to “prove” the value of Sullivan because how do you prove a negative? Meaning, how many baseless lawsuits against media organizations never got started because public officials knew of the high bar they must clear?
I could also point to Sarah Palin’s two unsuccessful lawsuits against the NYT. She lost the second case just a week or two ago. Her claim was ridiculous. Sullivan rightly protected the Times.
Most lawsuits by public officials against media get thrown out before going to trial. The media, indeed all Americans, should have the right to criticize public officials without fear of being hauled into court.
I appreciate that you find hope in journalism. I do too, and I am all for every First Amendment right.
Regarding Palin v. NYT, my take is she lost because the Times quickly corrected what they first published. Which is fine. Errors get made and, if corrections follow, that works for me.
But corrections do not always follow, and the public official (now also public figures) is not always the powerful party. Often times, the news corporation is the vastly more powerful party, and their interests are not so pure. Their interests are corporate. See, for example … what you wrote about.
Cognizant that correlation is not the same as causation, the evidence is trust in media has been in steady decline in the post-Sullivan era. See, for example:
If the bedrock value of journalism is truth, I just do not understand how a ruling that facilitates and protects untruthful publications could do anything but harm journalism.
Much more importantly, the majority of Americans do not either, because the majority of Americans no longer trust mass media. That is a terrible shame, and has greatly damaged democracy.
The arms race of public lies we have to slog through every day -- from all sides -- was founded in a ruling that did excellent service to the civil rights movement, but fundamentally and catastrophically devalued journalism.
Dave, your editorial should be required reading. Whoever would have thought we’d be this close to losing a free and independent press? America had better wake up!
It’s a tough decision. Resign as an act of conscience knowing you will be replaced by a lackey, or stay and fight as best as you can for what you believe in? There is no right answer. Resigning just makes it easier for the bosses to get what they want but you can’t surrender on some issues.
Thanks for standing up, Dave. Now we just need other honest journalists to behave likewise. Thank God we have a platform like Substack since most media outlets seem to be taking a knee to the Golden Idol.
“You would be right to think from this point forward you’re being spoon-fed stories that have been “approved” by people more interested in their stock options than in journalistic principles.”
Whoever thought that that quote would apply to 60 Minutes?
Journalism ain't what it used to be -- but then again, it never was. All mainstream media in capitalist countries stampede to profits like hogs to the feeding trough. All media in authoritarian countries are like milk cows following the bell cow along a narrow trail. Americas has become a curious blend of the porcine and bovine. And we consumers obviously want it that way: note the percentage of "news" coverage devoted to celebrity, wealth, and sports.
Jerrold, thanks for your comments. Journalism is a business, no question. But it’s a special business. Or at least it should be. There’s nothing wrong with making money, but it should be done responsibly. I was fortunate to work for owners who took their jobs seriously but understood our profession has constitutional protections and that needed to be closely guarded.
At the end of the day, what the money folks have to sell is credibility. Once a news organization loses that, there’s not much left to sell. And it can be very hard to win that back.
Paramount has surrendered the credibility of its news division in service of a big Wall Street deal. That is tragic.
You reasonably can argue that 60 Minutes is the greatest-of-the-great, consistent newsrooms protecting broadcast journalism, much like the NYTimes is on the print side. Pelley’s commentary might be the last trustworthy thing we can hear from this legendary program. More peril exists in that assessment then we can imagine. Well put, Dave.
This would, normally, be one of the saddest stories confronting the American people today. But, normal????? There are so many stories of control, so many stories of a dictator running, and ruining, our lives. It is exhausting. And frightening, because that is their aim.
Thank you once again for telling it like it is Dave! 60 Minutes is one of the few tv programs we try to watch every week! Their stories have always been truthful and insightful! I am so very angry with the clown in the White House and his entire circus….and those who still consider him to be presidential material!! I’m 81 and I have never seen such an era of hate, fear and stupidity! We are living in the age of Alternative Facts or no facts….just lies!!
I look to Substack as a place for those with intelligence who are unafraid to speak the truth…like you Dave….and all the journalists who refuse to sell their souls! Thank goodness for Substack!
The words honest and journalism being in quotation marks is telling.
Honesty in journalism stopped being required on March 9, 1964. Not to say all journalism is dishonest. Honesty has just not been a requirement since (checks notes) you were in grade school.
Which (combined with Citizens United v. FEC) is how we got to where we are at. The best lies which raise the most money, win.
Good luck, indeed.
I will respectfully disagree on Sullivan. Public officials SHOULD have a higher legal bar to clear. That promotes robust debate about those in power. A significant distinction between us and repressive countries is the ability for all Americans, not just journalists, to criticize their leaders.
All for the First Amendment, here (have taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution).
If you have any evidence that Sullivan has engendered trust in journalism or truth in public policy, I would be interested to see that.
We live in a "post-truth" society because of Sullivan, and Citizens United.
And if you are serious about Sullivan as a defense against repression, there are some folks in El Salvador prisons you might want to talk to.
I agree with you on Citizens United. But it’s difficult to “prove” the value of Sullivan because how do you prove a negative? Meaning, how many baseless lawsuits against media organizations never got started because public officials knew of the high bar they must clear?
I could also point to Sarah Palin’s two unsuccessful lawsuits against the NYT. She lost the second case just a week or two ago. Her claim was ridiculous. Sullivan rightly protected the Times.
Most lawsuits by public officials against media get thrown out before going to trial. The media, indeed all Americans, should have the right to criticize public officials without fear of being hauled into court.
I appreciate that you find hope in journalism. I do too, and I am all for every First Amendment right.
Regarding Palin v. NYT, my take is she lost because the Times quickly corrected what they first published. Which is fine. Errors get made and, if corrections follow, that works for me.
But corrections do not always follow, and the public official (now also public figures) is not always the powerful party. Often times, the news corporation is the vastly more powerful party, and their interests are not so pure. Their interests are corporate. See, for example … what you wrote about.
Cognizant that correlation is not the same as causation, the evidence is trust in media has been in steady decline in the post-Sullivan era. See, for example:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/651977/americans-trust-media-remains-trend-low.aspx
If the bedrock value of journalism is truth, I just do not understand how a ruling that facilitates and protects untruthful publications could do anything but harm journalism.
Much more importantly, the majority of Americans do not either, because the majority of Americans no longer trust mass media. That is a terrible shame, and has greatly damaged democracy.
The arms race of public lies we have to slog through every day -- from all sides -- was founded in a ruling that did excellent service to the civil rights movement, but fundamentally and catastrophically devalued journalism.
Just my two cents. Wishing you well.
Dave, your editorial should be required reading. Whoever would have thought we’d be this close to losing a free and independent press? America had better wake up!
“Good luck,” indeed— to all of us. Sadly, well said, Dave. I wonder if other good journalists will follow Owen’s out the door.
It’s a tough decision. Resign as an act of conscience knowing you will be replaced by a lackey, or stay and fight as best as you can for what you believe in? There is no right answer. Resigning just makes it easier for the bosses to get what they want but you can’t surrender on some issues.
Thanks for standing up, Dave. Now we just need other honest journalists to behave likewise. Thank God we have a platform like Substack since most media outlets seem to be taking a knee to the Golden Idol.
At least those of us on Substack have independence.
And we respect you for your honesty and integrity.
I, too, am old enough to remember Edward R. Murrow. How scary to see the decline of journalism my grandkids are experiencing!
Thank you for your candid writing‼️
“You would be right to think from this point forward you’re being spoon-fed stories that have been “approved” by people more interested in their stock options than in journalistic principles.”
Whoever thought that that quote would apply to 60 Minutes?
Yikes.
Independent journalists unite!!
Thanks for your support, Kay.
Journalism ain't what it used to be -- but then again, it never was. All mainstream media in capitalist countries stampede to profits like hogs to the feeding trough. All media in authoritarian countries are like milk cows following the bell cow along a narrow trail. Americas has become a curious blend of the porcine and bovine. And we consumers obviously want it that way: note the percentage of "news" coverage devoted to celebrity, wealth, and sports.
I recommend ProPublica.
Jerrold, thanks for your comments. Journalism is a business, no question. But it’s a special business. Or at least it should be. There’s nothing wrong with making money, but it should be done responsibly. I was fortunate to work for owners who took their jobs seriously but understood our profession has constitutional protections and that needed to be closely guarded.
At the end of the day, what the money folks have to sell is credibility. Once a news organization loses that, there’s not much left to sell. And it can be very hard to win that back.
Paramount has surrendered the credibility of its news division in service of a big Wall Street deal. That is tragic.
You reasonably can argue that 60 Minutes is the greatest-of-the-great, consistent newsrooms protecting broadcast journalism, much like the NYTimes is on the print side. Pelley’s commentary might be the last trustworthy thing we can hear from this legendary program. More peril exists in that assessment then we can imagine. Well put, Dave.
Lyle, I’m a little surprised CBS allowed it. Even so, it was a tame spanking. Kelley could have been a lot more rebellious.
Thanks, Dave. Good journalism must be defended. There's no one in Iowa more qualified to do that than you.
And you, Amy!
Guessing Pelley will be out soon.
Certainly makes me wonder about Colbert and whether they’ll get to him. Not news, but he beats up Trump every night. Rightly so, in my view.
Good luck indeed.
Sad and scary times ahead.
This would, normally, be one of the saddest stories confronting the American people today. But, normal????? There are so many stories of control, so many stories of a dictator running, and ruining, our lives. It is exhausting. And frightening, because that is their aim.
Concerning and frightening!
Sadly stopped ticking. What a shame.
Thank you once again for telling it like it is Dave! 60 Minutes is one of the few tv programs we try to watch every week! Their stories have always been truthful and insightful! I am so very angry with the clown in the White House and his entire circus….and those who still consider him to be presidential material!! I’m 81 and I have never seen such an era of hate, fear and stupidity! We are living in the age of Alternative Facts or no facts….just lies!!
I look to Substack as a place for those with intelligence who are unafraid to speak the truth…like you Dave….and all the journalists who refuse to sell their souls! Thank goodness for Substack!
Thank you, Joan.