thumbnail of The First Amendment; Baram; Lerbenger; Rubin: Business Journalism
Transcript
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
The. WGBH Boston in cooperation with the Institute for Democratic communications at the School of Communications with Boston University. Now President the First Amendment and a free people. An examination of civil liberties in the media in the 1970's and now here is the director of the Institute for democratic communication Dr. Bernard Rubin. Our subject tonight is business and journalism with the emphasis on what new research is needed so that we can understand the needs of business and the needs of the general public. Business is entering a new phase. Specifically tonight we want to take a look at the question of how business handles its issue oriented concerns rather than how business handles its product advertising problems and bi issues gentlemen. I mean ecology minority problems in America the urban crisis energy pollution and so on. I'm very pleased to have
as my guest tonight professors who LeBron and Robert Burnham of the school of public communications specialist respectively in economic developments in the mass media and the journalistic interest in the mass media. Also Bob Arum is. One of the experts on radio journalism and television journalism today. I like to quote from John W. Hill to start this session. He's chairman of the executive committee of his own world known public relations firm in New York. And in an article which appeared on the Op-Ed page recently the New York Times entitled The business of business. Among other things he said this and I'm quoting business men must understand the inner mind and inner mind of the public. The world of corporate management of millions in sales of profit and loss is not the world of the average person. End quote. Then he went on another passage to say the following quote Unfortunately
business for the most part has a blind spot when it comes to the main conduit for reaching people and adversary situation has developed between corporations and the media. Business thinks the media are all hostile towards it while the media think business is unresponsive and secretive. In our sophisticated society the existence of such a situation between two vital elements of society that need each other is absurd. It can and should be corrected and of course barbaric. How do you feel about Mr. Hill's comments that business is not reaching out to explain itself or to use the media properly. Well it's a very large question I would have to us answer in very general terms on the basis of my own experience and what I've read and conferences that I've attended have discussed this subject in many ways and I would agree I would agree with Mr. HILL. I would agree especially
that the adversary the role of the press here does exist there are some journalists that would insist that the pressured play an adversary role. But both in the book government and present and business are concerned that this is a good thing. I don't think that the adversary relationship is bad in and of itself. Question is how does business respond to a media representatives who see themselves in an adversarial role if this business responds. Clearly with accuracy and does a good job of communicating the adversary relationship may remain. But I would hope that the results of flow of information would NYT rather than inflame so that the adversary relationship. I think we would agree is healthy on the journalistic side at least but on the business side I think it was probably emphasising that the adversary psychology is from the business side taught journalism that they feel that the journalist or the media in
general are represent the camp of the enemy. I don't know you how do you feel. There's a book that Theodore levered wrote about two years ago called the third sector. And in it he relates a very interesting idea in this is that the third sector referring not to business not the government and not to the conventional social agencies in church and so forth but referring to social action groups and public interest groups that they have been more successful then established business in getting media attention and of course I'm referring to the environmental movement the consumerism movement and so forth. So that in contrast with them. Many many business people now feel that they're not getting enough of media attention. Now as you said the media however will fight back
and say look you're trying to control the news. In fact Alan center who is also a public relations practitioner had this idea he said there tends to be a three stage evolution in an organization's attitude toward the press when an organization is small young and hungry then it seeks media attention then as it grows it seeks it. But on a control basis and then when a business really gets large they may take the attitude he says of tolerating it but only on as controlled a basis as possible. You know one of the interesting things about this new feeling that business ought to be involved with the with the media. Ike of course is self defensive. These this last decade has been a great lesson for the media will say ever since the president of General Motors sat before Senator Ribicoff over the Ralph Nader thing. More than a decade ago it's been a new ball game.
One of the companies that has taken the lead in terms of being pug Nations is one of the major oil companies and of course that's Mobil Oil. There was a very revealing article in the September 1976 issue of Fortune magazine entitled public relations isn't kid stuff at Mobile. And the tenor of that is that mobile will go after its points using the media we've all seen these little quarter page ads in most of the magazines and newspapers. And I'm just looking at one right here entitled growth is not a four letter word. And the point of this is that. Business must have a comprehensive national energy policy and the only way to get this will be for business to advertise its positions and to argue for its positions. Other companies are much more timid Have you noticed that the timid so many corporations are timid.
I believe partly because they're afraid that whatever they say now they're going to be hurt and this is necessarily true that you know that the negative would happen if so facto not many of them do feel that they won't get a fair play or a fair shake in the media. They see reporters as what we refer to as not just adversaries but is antagonistic and almost enemies. And they feel that if they tried to point out something that they feel is in the best interests not only the company but of the public that they will be highly suspect and that reporters will think that this isn't so that the reporter will be not skeptical but cynical and so are mobile does here in the sense of say all right if the editorials that we read. Talk about we energy makers here are going to be almost completely negative then what we're going to have to do is buy space to counteract and you notice that I'm sure that the mobile ads are set up so that
they look as though they are editor of an editorial to write a full game for a newspaper to play. Namely don't give mobile all the attention they seek end then they'll buy some advertising space and they're buying an awful lot of advertising space. As a matter of fact this brings up another question of those of us who live in Massachusetts and have been through the election campaign of 976 know how much the media used for example on one of the referendum question is an all the referendum questions that involve business. Here's a typical full page ad I'm looking at which was in the Boston Globe of Monday November 1st 1976 big headlines don't gamble on Question 7 vote no on flat rate electricity and and scare illustration such as one that has a man leaning laser liye against a cart that is used to transport things in a factory and it says 30000 jobs are on the line if you gamble on flat rates. Can you afford
my unemployment. And on the bottom it says council for employment and economic energy use the three month Street in Boston with a man's name given as the one who placed the ad. How much of this do you think really is independent advertising how much of the of this do you think is subtle placement through business money. In order to directly influence public opinion on Election Day I don't know what the exact figure would be but there are many indications that tell us that there was very heavy support by industry not both within the state and from without on some of the referenda questions that confronted voters here. Now I would like to point out that. Our industry has every right to use the media to deliver its message to what you get into here is a question of cutter advertising if the media come up with all with a great package of money to subsidize special
campaigns on such issues as confronted voters in Massachusetts and in state of Maine and other places. How do the consumers as as we call them how do we part of the consumers who are far less able to raise money. How do they confront this tactic. What does the newspaper do itself. The newspaper I read has as an editorial area which it can use it can send its reporters out it could actually dissect an advertisement in terms of whether it is fair whether it is misleading or not. But I. I think that these are ads first can be there because of the First Amendment and secondly that it is incumbent on some of the consumer advocacy groups to try to find some way to counter advertisements such as some people saw in the last referendum when it was a question so much of the backing is that they may have been somewhat misleading. I think a lot of
individuals felt that they that they weren't using the most ethical tactics in trying to convince voters to vote against questions. All four I would say it's certainly reasonable to expect a business that's affected by a referendum or by legislation to present its viewpoints to argue its case. Now you said a business but this is a business. This is a something something of a cloak for business interests. Well I think you've got a good point here. Namely shouldn't business be forthright and say this company bad company and perhaps particular people in the company a chief executive officer officer believes in this or that rather than organizing names that sound as if. There are some kind of a public interest group when actually although they they themselves may be convinced this is in the best
interests of the public but they're really primarily presenting their own case to protect their own industry. Have they learned from the public interest groups how to take this approach of placing ads that look as if this is the public interest that is involved. This has been going on as you know but not for a very long time now. I think that here this is where the press must plug play a very special role. As I said as I implied if if a newspaper sees something such as this going on and feels that it is not necessarily. In the best interests of the movement of information and accuracy of honesty then I think the newspapers should then do something about going to these groups finding out who supports the advertisements. In fact defacto and noted by newspaper articles. And this is true also incidentally also on television and
radio. So let me ask a question about that Bob because I think it's a very very salient point I agree with it completely. What the what the newspapers tend to do is they tend to let these ads get plays they take the advertising income then somewhat later in their campaign indeed even after the campaign after the election they'll be these summary articles telling you how much business money was spent or how much consumer money or public interest money or any kind of money. But that's too late for the public. The public is not sophisticated about this kind of propaganda. What do you do about that. Well it's that's a very difficult one for this for this reason or for these reasons. The press and I can't speak for all the presidents of very very large animal we're talking about. But I believe that most editors and reporters feel it has to be a very sensitive subject in the sense that the press doesn't feel that it should control elections or it is a year.
Yes it wants to let the free flow of information move just as on the editorial page during elections in the op ed page there will be letters and columns which clearly if you speak to editors and all reporters and publishers they may not necessarily agree with you but let's say that there should be this is I say this free flow of information from all vantage points. And some individuals will say but some of this information is negative it may be somewhat inaccurate maybe and maybe misleading shouldn't you remove it. Well this is a problem in what we refer through because you know free and open society and you know there's this imbalance of course because what corporations and trade associations can do is use economic resources and convert these resources into political resources. Now on the one hand it's true that a person like Milton Friedman will say that other groups that don't have these economic resources are put to the test to see whether they can get sufficient public support to pay
for ads but we know that this process takes time. It is not it is not a really a false argument let's take. We've had in Massachusetts and in neighboring states we've had issues like the bottle bill. And we've also had issues like the graduated income tax it seems on the graduated income tax. The consumer or the fellow without the corporate finances is never going to get anybody enthused about giving him money to oppose the corporate income tax. Me too want to oppose the graduated income tax so that the taxes will rise as your income rises. In most states those graduated income tax proposals are voted down through fear that is engendered in the public. I think it's that particular issue of the words income tax themselves the phrase tends to be and I get of what for most voters and there's no question of the campaign against a graduated income tax over the many years that this issue has been played very strong. I would like to get back to the point about the exposure that you reach
for to what may be considered misleading or inappropriate advertising during a campaign. I one of the reasons that I would I would say that. Much of the media does not expose this during a campaign. Is is because as I said they don't want to feel or look as though they're there the judges the attorney general's office deciding what is good and bad here. But another reason is one for which they should be chided. It is the media and that is that very put just they are. They make a very poor job of distributing their own energy sauces their reporters and columnists so often are covering the same kinds of stories and are duplicating and overlapping in that coverage. And because there is so much going on during an election you just can't be everywhere at once and because I guess I don't know do you have to really dig into some of these so that the stories you do have accuracy as well that they they just don't get to this until later when someone says Let's find out what
business did you know this you know. And they're just not handling their reports right. This raises another question the complaint by business that a lot of the journalists are insufficiently trained in economics in business to cover the news intelligent light right. And as we also know newspapers generally don't give much attention to business news in fact one report says the ratio of sports news the business news is at least two don't want to and you might have the same journalist involved and writing the business I want to know what a lot of what is your point. I know that Oral Roberts who created Oral Roberts University I'm talking about the evangelist at one point was asked why did he create a basketball team of national importance at all Roberts University. Remember he has at this time a university which is about what 10 or 15 years old which has one full accreditation for most of its programs
and is has a capital plant of about 65 million dollars. So we're talking about how to get corporate money. And he referred to the media he said I notice that when most people open a newspaper. This goes back to Ottos point they immediately open to the sports page. And if we're going to get support for Oral Roberts University I determined that we would have to have this first rate basketball team. Well he discovered of course what a lot of the great football powers refer to them in the collegiate area and learned quite some time ago of you know the stadia that have been built on football money in this country. There's no question that the press coverage in the sports area overshadows overwhelms the coverage on any other area. Any other. Another question Bob. There's an article called do Rosie headlines sell newspapers. And I do reminds me of the accusation by businessman that newspapers and
television media they prefer to report bad news or at least bad business news. Can't they say something good about business for example. The media have been accused for getting us into a deeper recession because every time a group of workers is laid off OK the media will publicize that. Now when workers are rehired although I do recall TV covering this but this doesn't get all that attention you see any truth in that and do rosy lines rosy headlines sell newspapers or is it the other way around. It's the other way around it. There is much grit a catalytic catalytic agent for moving is that there was a nation of news all where there are many definitions one of one of many is that news is a deviation from the normal the greater the deviation. You know the great OF THE NEWS. Some say news is. News is what is important and interesting to you at this moment and the word interesting
itself to give some kind of a flavor to something else called entertainment. Now I'm not saying that what we're trying to do is entertain not not at all but the role of the press I think was better better described by I think it Finley Peter Peter Finlay done the last exchange. Lawson has used it to individuals as sort of the straight man on the jokester and Mr. Hennessy once asked him Mr. Dooley asked Mr. Hennessy What is the role of the press and he said to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. But if we I rule is to uncover as well as to cover to one cover. And there's no question that if there was an accident the number of persons are injured. That's the biggest story is that some individuals were injured. You don't say how many people you know you know did not did not suffer your injuries you meant that in the story.
But you don't the headline doesn't say 600 saved what you have is two who are killed in acts that you know Bob it reminds me of Mazal those hierarchy of needs and it just occurred to me that it seems as if the newspaper world the media world deals with the more fundamental needs the safety needs self-preservation. But they don't dwell on the top with self actualisation because we don't have the room for. You don't have the room I'm not I'm not rationalizing don't really. Because once you get out of the area of the miserable the unhappy the tragedy and other tragedies of the day by day existence in a world such as the one in which we live. You just don't have much space left if you want to unless you want to have a losing newspaper you have to keep in mind that a newspaper is not only public service but also as a business in itself. Let's take let's take that theory that you propound which is absolutely correct that bad news sells
newspapers bad headlines most of the stories about business about business activities the business mechanisms off of the general public are part of an occult science. Business advertises its products primarily with a lot of Rosie-Ann advertising glorifying its cars or its refrigerators and whatnot but only comes into the general picture of the average person on issues before the society. I want only but I'll say in numerous cases more often than not when they have some dire prediction or when they're trying to stop something or when they want you to know that they should not be regulated or that the system of openness should should prevail whenever nods to that will change I believe you see here you're talking about different strategies that businesses use. And the old strategy was almost by default. Wait until we get into trouble. Wait until there's impending legislation now when you
listen to people like John Hill and when you listen to the more progressive trade associations and businesses they're saying look we want to take initiatives we want to suggest legislation. In other words they don't want to wait until all they've got to do is to be defensive they want to be seen as constructive. Now this is being a little bit optimistic you know I'm talking about the leaders. And this is however the posture. That is being promoted by a lot of the public affairs and public relations people in industry all too few. However follow this advice you know as part of the small research just before this broadcast I say just before this broadcast aside from the rest of the research was that we went over to the bookstore at the Harvard Business School to see what might be used for this broadcast. A very small number a small proportion of the books much more than ought to be deal with the
social consciousness of business and of the small number of books that deal with the social consciousness of business. The case studies only accidentally on the media side they they dwell on the traditional public relations angles of how to effect thrust through the media. But the use of the media or the role of the media viz a viz the corporations is a brand new subject. Yes in textbooks on the other hand when you look at the journals there are a lot of articles now advising businessmen on how to handle journalists or if they appear on TV how to use body language properly how to get a positive reaction how to gain some kind of public credibility. And I must say that in my in my opinion the media actually been very kind to business and I am sure that business might not agree. Clearly the Nader story should have been broken not by
tall skinny lawyer from Connecticut but by the by the media. But there are a lot of sacred cows in this area and I'd I would say that if business really finds us opening up. If this is the coverage by the media does open up become more and more intensive. While I would say that the stories that we refer to the bad news stories will be the first ones that break now there are good news stories too that you can find. But you know where they are. They're in the financial section of newspapers for example. You're right and you get almost no real economics reporting in television or radio news. You just don't get Wall Street stock reporting Yes which which mean nothing to the great mass of people in fact which means pretty much of nothing anyway. By that time anyone who really is very interested in the field and dabbles in it knows what happened before before 6 o'clock for the 6 o'clock news. But I would say that the media have treated the automotive industry very
gently very kindly in terms of coverage. You know you can see that sometimes when something's happened to a lot of the older the number of hundred thousand for example have to have repairs done and special repairs and such. This is this very often is a very small item inside you don't you don't get the cruel negative coverage that some of the business leaders say they get the press I believe the media have been very kind. Bernard you mentioned research when you started. And here's an example. Business and the media have to learn how to communicate economics. This Men tend to use too many facts to be too objective to act as if they're accountants. And what they have to learn is a little bit more about call it the logic of sentiments. Call it psychological economics I call it being able to talk to people this is a language they have to be able to translate all a lot of complex business matters into everyday language traffic we can summarize this by saying that the
business of America has now translated into media and I'd like to think Robert there I meant I don't know. And joining me tonight this is Benadryl and saying good night. For WGBH radio in cooperation with the Institute for Democratic communications at the School of Communications at Boston University has presented the First Amendment and a free people. An examination of civil liberties in the media in the 1970s. This program was produced in the studios of WGBH Boston.
Series
The First Amendment
Episode
Baram; Lerbenger; Rubin: Business Journalism
Producing Organization
WGBH Educational Foundation
Contributing Organization
WGBH (Boston, Massachusetts)
AAPB ID
cpb-aacip/15-19f4r11r
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, or if you have concerns about this record, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/15-19f4r11r).
Description
Series Description
"The First Amendment is a weekly talk show hosted by Dr. Bernard Rubin, the director of the Institute for Democratic Communication at Boston University. Each episode features a conversation that examines civil liberties in the media in the 1970s. "
Created Date
1976-11-24
Genres
Talk Show
Topics
Social Issues
Media type
Sound
Duration
00:29:40
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Credits
Producing Organization: WGBH Educational Foundation
Production Unit: Radio
AAPB Contributor Holdings
WGBH
Identifier: 76-0165-12-11-001 (WGBH Item ID)
Format: 1/4 inch audio tape
Generation: Master
Duration: 00:29:00
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Citations
Chicago: “The First Amendment; Baram; Lerbenger; Rubin: Business Journalism,” 1976-11-24, WGBH, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed March 19, 2024, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-19f4r11r.
MLA: “The First Amendment; Baram; Lerbenger; Rubin: Business Journalism.” 1976-11-24. WGBH, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. March 19, 2024. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-19f4r11r>.
APA: The First Amendment; Baram; Lerbenger; Rubin: Business Journalism. Boston, MA: WGBH, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-19f4r11r