Coverage of the 2004 Edward R. Murrow Symposium with Peter Jennings [No Audio Until 0:05:24]

Scholarship dinner I find this part of the symposium tradition is especially gratifying because it's a reminder of the role that education can play in a successful life and a successful career. After all it was on this very campus Edward R. Murrow skills which he later translated into an international reputation for excellence. As you're well aware Edward R. Murrow is the reason we're here today. Merle was the first to understand the power and the responsibility of broadcasting the Edward R. Murrow School of Communications dedicated to making certain that this important awareness continues in every graduate comes from this school. Thank you for being here and I hope you all enjoyed this splendid evening. Thank you.

Edward R. Murrow came from a tiny hamlet in northwest Washington. He shared his ideals and values as a student at Washington State College and in Europe and through his style of journalism changed the way we look at the world. Admiral was an inspiration much just to his generation but to future generations of journalists to come. And for those of us who are lucky enough to work with him he was our mentor Ed Murrow made it plain to all of us who have been lucky enough to follow him at CBS News that he was a reporter with a conscience that accuracy fairness and the courage to face down pressure from governments from big business pressure from power is a sure sign of a good journalist. He had his run ins with all of the above and he never lost his way. His fresh eyes his

eloquence and his willingness to go in harm's way made him a reporter's reporter. And I can think of no higher tribute. Murrow joined CBS in 1935 and would soon stationed in London. He brought World War Two into American living room. Hello I'm out is and I was thinking that you can have little understanding of a life in London these days. There are no words to describe the thing that is happening Londoners come osing out of the ground tired and red eyed and fires are dying down. I saw them turn into their own street to see if their house was still standing. From here it now on radio. To see it now on television. Merle expanded journalistic horizons with his courage to stand up against Senator Joseph McCarthy and his investigation into the plight of migrant workers in Harvest

of Shame. Edward R. Murrow was professionalism his integrity his courage are well known. But I want you to think about another of his qualities. He was a progressive. He experimented with television. I think the popular phrase is he pushed the envelope. He did things that hadn't been done before and he did them successfully. Merle left to CBS in 1961 and worked for the Kennedy administration as head of the United States Information Agency. He was knighted by the Queen of England and in 1964 was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom with distinction a minor in education through mass communication and brought to of his endeavors to convey that truth and personal integrity. I think I'm a Twitter man and. His legacy does not need my endorsement but I cannot

imagine broadcast journalism without the early formative years of Edward R. Murrow. His ethics his values his dedication to the essence of the craft of this business of reporting seeing in a way in which he did it factually. But at the same time in a way the whole country could understand what it was that he was talking about and come to care about those events however separated they may have been from them. His devotion to the truth and his fearlessness in going after it and then broadcast it to set a standard that is going to live as long as journalism. So I'm sure I think it honors his memory far more to say not let's do it exactly as Edward R. Murrow did it but. Let's do it the way Edward R. Murrow might do it today. As you know the Merle award honors the person organization

or network exemplifying through service or performance the professional ideal of Edward R. Murrow. Last year we went to New York with Alex and some others to award to make the award to Sir Howard Stringer and I ended the conversation with a number of people a number of broadcasters and journalists who were there about about this award and came to understand a little better that within the broadcast profession and how deeply these values are cherished the values of. Commitment and professionalism and courage. We are very proud that Merle is an alum of Washington State University and at the School of Communication bears his name. I have sometimes said jokingly it's a little bit like having the Einstein school of physics you can't do much better than that. Our pastor award

recipients are listed in your program. But let me just name them for you because I think it is significant. 2003 Daniel Pearl in 2002 Daniel Schorr. Christiane Amanpour and Sir Howard Stringer in 2001 Bernard Shaw in 2000 Ted Turner in 1999. Keith Jackson and Al Neuharth in 1998. MAURY I should say too. And Walter Cronkite and Frank Blethyn and in 1997 Sam Donaldson this year's recipient for lifetime achievement in broadcasting brings honor to this award. Peter Jennings is a legendary television reporter a news anchor and foreign correspondent who has covered the most important world events of our time since he began his journalism career at a time which is preceded

the birth date of most of you here tonight. Even though he was exceedingly young at the time. 1964 those events included in every major national election the covering of the Millennium Eve 2000 the terrorist attacks of September 11 and currently the war in Iraq its aftermath from which Mr. Jennings just returned last week. I think we are particularly proud of this award because Peter Jennings career is marked by its depth and integrity and his courage. And many of you view the ongoing Peter Jennings reporting series including the provocative Jesus and Paul the word and the witness which aired last week. In addition to his 14 Emmy and a Peabody Award he has won the Harvard University Goldsmith career award for excellence in journalism the coveted radio and

television news director Paul White Award and in 2000 he was awarded the tall Saltash tie tie show off I guess is pronounced Award for Excellence in broadcast from the National Press Foundation. Here now from his colleagues at ABC News is a video tribute to Peter Jennings as he receives what we hope is a pinnacle of awards. The Edward R. Murrow work. For 20 years now my friend and colleague Peter Jennings has edited and anchored ABC World News Tonight. A lot of people ask how did it all be repeated here at ABC. Peter was in its 20s when ABC surprised just about everyone with this brash Canadian reporter to headline the evening news. Tornadoes usually just like the meteor went on to spend three years at the anchor desk. Then this young anchor suddenly found himself back in the field as a young reporter doing what he

loved most traveling and covering the world. Peter Jennings ABC News in Calcutta in reporting the news a longtime Middle East TV Many people in the west. Look at this and they say this is nothing but sand as history unfolded almost daily. Peter was there the Syrians have asked us to tell you that you are in a Syrian hospital. He was there as the Olympic Games in Munich were shattered by violence and terror. And I want you to come and we're going to make a comment like we have now are we on an all black. Event by event. Peter distinguished himself as a world class reporter. Would you release the hostages when were you released. So much so that Peter was made for an anchor on Roone Arledge as groundbreaking World News Tonight Xander Ginsburg and then Denver.

It was 1983 that Peter was named sole anchor of World News Tonight leaving the fate of Korean Airlines flight. Of course he's been there ever since from tragedy. We're going to stay on the air until NASA tells us what it knows to try out. Someone actually reached up and handed me a small piece of the wall that they had chipped away. It's those small moments that make up this extraordinary day of. Terror. To politics there are two great minds in the presidential race in life. This is one of them. War. War against Iraq and occupied Kuwait has begun. There's been quite an extraordinary day and the long struggle between the United States and Saddam Hussein. The great hope of peace. Peter has had a front row seat to history is thoughtfulness. So when you hear on the radio that seven people have been what do you think. Passion what happened to you. I was shocked at. His enormous curiosity his drive to get the story right have made World News Tonight what it is today. Why do so many

Americans get their news from Peter. You need look no further than September 11 2001. We were talking about massive casualties here at the moment. We. Have. His compassion his humanity. I check in with my children. And it. Who are deeply. Distressed. As I think young people are across the United States. And. So if you're a parent you got a kid in. Some other part of the country you call them up. And when the World News Tonight cameras dim Peters still at it. Working on some of the most daring timely and innovative documentaries as seen on network television. Who else could take on big tobacco and the big pharmaceuticals as well as taking time to talk and listen to. What do you think about the war. Oh. You tell me why. This is just simple. Give us the century and go in search of America as well as Jesus.

And who else people pull together. We entered into a new millennium. A 24 hour global celebration. It's been a pleasure and a privilege working alongside Peter here at ABC. He has done us all proud and he continues to be so from all of us here at ABC News. Congratulations mate. Peter please join me. It's now my pleasure trip to award you the Edward R. Murrow Award for lifetime achievement in broadcasting. I'm tempted to say about the film that the foregoing was a paid political announcement.

And President Rawlings Yes it is the pinnacle without without a shadow of a doubt. As I look at those. First of all thank you for coming. I have places full I'm told. I would love it if if people who were running the houselights could turn them up just a bit so that I could. Two things one so I could see that. See you to talk to you. And secondly to make sure don't leave in the middle without giving me some warning. I am. I don't quite know what to say as I was looking at the pictures of Ed in London our the CBS offices and the ABC offices were quite close to each other in

London my best friend in London still is the CBS chief foreign correspondent Tom Fenton. And as I was looking at some of the pictures of ed today outside all Souls Church next to what was broadcasting house for the British Broadcasting Corporation during World War 2 I realized again two things one that my dad who was a great international public broadcaster and my wife's dad Casey Freed's dad was a pioneer at NBC that how lucky I am to have had not only these roots in my own family and in my and my wife's family but having had ADD and my dad as the reason is to want the job that I wanted I think more than any other in my career. And that was to be the chief foreign correspondent for ABC being the anchor for the last 20 years has been great but I have to tell you that the years before that as the chief foreign correspondent and before that as the Middle East correspondent over the years which made a huge amount of difference in my life and I'm very mindful

tonight that there are a lot of young folks here who may be thinking about doing this in the future and perhaps in the question and answer service period we can talk a little bit about your future and not so much about mine. I want to thank some people and make some observations. First we have just come some of us have just come from the scholarship awards banquet and behind us over here as Mary Johnson would say that's another cougar first down. When I was very young and growing up in broadcasting my dad around the house I always wanted to sound like Mary Johnson and my dad and I so I would talk like this whatever I could. And my dad would come around and hit me on the head with the back of the head with a ruler and remind me what I tried to remind some kids earlier today which is the secret to good broadcasting I think is to be yourself. And in Mary Johnson It

sure sounds like himself. I want to thank President Rawlings and Mrs. Rawlings particularly for having been so kind to us both at their home and at dinner tonight. Your president has as we you probably know much better than I one of these good old boy approaches to life shocks you know. But is unable to discuss the first unable to disguise a first class a first class mind. And I want to thank Alex tan and his wife who have been so gracious to us today. We had a wonderful time flying across the balloons that have not been in this immediate part of the country before that I made a film and in Idaho a couple of years ago as part of the American series. So I just got out to the edge of this gorgeous country and in case he and I had a wonderful time coming in today and also of course I'd forgotten until it was mentioned the seating of this is also where the great Keith Jackson went. And as ABC News and ABC sports for many years where were both run by the same man the great Roone Arledge the late Roone Arledge. And so I knew Keith Well and and worked with him at

the those famous 1972 Munich Olympics. And he's a great guy. So that's another one of whom you can be quite extraordinarily proud. I have to tell you that if I had my way I wouldn't make a speech. I just sit here at the appropriate age and tell you stories about where I've been and what I've done and why it's been such a goal darn good time. But then you'd think I was lazy and I hadn't prepared very well. So in this face to face confrontation my wife says I should tell you one story at the beginning about how journalism happens to us on occasion and we were reminded or she was reminded because of the banquet tonight. Some years ago I went with President Carter on his first and only trip to China. President Nixon as you know reopened the American-Chinese relationship and it was something that President Carter wanted very much to do. I had

been to Hong Kong before during the Vietnam War but I had never been to China. I wanted badly to go. I called up a great China scholar named Mike Oxenberg at the University of Michigan who was also teaching many of the people in the White House and I asked him if he'd give me some prep lessons so that by the time I got to to Beijing I wouldn't sound like a complete idiot on the air. When we flew from Washington to Beijing and the first evening there was a banquet given by the Chinese in the famous Great Hall of the people of which makes you know this entire area. Just seemed like a closet it's so big. And we were all very excited about going to China. I was in very banal way. I want to know what the food was like to start with and whether Chinese laundries were as good as people really said they were. And I was deeply disappointed that the first dinner or the very first night we got there in the Great Hall of people was I didn't think very good. And as we were walking

out I happened to make this observation to a correspondent beside me who was an old China hand working for the Financial Times. I said I was a little surprised that the food wasn't very good. And he said oh no I'm not at all surprised. Not only was the food not good but he was all over in 45 minutes. There were no speeches of any consequence and the band didn't play any American music. The Chinese are telling Jimmy Carter that he isn't yet welcome. Well later that night after I'd found my television piece and I was on the phone filing for ABC radio and radio said Well is there anything else. I said well you know the truth of the matter is you know this is instant knowledge right. Instant expertise. I said you know I think the Chinese are telling the president that he's not really quite welcome yet. They said why not. I said we'll take the banquet tonight for example the food wasn't very good. The toasts were minimal was all over in 45 minutes they didn't even play Turkey in the straw that great American song that they played when Richard Nixon was here. Well what

happened of course was that ABC Radio took that and ran with it and every other American news organization who had a correspondent in China with the president got a call in the middle of the night. All of us longing for sleep saying Jennings is reporting Carter not welcome in China. How come you not report this. Well not only did I did I read the enmity of my colleagues in the international press corps but I turned out. Or should I say my colleague at The Financial Times turned out to be dead right. And our whole stay in China was ultimately measured by the menu. And when when President Carter finally had a meeting with Joe and lie and it went very well the Chinese then gave a final night unbelievable banquet the likes of which we had never seen. I remember the carrots and radishes were all carved in the shape of animals and I'd never seen Chinese food like that before

in my life nor ever expected to again. But it's always been a reminder for me that even in reporting the news the little things really count but luck counts more than anything else. Now as I said I didn't really want to make a speech but the thought was Professor time said that I might talk for 20 or 25 minutes or so I have no idea how much I've written down here. And then we might have an honest to goodness face to face encounter in which I might get to hear from you and we could have an exchange. I also don't like to be perfectly honest to talk about broadcasting. When I went overseas as a foreign correspondent there was nothing in America called the media press of any consequence of the big newspapers that people wrote about television. But when I came back some 20 odd years later there was a whole industry of media press and I decided very quickly after coming back from overseas. I had to do one of two things I did continue to pay attention to the politics of East Germany or had to pay attention to the media press

and I'm sorry to say I thought that East Germany before the wall came down. I thought that East Germany would be enough to occupy my tiny little mind and so I never paid much attention to the State of the industry. But in some respects you can't avoid it. And I know there is some expectation here that in the in the tradition of Ed Murrow I might have something to say about the state of broadcasting in the country today. So let me try. It occurred to me actually that I might find some inspiration in what he was thinking. Almost 50 years ago today those of you in the morrow school. Know it well but you may not all know what well but I couldn't help but notice that in a 1958 speech when he spoke to the radio and television news directors he first observed that he might be accused of fouling his own comfortable nest and when he had to say might just not do anybody any good. And I feel the same way and I echo the words he said

and that in every respect these instruments of radio and television have been as good to me as I could ever have imagined. Certainly as Murrow said beyond my view you've had a slight allusion to it from the president within the last two weeks my company has given me just within the last two weeks my company has given me the time and the resources to do first a pretty tough hour long examination in prime time of the government's drug policies and if those of you who are young have not seen the program called Ecstasy Rising I suggest that you get it and look at it or we'll send it to you. Whatever the case. But when it was cavalierly described as the most irresponsible piece of journalism we'd ever seen by the Bush administration's director of Drug Control Policy. My employer is and this is the point I'm making we're really quick to point out that it was anything but. So when Murrow was not certain about his employers his immediate employers in 1958 I am very certain in many respects about mine. More

recently I had been given the resources and three hours of prime time to examine the roots of Christianity. And I must say that my company's commitment to a pretty controversial piece of religion reporting was made well before Mel Gibson made clear how interested the audience really was and perhaps earlier today as an example this is something we may want to talk about in the Q&A. I don't mean to suggest that commercial broadcasting in America has lived up to its potential by any means. But Merle was right and I'm mindful about this tonight to remind us that just because our voices are amplified from one end of the country to the other it does not necessarily confer on us greater wisdom or understanding than we possessed when our voices reached only from one end of the bar to the other. But with that admonition in mind let me say just a few things almost in shorthand about broadcasting and broadcasting journalism today. Bearing in mind that I don't like to talk shop but it may lead you

to some thoughts which we can share. Face to face a little later. The current situation in Iraq and the public confusion about the policy as we saw reflected I think in the president's news conference last night leads me to ask whether we in broadcast journalism maybe in journalism general did enough in the run up to the war to foster public debate about the administration's stated intentions and the possible consequences on my own broadcast. I tell you by way of experience we tried and ironically were castigated pretty seriously by some who accuse us of not supporting the administration but even on occasion they said not being patriotic enough. I've had this experience before and it is one that is troubling and worth talking about. But now that the U.S. has embarked on a major campaign in the Islamic world I wonder if you think there has been appropriate debate now that we are

there in Afghanistan and Djibouti in Central Asia and in the southern Philippines. It is distressing to find the public has confused and divided as I think it is in general and until quite recently I think it was difficult for those in the country who had reservations about the war to be heard. One survey and it wasn't very well done survey I'm pleased to report found that my own broadcast was the most negative of those reporting on the war. But an example of negative was an Iraqi plaintively asking I Reporter John Donvan why U.S. forces weren't more helpful to his family which was without food and water. But in the wake of 9/11 and perhaps you've sense this already. We certainly do in the media and until quite recently the power of the White House bully pulpit was well quite powerful and the enthusiasm of much talk radio and some

of the cable operations for the invasion has been such that critics of the president's policies whether in the media or out have very often been questioned on the basis of their patriotism if they object. And I'm sad to say that I think this does give some people in the media pause. Not all by any means but some. It's always difficult when the country goes to war when American lives are at stake to be aggressive reporting the potential dangers. And it does not help in the fog of war or that in the fog of war we are at times overwhelmed by information and misinformation and disinformation. Sometimes those of you in the public wondered if we get the facts that we're being overwhelmed by misinformation and disinformation. And the answer is we often are. The point I'd like to make is that we might well be in Iraq anyway if the public

had been more fully informed. A public informed and consulted I think is likely to make the longer term sacrifices that such an ambitious military and foreign policy demands as I think we see very dramatically in the last couple of weeks and in the NIE that the president failed to make his quite lengthy speech before taking questions from the White House press corps the other night. The U.S. is pretty much running the world right now and in much of the media we are not doing enough I think to tell you what is being done. There is so much going on in the world and none of us I think in the media generally has kept up as well as we could. Now I would like to think or in my job I would like to think that if you were the public rattled our cage more vigorously and made yourselves clear that you value more reporting about the use of American power in the rest of the world we would be more responsive.

Sadly and I hate to say this. I think that the competitive pressures in American broadcasting today have not only undermined the quality of many programs and encourage some corporate executives to pay more attention to the bottom line than to the public trust but have made some of my colleagues and I mean this is the absolutely most generic general sense. A little too timid about advancing the cause in which we quite deeply believe. Ed morrow said in 1958 that if news is regarded as a commodity and only acceptable when it is saleable then I don't care what you call it it isn't news. And I think that Mauro's contention in 1958 has some particular relevance today. I don't think it behooves me to stand here and emphasize the dumbing down of so much television. If I cannot convince members of the public to shake corporate

executives out of their prejudices and show that you are interested in the rest of the world. But I should tell you if you despair about it we have quite recently seen at least one dramatic example of how effective a public uprising can be when many thousands of people decided that the big corporations one of for one of which I work. We're going to get even bigger and perhaps ignore the local importance of local broadcasters and who believe that the role and place of local broadcast is in their communities fabric was being threatened. The Federal Communications communication got such an uprising in its hands that it was forced to listen. And ultimately if you followed broadcasting news at all to retreat and whatever you think of the recent uproar about the so-called indecency on the airwaves and that in itself I think is hugely debatable. When people got riled up things changed at least a little bit and surely after

9/11 I do not need to make the point here that events in distant places are having a profound impact on all of us. The television networks used to have bureaus in almost every part of the world I opened. Somebody said I think here tonight. The first one in the Arab world. We now each of us have a handful of foreign correspondents to cover the world. And unless you rattle the cage is there any reason for the networks and the cables to believe that you really care. I suppose this is a slightly plaintive way of saying that those of us who do care could use your help but I also want to talk about something else tonight and I really am and I don't mean this literally I'm grateful for the courtesy you give me of listening. It is 40 years since I came to the United States as a young reporter and was sent immediately off to cover the civil rights struggle in the south and I had a wonderful great time seeing the rest of the world on somebody else's money.

Its true what they say and the propaganda Ive been there I think for every major significant news event specially overseas ones in the last 30 some odd years. And in my entire experience nothing has moved me quite so much as the coming together here in the country. In the wake of 9/11 and it saddens me deeply but in the wake of that shared experience America has become so apparently polarized that the clue to my state of mind at the moment is actually something that Thomas Jefferson said to restore harmony to render us again one people acting as one nation should be the object of every man really a patriot. I don't know maybe it started with the Robert Bork nomination to the Supreme Court. Maybe it was the 1988 campaign using the image of Willie Horton the convicts against Michael Dukakis. Maybe it was the Clarence Thomas hearings Whitewater the

Clinton sex scandal the Clinton impeachment the 2000 election whatever it may have been the public dialogue today. And surely you cannot avoid this has become vulgar to the point where I think it's shameful. Now it's true we've been through ugly cycles before. But today I think it has made much worse by the constant need for the drama of conflict that many broadcasters seem to demand. Our national conversation is very often a shouting match and too much of it is infected with venom. I'm not naive it's not to say that I imagine a world in which we all get along. And I do not think we need to single out of the right or the left or the talk radio ranters alone nor are the angry columnists to some extent.

I actually think we're all culpable including the state Center which by its silence is not without responsibility. But I really do wonder why is it the best selling books in the country have titles like shut up and saying Savage Nation bias slander lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. You know the titles. Well as I do they aren't just opinionated which is what troubles me. They're mean spirited name calling from the writers who characterize the caricature of their enemies. Now the founding fathers wanted the country to have a robust public dialogue and it is true you students of history know this better than I do that the founders had some pretty mean spirited name calling even pistol wielding arguments of their own. But they didn't have our modern communication system and other technologies which have increased the volume of public argument to an unholy racket and I don't know

about you. I'd love to hear from you but to meet our national conversation sometimes feels impoverished as a result. The Founders believed that the success of democracy depended in part on a civil public arena. Thomas Jefferson's insistence on a free education for all was to ensure that people would have the intellectual tools to join the public discussion. John Adams stressed morality because he believed that a moral people would edit their worst instincts and not let disputes dissolve into anarchy. George Washington some of you know actually wrote a book called 110 rules for civil behavior. I really recommend it. And number one hundred and ten is labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

After Jefferson advanced to the presidency you are caught in the middle of the nation's first big public political squabble. A chapter of intolerance he described as wicked and bitter and bloody. He pleaded with the nation to recover its voice its better voice. Let us restore to social intercourse. Jefferson wrote in his first inaugural that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life are but dreary things. The virtue of this principle has been in evidence throughout the country's history and it shows that civility doesn't just promote decency. It also leads I think to a fair exchange of ideas and a greater chance of finding workable solutions to the kinds of problems that we face and at the beginning of the 21st century we face innumerable. I think the problem of the exploding media in the country has made this a real issue for us. We now have

news sources operating 24/7 with a need to constantly fill the airwaves and the Web sites even when they have no real news to tell. If you've ever watched the dog being chased around on cable television until it finally pees on the Bush you will know precisely what I'm talking about. And it is this persistent need for conflict that can lead to the New Yorker suggests has led to a modern conflict bias on the part of the it's for what is more engaging than a cockfight. Bitterness may be corrosive but there is no doubt that it is also entertaining television interviews are often conducted his confrontations with the questioner sometimes shouting down his subject until he reveals his hidden biases. Do you consider yourself a liberal. Demanded Neil Cavuto a fox when Aletta was on cable with his program to talk about his piece in The New

Yorker. Was this a signal to Fox's conservative viewers that they could now discount anything that the letter said. Much of today's journalism I'm sad to say seems to be grounded in the desire to hurt or expose or belittle. I think you may disagree with me. I think of Michael Moore's ambush of Charlton Heston already stricken with Alzheimer's disease in Bowling for Columbine or move on or just display of an ad morphing President Bush into had off Hitler. But just consider if he were the disrespect shown daily by some of the radio host to anyone who disagrees with him. Whatever you think of Senator Clinton's politics the caricaturing of her and the former president is designed to hurt and in some cases I think we have discovered that the greater the excess the better the radio performer is paid.

Now there's no doubt that we mainstream journalists have some responsibility for this loss of political ethics and standards in the past. I think the mainstream traditional biased to the left has caused many conservatives to feel left out standard free market theories would then explain why so many options emerged on the right. I've long argued in my own shop that more conservative voices would be a positive development. But market market driven journalism has become the engine of our argument of culture. It's always cheaper to show it than to report a story reporting is not only expensive. As I talked to some students about today but it is unpredictable. It's a great thing about journalism in many cases it's unpredictability but it very often introduces complexity that disrupts hard and right or hard right or hard left points of view. For those of you thinking about journalism and I assume that's a reason one reason to attend this great university. I do

want to say this. There is real joy in doing it well. I just sometimes as I did a little while ago that journalism has enabled me to see the rest of the world and the company's money which is true but I know nothing so satisfying as doing a story. And by that I mean any story and my dad wherever he is the weather and knowing that you presented it fully contextually and understandably to a large number of people that is really the definition of making a difference. So it's probably only fair that I end this first portion and let you have a go at me by saying what I would do if I could or somebody said once if I were king I would do a weekly review of the news every week at a time when the public might be expected to watch. Which means prime time so that the public would be given some sense of context of the week we've just been through and what we might be facing in the week

ahead. I would make documentaries on television a regular part of the primetime schedule Frontline on public television is great but it is not enough. And I would include regular programming from other countries how they see us how disturbing it is to see the Iraqis responding in ways that we didn't anticipate even a month or so ago and why and how did it get to be that 55 percent of the people in Great Britain our closest ally in a poll not too long ago believe that it is the United States which is a threat to world peace. And I would make now that I'm out here on the edge. I would make network news an hour every night. Please do not. Please do not think that you can be well informed or fully informed let's be better let's be a little more charitable to what I do for a living. Please

do not think you can be fully informed by watching the evening news on television once a day for five days. You have to do more. And if I could just for the record I would institute the change that my late boss Roone Arledge came to believe in. After he discovered the downside of news as a profit center I would make news and information programming. Exempt from the rating system which in my. It. Is the rating system and the competition and the discovery in the 70s and 80s that we were a profit center usually which has driven so much of it in the direction of at the mercy of Michael Jackson and Britney Spears and Lacey Peterson thank God. Such excesses as you know do not speak well for those news organizations which claim to have the

public interest at heart. Excuse me please. I've been talking to them. So finally my wife asked the toughest question with you she said the other day. Tell these young people that admiral's alma mater to go into journalism or to do something else is a tough question. And the answer is if you believe what Murrow stood for and what my father stood for and what Casey's father stood for that broadcasting is a public service then I would say to all of you who are thinking about it. Please come into the business. We need you. And Muro said it best of all there is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought. He put it against ignorance intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television and radio can be so useful. Thanks for doing.

This. If you want to stretch yourself that's fine. But if not want to get out. Of the box. Now in order to see him better I've got to put on my glasses. And by the looks of it there are a couple microphones in the audience maybe they're more than I hope they're more than a couple. So those of you who'd like to have a go at me. But this is the time I like tough questions. I like opinions. And it hasn't taken you long at all to get there. So. Just tell me who you are on.

Yeah. My name is Angie Dohrmann and I'm a doctoral student in history from the University of Idaho and a high school teacher in the Central Basin of Washington. You mention the the silent center. And my question I guess the point. For you that maybe comes from my perspective is in many ways doesn't the large media encourage that and encourage that polarization. I've watched you I hate to say for a long long time I'm old too. And I appreciate your foreign policy point of view and the way you grasp that aspect that seems to be the sellable story but at the same time I work in a town of fifteen hundred people the high school of less than 200. We have kids sitting up here. We know five kids that are in Iraq right now. The stories to me are yes. The one that I would like to see told

is the small community these quiet people in the center that really nobody cares about outside of New York Washington Atlanta Miami the kind of middle America's Silent Majority type folks that get up go to work farm every day send their kids off. All these kids are in the Washington National Guard which is one of the most mobilized National Guard units in the United States. We send our kids off and we have a really direct connection to what is going on in Iraq. I mean you can sit there and connect with the kids that are going to get up in the morning and go to school with a young man who called his mom crying because a bullet whizzed by his head when he was he joined the National Guard so that he could get a discount to come to the university. We have a president whose father began cutting our military to next to nothing you know cut the numbers down cut the numbers. Now now we have a massive

array of civilian contractors who are now getting kidnapped and killed and hauled through the streets and we're overpaying them to do a job that soldiers are supposed to do. Angie or is it an Angie and is that shut up and ask my question No. But can I just take to cut it. Can I take some of that stuff. Sure. It's interesting that in this war unlike other war we have been criticized in the past. You've said a lot of things which have a lot of answers to that from my point of view in this war more than any that I can't campaign that I can recall Desert Storm. Some of the expeditions in Salvador and certainly Vietnam we have been criticized ironically in the national media and television for concentrating too much on the American soldier and the circumstance of the American soldier and marine in Iraq today rather than what the administration believes. And I think with some legitimacy as the broader

construction or reconstruction issue of Iraq. So on the one hand I actually think we are doing quite a lot of what you suggest in terms of being focused on American servicemen at the same time you raise something which I think in many respects is a better issue for your local television which is to say if you've got a good local television and you do in this area which is far better able to make the kind of connection I think you and others are looking for in terms of the men and women in your National Guard and I would be very surprised at a local television operation that does not have or has not attempted to make those kind of connections for what I call the sort of hometown market. I only agree with you wholeheartedly on one thing we don't cover enough farming. I have a son who's a farmer and I come from a farm country and I've never been able to convince my employers to spend enough time on American agriculture. But

on the war. I'm not sure that if you look with any degree of care I don't want to get into the debate with you what you think of the president or not. I think if you look at the coverage just even in the last two weeks you'll see policy being very vigorously debated in the national media not only about 9/11 but also about the current policy in Iraq. But I actually disagree with you a little bit about our connection this time in terms of American servicemen and women on the ground. Not sure that satisfies me. I guess. My point and you make this point well with this corporate and business angle that news media has it's hard for local. You know it shouldn't be true. Don't don't let your. Don't let your. Don't let your local station use that as an excuse. I'm sure that the ABC affiliate in the region would not use it as an excuse. For going was a paid political announcement. Can I go on to somebody else want to know. One more thing that says.

Be fair. I know a lot of people when Merlots on McCarthy right. It was sort of the beginning of the crumble of the end. So there is a difficult difficult time for local affiliates to take on extremely controversial because look what they've done to you but actually they didn't. That so far they were pretty good to me to be perfectly honest so I've been lucky to work for a company to give me a lot of freedom to to not to criticize but to ask tough questions. So in that respect I think I'm quite lucky. Yes ma'am. Can. You hear me. You're actually supposed to ask the question jump up and down the same time. We. Thank you. OK. I have a question. I know that you did a lot of hard correspondence and I was wondering if my comments. That's in girls day especially a lot of the American press was censored by foreign governments and foreign factors. And I was wondering why you personally

especially in the Middle East. How are you your party. Well you saw that. What's your name. About Christine. Christine you saw the picture of Admiral Knight in uniform during his service overseas with the American armed forces in World War II. Part of the time he was based in London working basically as a civilian foreign correspondent as we have all done and sometimes in the second war. If my memory serves me correctly foreign correspondents got the rank of captain and were subject to all kinds of censorship. We are far less. Circumscribed today though covering a war is always complicated. If you're with the troops we had an embedded system in the campaign against Iraq which in many respects enabled us to do more reporting that God knows that we were able to able to do in Desert Storm Desert Storm than the military actually locked us out and people sat you know and in in Saudi Arabia you know waiting for the invasion of Kuwait to be ordered this

time I think it was a much better thing. But there's been no formal censorship in this regard. If you were an embedded reporter in this war and you you were violated the sort of rules of where it is that you would at this time you violate what they would call security or safety you could lose you're in that position. But we don't have formal censorship. There's been formal censorship in other countries. I must tell you that when I arrived in Syria in Damascus it is an old enough story now that I probably won't be prosecuted for it. But Syria had censorship in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war you saw a picture of me at an operating theatre with the Israeli pilot who had just been shot down and they had a sense they had censorship but they didn't have the answer and they don't know how to run a censorship office so we Foreign Correspondent very smartly told them how they should run it. And. I remember I remember going to the souk in the market in Iraq we got a big rubber rubber stamp mates had passed by the censor when we gave it to them. We all have.

But. Most of us have been foreclosed upon us have spent our lives trying to get around the censors. Oh Charlie you can't stand to be an edgy major My question is in 1968 Walter Cronkite went on the air and in our decision that Johnson and decide not to run again with his comment that we cannot win the Vietnam War. Did you agree with that commentary and would you see major broadcast news anchors doing that today. It's very interesting you know because one of the things that Murtha argued in this definitive speech in 58 was that we in the networks should take commentary more seriously and we should do commentary both on our daily broadcast but that we should have editorial positions and we should label them as such. Cronkite is an anchor person to take an editor position as he did on the war after the Tet Offensive. Is was a very unusual and had a huge impact. Remember there are only three television networks of the time actually there are only two and a half. There was NBC CBS and us.

And so it had a huge impact the likes of which I don't think any one of us would ever have today if we chose that route. It's not a route I would choose. I'd be happy to have commentary come back on the air. Howard K. Smith was a great commentator for us. Eric Sevareid was a great commentator for CBS John Chancellor for NBC all added editorial input editorializing to the broadcast. But the trouble is as I said I'd like to do an hour. We don't have enough time on a daily basis to do all the news now that we have the technological reach we can do news all over the world in a day there's no delaying it anymore. So we don't have enough time I hate to give it up for that. I'm a little sad to see my friend Bill O'Reilly at Fox who used to work at ABC. He's always telling me that he wants to hear my opinion more. He should get out there and express your opinion. Like me he said and I point out that that's not it's not the most useful function I think for an anchor person. I prefer to people hear other opinion not that I don't have one and you don't see it expressed in the news you see it to

some extent expressed in the editorial selections we make of stories to cover and put on the air. But I think that sort of taking the time for the anchor persons editorial opinion on a daily basis is not the best use of our time. Yes ma'am. It was while I was wondering you talked a little about how. The British have a different opinion. Than we do ourselves. I've heard that from other people as well. Is that a function of them. Is it a function of reporters or international presence that our reporters in other countries. I don't think we have to talk to reporters in the country to get something of the same impression we are now the most powerful superpower in history. And we have at the moment not only a very aggressive foreign policy but we have a very aggressive commercial policy much and many American businessman's idea of globalization is to do with the American

way. And so and you also have a very very profound in the case of the British and the French to some extent very profound different opinions about what leads to an ultimate solution if such a solution is possible in the Middle East. If you look at the daily reporting of the Middle East in the United States and Britain you would sometimes think you are on two entirely different stories. British press for the most part French press to a lesser extent are infinitely more interested in the Arab and Palestinian point of view than the American press has traditionally been. So when you get a combination of power a country that an administration that clearly says quite openly in the president's case now that we'd like to have our way in the world our way in the world being to promote democracy and freedom in a fashion which the current administration subscribes to then I don't think we should be surprised to find resentments. And if you put that together with the fact that I give you an example I grew up in Canada. I got in trouble once for saying this so I'm

already in trouble for I don't mind saying it again. My mother was a profound imperialist and actually quite anti American. So I was a young man you know grew up being sort of indoctrinated with these terrible people to the south. Well the truth is it was all about bigness and it was all about power and it was all about the influence that America has a culture and the power it was having on this tiny little population to the north. And it's much that way in the rest of the world our arrival in the 21st century I think is going to be China which has which we can watch emerging from its inferiority complex almost day by day. But other countries in the world on which we have a very profound effect and sometimes find themselves unable to resist the American way. It can be very very very resentful. Yes ma'am thank you for coming today and also suggesting that more documentary and debate is needed in the media.

I created that documentary maker not a documentary. My question today is during the Afghan war my family and I were fortunate enough to have access to the British and Canadian and U.S. News we found consistently that in Germany Canada and the UK the news was available about 24 hours ahead of the US. What causes that delay and what role does editorial influence play in the U.S. news. The lad. The second part of your question is so general that it's a little little hard to answer. I mean we all in every news establishment in the country. Has an editorial point of view or many points of view and in newspapers which have for example publishers with very strong political points of view you should not be surprised to see that reflected on occasion certainly in the editorial pages and maybe even in the selection of the news pages a good newspaper

publisher believes that the best service to his or her community and we believe this and delivers to those of us who are idealists about this believe that the best service to community is fair and objective news and a full time basis. I don't know what to say about the first part because the truth matters. Afghanistan was such a difficult place to cover that we were all to some extent reliant on one another and to a large extent reliant on some of the Arab television networks most notably Al-Jazeera who was reporting from Kabul during the time of the serious U.S. attack on the air attack on Afghanistan when nobody else was there and able to report. So I don't know why they're getting stuff on the air a day before. We are. There's no question of censorship here. Maybe a question of delivery systems but in many cases we've been using much of the same raw material. And so I can answer that question either. I'm sorry.

Hi. Last year I was on the front row of the controversy surrounding Senator Patty Murray and her comments about the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and the impending war in Iraq. And I was just wondering I have two questions. How do you as a journalist balance selling the story and maintaining truth and integrity and also how or what can you suggest to those of us who are highly disconcerted by the media today. I saw your story and having the ratings be the priority there seem to be the priority rather than telling the full story and getting the truth or more important facts behind it. I hate to hate it when anybody suggest that I tried to sell the story. But I accept your criticism. The most effective thing you can do is to turn this off just turn the turn the television

off turn radio if you feel as strongly as you do or as you appear to about a lack of context or a lack of fairness or that somebody is trying to sell you. So I turn the television off or I turn the radio off I go somewhere else and and look for context one of the things we're so profoundly should be so profoundly grateful for in America is a is a body of news information and opinion on every imaginable subject in a variety of different ways. Now it's true that most of us have grown up under a custom television is a nice passive medium and and quite frankly some of the time I think we do a darn good job. I don't mean to you know to step too hard on what some of us do for a living. But if you and the other thing to do is tell us about it. You just have in one respect. I know that my father who is as I said earlier public broadcasting would roll over in his grave if he heard me promoting as I sometimes do. Coming up on World News Tonight tomorrow you know

World War Three pictures 11 I'm not quite that bad but my father would just die if you heard me doing that. It seems to be a reality of modern broadcasting that the people who do the news tell you what's coming up next. That's that's the least offensive that's the less offensive I think than people who hype the news and tell you you're going to get something which ultimately you're only going to get a little slice of. But you clearly are aware you're clearly all aware that in this competitive environment of which I spoke in which ratings have become so important to these corporations that you're going to get people rushing for the bottom on occasion. And you're smart enough to know that you're smart enough to go somewhere else when you're dissatisfied. Yes or two questions. What do you think of Fox News and what some perceive as a pro administration perspective but also what do you think of the use of consultants and Richard Clarke and ABC.

Can I answer the second part first because that will give me time to think about the first part. I think some of you may know this gentleman knows that Richard Clarke is a consultant to ABC News that means we pay him for his expertise. We also pay generals we also pay some people in science but not very many we over on it over the course of a year have periodic relationships with specialists with whom we make financial arrangements and we label them very carefully. The other day when I had to cover Condoleezza Rice's testimony I took about a minute explaining our relationship with Dick Clark before we got into her we did not imagine when we hired Mr. Clark that we were hiring anything other than one of the most serious counterterrorism experts in the country if not the greatest current one. Having worked for the Clinton administration and being carried over the Bush administration I for one I don't think anybody had any idea that he was going to write a book

which would suddenly make the news as dramatically as he did. And once he did it make the news in the To the extent that he did both we and he were very careful on how we used him. Subsequently we did not nor will we use him as a foil for Condoleezza Rice. But given the fact that the Bush administration went for his throat in every imaginable way after he testified we thought it fair at the time of her testimony to have him on briefly to comment as to whether anything there had caused him to change his mind. Fox has a more interesting question. I feel I feel I feel both good and bad and excited and indifferent by the presence of Fox first of all it's run by a man who is one of them. Roger Ailes a guy like very much but is one of the great salesmen and

communicators and packagers and product managers in the country. He's a really smart guy and he knows exactly what he's what he's doing. I like in some respects that Fox is what it is and that I know Fox is what it is. On some occasions it was clear to anybody who watched the coverage of the war that Fox was far more disposed to the administration without criticism than some of us were in the rest of the media didn't take me long to figure that out. And I think as long as you know what Fox is that's just fine. And by the way Fox is populated in some respects by really good reporters including Brit Hume who does a nightly news program who used to be our White House correspondent who are really good journalists. I think Bill O'Reilly has a legitimate pay a legitimate place on the debate page provided you know exactly what you're you know what you're getting what the one thing I think I do not like about FOX is the occasional maybe it's more than occasional because the moment I say this to you some is going to pick it up in New York

is the notion that in their advertising there is something absolutely dead right down the middle about them. We did we report you decide. I would be happy if Fox were not using that slogan in itself. It's it's not a harmful slogan but I think it's a little bit on the disingenuous side. But I'm glad that they're here. But as I said earlier I am unhappy with anybody in the media whether they're on Fox or CNN which has gone out of its way to try to compete with Fox on something of the same level. Anybody who thinks that the public debate today is best held at the highest decibel. I'm one who prefers calm conversation. Hope that was diplomatic. I just looked at my wife for approval sort of you know you didn't get

yourself in too much trouble there. Yes sir. Some would argue that Sidney domain's film Network offers a rather cynical and perhaps extreme approach to the issue of the mainstream media. Have you observed any manifestations even on the huge scale of the film's claims of sensationalism trumping all else. And furthermore what is your opinion of the film. God I hope you don't take this seriously. I live for the day I live for my last day in broadcasting. Please don't take this too serious. I live for my last day in broadcasting and when I can look in the camera and say I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore. It is. It is one of the great lines. It is one of the great lines in broadcasting and I do not know an anchor person male or female my age or younger who hasn't had that kind of day with the company. Yeah

there's some truth in the energy and the pace and even in the skepticism and occasional cynicism about the industry which appears in the film but like any other form of entertainment I think you know as well as I do just looking at the media that you can find that sensationalist to mention in some parts of broadcast and you won't find it in others. So I think it's not when people get about we get visitors. I don't want to make this a mass invitation but we get visitors who come to see World News Tonight every day we actually have a little veranda up top because we get someone if you want to come and see the broadcast. We come and when they come. Anybody I think has the network as I see it now for the broadcast on the chair I go like this. Now for the anchor guy in the broadcast making sure his jacket pulled out before he got to do it. They just break up. Think he only really does it. But the answer like so much of so much of life was if it was it was true in many parts but caricature another element Good evening

Mr. Jennings How are you. I thank you for just making sure. Anyways I wanted to personally thank you. My name is Kristina Armento I'm a freshman here at Yale and I want to thank you for your presentation recently with our children the younger generation especially covering the war in Iraq how the opinions of children and also what the scholarship school shooting and children's questions. Yes. And a lot of them anyway. Furthermore my question to you is obviously as you know you work for ABC. And they told me that these people were really smart. I try. They said it wasn't all football. All right this is where it gets hard. OK. So ABC is part of Disney and recently has been in the news that Disney has been in talks with Clear Channel about merging to be one of the

biggest media conglomerates we've ever seen. Comcast you mean Comcast. What the hell are off. Say. OK. I mean Comcast. So my question to you is what do you and I could take it if we could go work downtown when we're finished here. The two of us would be more than willing to do that seriously. My question to you is what is your opinion on that and. What is your opinion on the growing trend of media ownership and how future of broadcasting radio and television organizations ensure that media diversity is. That's a really good question. First of all it's Disney and Comcast and Comcast made what my boss would know my client would call an unfriendly takeover bid for ABC and I'm not sure we've seen the last of them. But I don't have the vaguest idea. I am neither party to any of that. And and you just some of those things in life you can't worry about. I worked for Cap Cities before. ABC and Disney but kept cities

and life changed and life went on. So I don't know much about their business arrangements. I read in the newspapers I think yesterday that he's looking for a slightly better return on its stock this year. But I have a rule in my shop which my wife used to have in her shop. I don't like people I try not to let people in my office even look at the Disney stock ticker because I think it will affect somehow way down the road or somewhere. You know their perception of when you want to do something that's good for the company. My view of working for Disney is quite simple if Disney is does something bad or dumb we report on it because I think it's good for us. Good for you I hope. And it's certainly good for Disney to be known as a company which expects that kind of treatment for an independent news division in one of the things I think anybody in news today worries about is whether or not the people in the corporation are breaching the firewall that has existed throughout my career between the news division and the corporation. And when that firewall gets breached then I think we're all in greater difficulty.

I agree with you philosophically or I think I agree with the implication of your question philosophically that the more media in fewer hands is not necessarily better for the country. And I made that reference to the FCC in which we actually had the only broadcast that covered that story at a pretty regular basis and there was a small town. I think it was in Montana which had had a chemical spill in the town and they were looking into their local radio station for some kind of warning and guidance on what to do. And it had been taken over by some big broadcaster in the east that never went. It didn't even have the vaguest idea what was happening and that's just bad for its bad for broadcasting that's bad for the town that's bad for a community that's bad for everything. So I mean I mean it's fairly For me it's a fairly sensible position to have. The greater the diversity the better it is for the country. Yes we. We've got time for about three more questions and then I'm told I'm told I have to be out of here by let you go home like the bars close of the circle around.

Your neighbors high. And. Everything. That. Grad school here at you. And I'm curious to know if there was anything early on in your career. I think it's very important that you tell stories that mean something or you tell stories that make a difference in someone's life. And I'm not sure if there's anything that stands out to you with all that you've covered over the years that stands out to us this is why I do what I do. He is what makes it all worth it. I think the thing for someone at my stage in life things stand out all the time for a variety of reasons. We had a little news conference today which in itself was an uncomfortable experience for me because I'm used to being on the other side of the camera. But there were some very there were some kids from the high schools here and they asked me you know what should they know about their careers and I said for goodness sakes to be cautious. And I reminded them that I had my first inauguration with Lyndon Johnson's inauguration in

1965 and I studied pretty hard. I'm a guy who really does his homework and I thought I really had it down pat. But halfway through the day when the parade was coming down pensée Pennsylvania Avenue past the White House I got cocky and I said I'm here come the Marines playing their song anchor's away. Everybody in the country except me remember that it was Navy. And in a similar broadcast having done a lot of study for some reason the Civil War came up and I said you know the great surrender ceremony at the Palmer talks. Is a long time ago mind you OK. And I have become deeply committed to American history says but it was about 40 years 40 years ago. I remember these things today as if they were alive because they reminded me about caution and I'll tell you one more story and then I probably should all like about it. I'll let take him last which I have told before but I think he has a worthwhile story for a young would be journalist. In 1969 I was living in Rome

and having a ball and my bosses called me up and said we want you to go to Beirut. I hung up the phone and they called back he said no we want you to move from RAW. I hung up again and they called back a third time and they said Excuse me you know what's going on in the Middle East you've been in and out of there a few times. We want you're going to us. Of course I figured I was going to leave and I left my glorious residence in Rome where I was having a ball and I moved to Beirut and on the first night I got to Beirut there was a big fight going on between the Lebanese army and the Palestinians in the south. And I didn't know anybody in town and I had to file by like 5:00 in the morning for what was the forerunner of Good Morning America called an America I called up the one journalist I knew in town so could you come down and have a drink with me and tell me what the heck is going on. Greed. And I wrote down every single word he said and I then typed it up and I broadcast it the next day without a slightest piece of editing I don't recommend this on a regular basis. And I was

absolutely right and everybody in York was just man with impressed. I was absolutely right. My apologies. And it was the last time in my six years six and a half years of permanent coverage of the Middle East that I was ever right. And it was the first reminder to me and I've been reminded in every story in every part of the world in every part of the country that I've worked ever since. Truth is really hard to get at and that you just have to. And part of the thing it's about nuanced nuance thing. I talked to really part of the great thing about what we do and what I hope some of you will do is going out and trying to understand the mix of opinion and philosophy colored by age and gender and geography and economic circumstance that makes what we do so absolutely profoundly exciting. So that's that's the best I can do on short notice. Last question yes sir. Let's go to my dad's island. I was wondering during your speech you spoke

about rattling or shaking the box. What can we do as viewers to press newscasters to give us a better story. Well let me just ask you just quickly what's your definition of a better story more detail like when you're talking about how the feelings that other countries have towards us. But the news doesn't always show that. Well I suppose there are there many ways you could. I mean you could the boring way you could send an e-mail to the companies you think you'd like to give you more. I mean it sounds a little primitive but it works. You could watch those programs which some of us slave over which try to give you a sense of context that you might not have got Otherwise it sounds a little pompous. That last answer but. But you know we try and you should look for places where those programs are on and you should protest.

I mean we were talking I was talking to the president earlier this evening actually he volunteered at the sun still at Scott College and there's a certain passivity. Some of us older guys think about the current generation of university student. They kind of wonder why you're upset about or wonder what you think should change in is I mean I made my early bones coverings student protest in the late 60s and every major college campus in the world with some kind of uprising in which reporters you know were deeply engaged. We are now the country is at war. There's a huge inequity in the country between the rich and the poor and. Every indication tells us the rich are getting rich and the poor getting poorer don't have to be a liberal or a socialist to realize that there's some consequences to that. We have problems of immigration in the country. What do you think of the country's immigration policy. There's so many ways. I know I sound like an old geezer don't I. There's so many ways that you and your mates could get involved and have a really good time doing it so nobody could

make us feel you could make us defensive with far less effort than you probably might imagine. I read all my mail I answered my angry telephone calls as best they can I try not to respond to those with anthrax in them. For we had an anthrax incident in my office and a child of one of my producers. We thought it was a spider but it turned out to be anthrax but my poor young assistant the other day some woman somewhere in the country sent me cookies with powdered sugar all over them and my secretary just threw them away and then she realized oh god went around the rest of it with her hands in her pockets not touching anybody. But I and I want to talk to all I want to talk to the angry people this story we did on Jesus and Paul a lot of people in the country thought he was great and I was trying a lot of people in the country who thought I was a blasphemer because I hadn't taken the New Testament absolutely literally in every respect. We love this kind of engagement with the public think I like just sitting every night

yakking at you. I'm not even sure I have any act at you too much this time. Thanks very much for coming. Out. Thank you very much. Peter Jennings son and thanks to all of you for joining us tonight. Well that's it. All. Right. Let. Me.

Say