Leslie Griffith

Will the Real Melissa Huckaby Please Stand Up?

The woman on the left is from Manteca, California. That’s very near Tracy, California where the woman on the right, also named Melissa Huckaby, was arrested in the maddeningly hard-to-believe rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.

Both are single moms, and both around the same age.  One key difference is that the Melissa on the left, although publicly accused of the same crime as the Melissa on the right, is the victim of mistaken identity.

Herein lies a multi-layered problem in journalism, one that could have led to a rush to judgment. But the person writing this now has watched this metastasizing and malignant metamorphosis first hand and learned--- never rush to judgment in the rush to air.

Melissa Huckaby on the left was mistakenly identified as the suspect by a local Bay Area television station. An employee in a television newsroom got the name of the suspect and then, apparently, found a picture of a woman with the same name living close to where the killing took place. Proximity her only crime, the Melissa Huckaby on the left used the social networking site—MySpace. Her picture was found there, then put on the air.

The falsely identified woman’s MySpace account is now closed, and she and her family no doubt wonder if or when they can walk Manteca streets safely again.

What the free and likely disillusioned Melissa Huckaby learned in this cruelest of ways is when journalists don’t do their jobs well, lives get broken and innocents harmed. What she likely does not understand is how endemic this problem is in newsrooms across the country, where life altering mistakes happen every day—mistakes that often damage much more than reputations. Some “mistakes” have the power to bring democracy to its knees, leaving citizens without access to diligently checked, thoroughly vetted information from various sources—so they can decide for themselves what to believe.

Hoisted on its own petard, mass-produced corporate media is an animal in a trap willing to chew through its own flesh to survive. But survival is at great expense. Corporate greed, with sales people essentially in charge of newsrooms and the profit motive directing the news, has crippled the Fourth Estate.  Still, citizens limp on—looking for nuggets of truth on-line, in a television news story or the local paper. They often find journalism is collateral damage. Those who dare to practice it in corporate media conduits are often labeled “resistant to change”—the death knell.

Over the last ten years, massive lay-offs damaged journalism’s most important collateral—the people who believe in getting the story straight.

Fact checkers were often the first to go—or the first to quit in protest as newscasts across the country multiplied like gerbils.

“All news all the time” is the new motto of television news: “Quantity over quality.”  Helicopter shots of traffic jams replace reporters with years of experience, and reporters once given time and encouragement to walk the beat with “boots on the ground” in an effort to find truth are now forced to do so many other jobs, it’s humanly impossible not to makes mistakes when compromises are demanded.

Those who stayed for the pension and the health insurance and the paycheck are filled with cold acquiescence. Marching, marching, marching—in conforming stupors. The spirit of a good reporter, the spirit of a revolutionary who questions both the corporate media itself and the government it’s beholden to, are mostly just shadows of their former selves. The owners of most corporate media are too far lost to understand by quelling the spirit of the town criers, they are destroying themselves in a perversely fascinating lemmings-off–a-cliff sort of way.

The internet now makes it possible to ruin a person’s life in seconds, not just locally but across the country.  Newspapers, web sites,  MySpace, Facebook and a myriad of other conduits have the potential of posting the same inaccurate information in the wink of an eye—or a “Poke” in it.

If those attempting to find reliable information are tempted to scream, “That damn so and so media corporation is so irresponsible I’ll never watch, or read or listen to it again!” Good, that’s certainly a start, but misinformation and out and out lies are so pervasive now, it’s not that simple.

About the same time Melissa Huckaby was misidentified in local media, the national media was called on the carpet for a headline that was pejorative, provocative and either a lie or a mistake.  Unfortunately, mistakes are not exclusive to television. Information is now so loose and people have such short, easily forgotten spurts of outrage, the mistakes flow down an ever-widening, ever-darker memory hole. The Fourth Estate in some cases has become a trash compactor, crushing stories into smaller blocks of garbage.

Recently the following conversation took place with a trusted reporter who not too long ago was allowed to help the citizens she serves put stories into perspective with some degree of context and sense of proportion. Now her corporate media company tells her viewers are too stupid to understand hard issues. Now she is told to tell her stories in 20 seconds and write twice as many stories to fill the never-ending newscasts.

My question: “How do you do that? My fingers would have whiplash!”

My friend paused, issued a sarcastic nose snort and said, “I write the story the way I used to, explaining all sides—then I take out the facts.”

To quote a lovely, young, bright, promising television producer who quit in protest over the inability to do her job, “I thought I was going to work for Chez Panisse and I ended up at McDonalds.”

No nutrition, just filler…and sometimes they can’t even get that right. Just ask the Melissa Huckaby on the left.

22 May 09: Leslie writing on this issue caught the attentsion of the Columbia Journalism Review

One Lone Bureau in Mumbai and an Actual reporter

Published in The Huffington Post December 1st, 2008

CNN made two scrupulous decisions before the tragedy in Mumbai. Both illustrating to the nation and the world the capacity of television news to be more than, as Edward R. Murrow put it, “Wires and a Box.”  If the other handful of networks owning America’s major conduits of information take notice, perhaps television journalism will not remain an oxymoron and the people’s trust in television journalists can be restored.

CNN proved ready for this tragedy by inherently understanding a bureau in India could become a strategically important move and possible open a window for the rest of us to peek through.  No other television news corporation had a bureau and a reporter there.

How did CNN figure that out?  With Pakistan to the northwest, generally considered to be one of the most dangerous places on the planet, Afghanistan next to Pakistan and Iran and Iraq next door, it did not take remarkable sagacity, but it did take money, and that’s why there were no other American television network bureaus there.  Stockholders these days often consider education excess.

Sectarian and political violence surround India, but until Thanksgiving Day, India was considered relatively safe. Relative being the operative word in that sentence.

The second thing CNN did right came in the form of a scrappy, brilliant, formidable reporter manning the lone bureau in India.  Sara Sidner barely flinched when explosions erupted and drunk and angry mobs surrounded her. She lives in India; she knew her stuff.  But then, Sara Sidner always had “Game” and a “Send me in coach” attitude.

Sara Sidner sat in the same chair as I for many years. She worked as an anchor on weekends and a reporter on week days.  Local news did not fight for her to stay. She had no contract keeping her from walking away-- so she did. She’s a rarity in television news today. She did not cover herself in airbrush makeup and flap her eye lashes or purse her dimples for the cameras. She wanted to be a reporter.

Few local corporate television executives notice Sara Sidner qualities these days, so she did what big fish in small ponds do. They either shrink or swim away and grow.

The pond Sara left was crowded with beauty queens toting beauty pageant sashes as resumes. Objectification to reach a goal is not Sara’s style.   Instead she chose the unknown. She chose to walk away from the comforts of home toward potential terror. She has a reporters heart and mind and if she could be cloned, American’s would be better informed and democracy safer. She chose to immerse herself in Indian culture while surrounded by countries with itchy- trigger- fingers, twisted loyalties and sectarian and political killing fields.

Following  the massacres in Mumbai one former intelligence member told Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity, that the “human intelligence networks” have collapsed---that there is complete reliance on “technological intelligence gathering. ” The same former intelligence officer said, “That contributed to the intelligence failure that perhaps could have stopped the “Thanksgiving day bedlam.”

Reporters based in foreign countries once helped fill that “intelligence void.” And anyone who has ever sent an e-mail to a friend, who misinterpreted the message, knows technology cannot replace human nuance. The lump in my throat melted when I saw Sara reporting from Mumbai. I knew her ability to gather information and relate it to others, and I also know America cannot avoid another 9/11 without understanding these conflicts.  People love Sara and sense her sincerity, and I wouldn’t be surprised if she did not come up with some answers as to whom the culprits were and the points they were trying to make.

 One personal note: When the contradictions of television news got too much for me, Sara Sidner sent flowers to my home and pleaded with me to return to television broadcasting. She indicated current destructive trends would change and reporters would be allowed to become public servants again. With those gestures, she considered my friendship more important than climbing the ladder to the anchor chair that in local and national news turns reporters into actors and creates myopic minds promoting corporate cronyism and corporate agendas. She was not looking for a camera close up, she was looking to be the real thing.

Silencing the Town Crier

First published in truthout.org  2nd September, 2008

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost."
    - Thomas Jefferson.

    How in the world can this happen? How in the world can citizens remain ensconced in their homes watching "American Idol" when a true American, who should be idolized, is getting arrested for nothing more than asking a few questions?

    Amy Goodman, who hosts one of the rare alternative news programs in the country, "Democracy Now," is not known for attracting attention to herself.

    She is not a Bill O'Reilly, shouting and screaming at anyone who disagrees. She is a journalist who loves diverse voices and putting events into perspective - helping American citizens get the information they need to make informed decisions.

    Yesterday, Goodman witnessed and experienced something very frightening that likely was not mentioned on your local news.

    During the opening of the Republican National Convention, she was arrested for asking police where her two producers were. They had been arrested, and because SHE asked a question police did not like, she was arrested too.

    After more than 20 years as a journalist, Goodman was doing what reporters are supposed to do. She was gathering news inside the Republican National Convention as well as seeking opposing views outside. Heavens to Betsy - a real journalist telling both sides!

    The video of a demure Goodman walking into a group of police who were dressed in riot gear - looking like guards outside a dictator's palace - is surreal. It also convinced me that Republicans would love to provoke citizens practicing their constitutional right of civil disobedience into acting like misguided idiots. Then the mass media, which have been lifting pom-poms for the Bush administration for years, can blame them and make them look like lunatics worthy only of dismissal.

    If Amy Goodman had been wearing an American flag or a Republican emblem on her lapel, I doubt she would have landed behind bars.

    Voices of dissent have always restored balance after times of extreme, and if those voices are silenced, can we still call ourselves a democracy?

    Goodman is one of the few working news persons to ask tough questions of powerful people, and they don't like it.

    This is the age of the bully, and those bullies don't want anyone showing America or the world that there is concern about where our country is headed. Bullies don't like discussion, and yesterday Amy Goodman was bullied right into the paddy wagon.

    Today, many of those in power want to convince sleeping Americans that dissension is evil - that it's unpatriotic and should be feared.

    How can a country formed by revolutionaries not understand that there is no democracy when there is no free press?

    To kill those who question is to kill democracy itself, and the end product is a dictatorship.

    When Iraq was invaded and the town criers lost their voices for not asking why, Americans lost their faith in journalists who are charged with protecting them.

    Now, as a small group fights to wrestle control away from a rich and powerful few owning our conduits of information, dissenting voices are rarely heard - these few own the people who should be asking the questions.

    But they don't own Goodman, and that's why she was arrested.

    Mass media owned by Viacom (entertainment) General Electric (arms dealers) Disneyland (let's just have some fun) and Fox (Rupert Murdoch, who likes to give John McCain a lift in his jet once in a while) are not about to give newsrooms across the country back to its citizens.

    Those sitting in anchor chairs reading the news are often there because they will say and do anything the corporation tells them to, and every one of those corporations has an agenda - and it's not protecting the public.

    Our conduits of information have been hijacked; a man, acting like a dictator, is in the White House; the town criers of democracy are getting arrested, and Americans' heads are so full of infotainment, Prozac and Zoloft that getting off the couch seems like a real inconvenience.

    There is a reason Americans rally. It is our right, and it is our way of pulling a country moving toward self-destruction back into the arms of the people who love it most - those who believe in all sides getting told; those who believe information without perspective is harmful; those who believe infotainment is not news, and those who believe corporate control of newsrooms is destroying a democracy.

    What a sad time for journalism. What a sad time for America.

    What will it take for journalists to put down their pom-poms for corporate media, get out of bed with the Bush administration and start fighting to do their jobs again?

    Perhaps Amy Goodman's illegal arrest will get Americans to stop listening to those who tell us the enemies are all around us and understand that the enemy is here within these divided states.

Cindy McCain: Pretty in Pink

The Huffington Post/7-10 The San Francisco Chronicle

Do we want our daughters pretty in pink?

This story took a week to ferment and bubble to the surface of my psyche. It is directed at women, and it's about a stupid news magazine cover that should not mean anything -- but for deeply complicated reasons it does.

The magazine is Newsweek and Cindy McCain is on the cover.

It's the message the cover of the magazine sends -- a message of conformity that First Ladies of old were mostly forced to project. Look closely -- conformity is illustrated in every pixel. Pick it up and take a look with an open-heart and an unjaundiced eye. Are we backsliding?
Or are we getting pushed.

The fingerprints of political consultants and image therapists are smeared over the cover like flies on -- well you know. Cindy McCain is no dummy. She's married to John McCain for goodness sakes, and she is the chairwoman of her own company. She's the age of most grandmothers, so why make her look as if she is just another Paris Hilton-ized size two?

Forced to project a pretty in pink image is not so easy, and once a woman gives the okay, it is hard to get the power to say no in return.

Most female anchors go through the same drill. Corporate owners of newsrooms -- often deeply entrenched in the entertainment business -- require subservience and deference. The pastels begin multiplying in the closet.

Consider the older man -- younger -- woman anchor teams with the same demographics as Cindy and John McCain. Many of the ultra-conformists running newsrooms across the country make sure the female is perky, smiling, deferential and pretty in pink. Is there a parallel? Are we selling out to be loved?

One anchor-woman in San Francisco wears a pink leather suit! Now really who is she trying to please? The answer to that question is the men who consider her an appendage -- a sweet little pussy cat -- purring perfection while giving up her own soul in the process. Hillary in blue slacks is their nightmare!

Why is it that the more conservative corporate leaders get, the more pretty in pink women show up to wave their pom-poms for the men in power -- men who often have few boundaries and wouldn't be caught dead in a pink suit.

We are back to the same old question: Why do women work so hard to be loved and why does that continue to involve being thin, having no wrinkles, smiling on cue and SHUTTING THEIR MOUTHS?

I know a woman who jogs six miles a day and cries as she pushes past all the other wives out doing the same thing. She says frankly that her husband will look elsewhere if she is not fit. He hasn't listened to a thing she's had to say in years

Imagine Princess Diana after attending a state dinner holding back her hair in the bathroom praying to the porcelain God. How many times did that dear woman wipe vomit from her designer gown or pick it out of her hair before leaving the restroom -- all in an effort to make a man love her who never did and never would?

What young women need now are heroes. They need to see women saying no to image consultants and unreal expectations. They need to understand images on most magazines are PhotoShopped and the lies of perfection are created by the publishers.

We've had President's wives who love birds and flowers and designer clothes and wanted nothing more than a title and a closed mouth. But there were a few who sat as equals: Abigail, Roselyn, Eleanor come to mind.

Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain -- who are you really? The consultants tell you not to speak of issues when those issues have defined your lives just as they have ours. Remember, for every person who hates you for opening your mouth -- two will admire your courage and feel protected by you.

This time around, America needs a woman in the White House tempering the testosterone with reason and helping an often isolated president understand the condition of the people living in the nation he governs for them. We need an Eleanor Roosevelt.

Between the years 1933 and 1945, Eleanor Roosevelt dictated 2,500 newspaper columns, wrote 300 magazine articles, published six books and gave roughly 70 speeches a year. She served as chair of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, and was routinely called "The First Lady of the World." That's the kind of First Lady America needs. We are tired of lies whether they be verbal, ocular, or PhotoShopped.

Ignore the consultants, be brave -- the times call for it and the people are demanding it. When Michelle and Cindy speak, we will spot the wife who is the friend to her husband and the woman who can be a friend to the nation. Yes, you must choose your words carefully, but after all -- that is what separates the girl from the woman isn't it?

Worn out images of perfection always self destruct. Nature makes sure of that. But honesty during hard times can make us stronger. Damn the consultants, damn the people who tell you to close your mouth.

Speak.

Bill O'Reilly meet bill Moyers

...violence does not consist so much in injuring and annihilating persons as in interrupting their continuity, making them play roles in which they no longer recognize themselves, making them betray not only commitments but their own substance."
                                                                        Emmanuel Levinas, Totally and Infinity


                                                    

I have just returned from the "Reform the Media" conference in Minneapolis. I was full of hope which is often mistaken for naivete.  That's my lame excuse for this:


(First published on the Huffington Post, 11 June, 2008)

I wanted to write an old-fashioned letter to both of you. I wanted to put pen to paper so you could each see I have a school- teacher's handwriting. It can be clean, precise, truthful and sometimes even amusing. I am not a threat. There is no anger in me.

I just returned to San Francisco from Minnesota where the "Reform the Media" group met for several days. I found it renewed my hope, but it also worried me. There were too many labels on our lapels. I am not liberal. I am not conservative. I am just me.

I don't know what those labels mean anymore. They seem terribly antiquated during these divisive times.

Consider the young man who spoke at the conference who started a popular hip-hop-on-line newspaper. He did so partly because the "ink gets all over your hands" from newspapers. Anything that is growing is in motion, constantly changing. The feel of the newspaper in the hands of my generation -- so comforting -- was just another mess to clean up for the young hip-hop entrepreneur.

Mr. O'Reilly, I apologize for what happened to your producer at that conference. It was unacceptable. The exchange with Bill Moyers was a flincher for me, but the worst part of the video was the young girl saying disparaging things about you. I hope for all our sakes she was not a journalist.

Bill Moyers taught me that UN-civil - discourse riles people up. Civil discourse educates and enlightens.
   
Having said that, I know it took balls for Bill O'Reilly's producer to walk into that convention hall among the perceived liberal-biased-self- righteous-wolves and it certainly took cajones to make a bee- line for the man journalists at the conference consider our present day Benjamin Franklin. Bill Moyers is the essence of who we all aspire to be. (without B.F's appetite for excess -- I hope.)

With that said, there is no excuse for degrading others. Our differences keep this engine of democracy oiled. But the discourse has to be respectful. In this country, we can still speak our minds and not go to prison. When we as journalists help citizens see through one another's eyes, we are doing our jobs well. The well-oiled machine begins to move forward. Bill Moyers taught me that too.

Now, stay with me as I present what at first will appear to be a non- sequiter.

In Kenya, an equatorial country, I have witnessed a man standing on the north side of the equatorial line with a plastic worn-out-bowl- in his hand. He drops a needle into the bowl. Gravity at the equator pulls the needle slowly toward the south. When that same man stands just a few feet away on the south side of the equator, the needle is pulled again by gravity and it points north.

On both sides, the needle is pulled toward the world's strongest point of gravity. Movement -- even at zero latitude. Movement at ground zero!

The confrontation between Bill Moyers and Bill O'Reilly's producer had much to with which man would appear on the other's show first. Each refused.

So what's the big deal? Americans have no leader telling them the truth, we are craving discussion.Why not start with the two of you? Help us see the world through the eyes of two men who represent the views of a a lot of people. Certainly, not everyone, but a lot.

Let the American people hear the conversation between them. Let's have the discussion, and let's make it fun not hateful. Let's learn. Let's act like free American citizens who don't have to bully each other to get a point across. Let's have civil-discourse with two leaders of two very strongly divided movements in America. The media corporations will love this proposal. But this time, let's use them!

Bargain for some of the proceeds of this televised meeting of the two Bills and get it in writing! Both sides should give the money to a group they believe is advancing democracy.

Here's the proposal:

A conversation with Bill Moyers and Bill O'Reilly.

Here are the rules:

The conversations should be on neutral ground -- (neither man's studio.) This civil discourse may get better ratings than the Super-Bowl!

Both networks should air the conversations simultaneously. Neither Bill gets top billing.
Have two moderators -- both men pick one. I nominate Phil Donohue for Bill Moyers -- he was my Oprah, so I naturally pick him. Bill O'Reilly can pick any moderator he wants. So can Mr. Moyers for that matter.

The moderators ask the questions. The American public is smart enough today to see when a moderator has an agenda to trap and insult and bring the conversation to a close. Stirring the pot will not make either of the Bills more popular: to do so will reveal the true nature of the man. Do his words come from the heart and promote public good, or do they injure and confuse?

Muckraking does not help create informed citizens, conversations do.

These two men represent many people on both sides of America's present day divide. Let's introduce ourselves to one another through them. Perhaps we will find we have more in common than we imagined. Perhaps.

Wise-well- chosen- words and empathy can only bring peace. Pride can only bring more ego driven fissures.

Before I left for the media conference, a woman, I consider my friend in the area, told me she "hates Bill Moyers and loves Bill O'Reilly." Remembering how much I like and admire her, I began to wonder how she finds comfort in the words of Mr. O'Reilly, and I felt sick that anyone could say they "hate" Bill Moyers. He is my version of Gandhi. His words move me to be a better neighbor and friend. He has taught me humility. He has shown me the value of an open mind and the value of a determined heart. He is my standard for good journalism.

As Joan Rivers might whisper in our ears, "Can we talk?"

Genetically modified Mouthpieces

Published June12, 2008

The San Francisco Bay Guardian.

In 2003 when I was working as an anchor for a San Francisco television station, anchors and reporters across the country were asked by the White House to refer to the Iraqi invasion as Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). We were asked to call the war in Afghanistan Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). Operation Infinite Justice (OIJ) had a rocky start because most of America’s Arab allies were offended. Muslims believed only Allah could provide “Infinite Justice.”
Even so, with press releases in hand journalist’s repeated genetically modified words as if their DNA depended upon it.   Genetically modified language is when propaganda wins, journalist sell out and the public loses. It is when words are twisted and massaged and spun until an entire suit of lies is woven to cover the guilty and cloak the truth. The Genetically Modified language, in the case of Iraq, was full of false bravado and moral superiority, in attempts to turn lies into honorable causes our dear children were willing to go to war for. 

But nothing caught on like “The War on Terror.”  It was a White House propaganda bonanza! Whole networks built their news around swirling “War on Terror” graphics and anchors began stories with “Today in the war on Terror,” while most of the world considered Americans the terrorists. That’s when I pulled up lame and refused to dance the destructive dance. Most of us who complained are gone now after some pretty nasty break ups.

Journalists as conduits of mass manipulation. I was too naïve then to understand it was nothing new. The lies were as poisonous as the tons of saran, mustard and VX nerve agents President Bush told us Saddam wanted to use on us. But, as the lies began scrubbing the girl away and the woman’s eyes opened, I started seeing the media’s complicity in the pain and death that followed. I read every book on propaganda I could find. I quickly learned Genetically Modified language was one of Joseph Goebbels favorite propaganda tools. But the dopes got duped.

Even so, many corporate “journalists” eagerly grabbed an American flag pining it to their lapels. Rooting for the war is much easier than asking hard questions revealing a conflict based on lies and a country led by liars.  Hard questions lead to other hard questions. Linear logic in this case is frightening.

We all wanted desperately to believe the White House Mantras.  Many are still repeating subtle propaganda in the name of patriotism on our nightly newscasts today. That’s why I am writing this now.

As you most likely are standing in judgment, I offer up this sliver of attempted redemption.  Journalist like most Americans are patriots too, we don’t want to believe the government is lying, but as odious as it may sound to the “My Country Right or Wrong people,” finding and revealing those lies used to be our job.

“The fourth Branch” was created to watch the government and anyone else using lies to gain power and profit at the expense of the safety and security of the American people.

Also, I ask the American public to consider their own role in the Iraqi quagmire.

Five years ago, when President Bush likened Saddam to Hitler in order to justify going to war, questioning the President’s motives was considered by corporate America unpatriotic.  Corporations exist for one reason: to make money.

Patriotism and genetically modified language delivered to newsrooms directly from the White House was easy. The words were powerful because “War on Terror” not only sounds authoritative, it makes a great graphic! All the polls agreed!

The President’s approval rating was high when America invaded Iraq and the media corporations blow toward the money. More viewers= more money.  So Patriotism was served up instead of unbiased news.
The media corporations began buying anchors and reporters who did not understand their part in the body bags.  Anchors, producers and assignment editors who would go along to get alone were hired, and they got to keep their pay checks and health coverage. This is why Disney, Viacom, Westinghouse  G.E., Murdoch and Cox should not own newsrooms. They are often the very ones the press should investigate.

Cognitive journalists can now see that using the White House Genetically Modified language with unquestioning devotion is one of the many reasons we lost the public trust five years ago.

The fourth branch our fore-fathers envisioned is broken. We became stenographers. Does the red-tally light on that newsroom camera lobotomize us?  Part of the problem is putting corporate anchors in anchor chairs where reporters should be. Certainly experienced reporters would notice the genetically modified words and their own complicity when it seems completely lost on those covered in layers of lip-gloss.

Now that former Press Secretary and once staunch Bush ally, Scott McClellan is walking toward redemption and has found the courage to speak the truth, the “Deer in the headlights” look on his face as he turned in his resignation makes perfect sense. I knew something was up.
Practicing Prevarication for a living wears most people down.

Now that the president’s approval rating has plummeted, it no longer takes courage to toss the White House pompoms in the trash heap and the genetically modified language with it.

With Bush’s approval rating lower than a snakes belly, no commercials will be lost if journalists are brave now, but we have lost more than we ever imagined, “ the penultimate loss” nearly five thousand dead American soldiers.

I propose journalists stop repeating Genetically Modified White House language, but they also go a step further.  I am about to fall on my sword here, so please open your mind.

On the very day it was leaked that Scott McClellan’s book reveals the country went to war based on known lies, the sweetest shiniest, dimple faced, airbrushed Bay Area Murdoch girl began a broadcast by announcing:
“Another American has given his life for his country today.”

Here is the falling on the sword part.

I was once that girl, but girls someday grow into women. Today I know that soldier was one of thousands who bravely believed in what the president said and died believing a lie the press helped promote.
I propose to this anchor women, who I imagine to be a nice person, read this instead:

“Another American has died in Iraq today, he was a beloved brother and child and he was number 4,084.
Then perhaps follow that with the number of wounded Iraqi veterans 30,329.
  In an attempt at truly unbiased  journalism end with the number  1,217.892 Iraqis who have lost their lives.

If this war, as McClellan says, and dozens of other experts have pointed out, was based on a great lie, let’s honor those who were brave and honorable and willing to believe the lie by bringing them home alive and stop repeating Genetically Modified words that glorify a conflict American journalists could have helped prevent by putting their pompoms down.

Lions for Lambs -- America in Need of Reporters

Lions for Lambs and a velvet censorship exposed

The movie Lions for Lambs damn near brought on the Post-Traumatic- stress that is someday inevitable for most reporters. Our eyes have to comprehend images that can never be erased and any sane person would never commit to a job that includes witnessing targets of tragedy and hate on a daily basis

We learn to cultivate ice in our veins until the PTS rolls in like fog.  But Lions for Lambs doesn't drift, it jolts. As jolting as sticking a tongue into a light socket.  My hair felt as if it was on fire, and the heartburn in my stomach moved into my throat. My daughter sitting next to me kept asking,  "Mom is this the way it was, is this the way it is?" I bowed my head, felt the ice in my veins melt and began weeping.

Finally someone understood and put on record "America's velvet censorship."

Tear ducts aren't anatomy parts used much by reporters.  Crying is debilitating, inconvenient and unprofessional. If one is unlucky enough to be an anchor as well as a reporter, it makes the eyes and nose red, and viewers are ruthless with rumors. "Could she be stoned, perhaps she's an alcoholic?" Cruelty is an epidemic in America today. You've read the tabloids, its ugly out in the open. Everyone's taking a shot.

Now that Lions for Lambs is on HBO, enough time has passed, and I believe I can write about it while avoiding too much sappy sentiment.

I don't always wait for credits after a movie, but when Lions for Lambs ended, sitting in a deserted theater in Steamboat Springs, Colorado, I could not leave the chair. I was dumbfounded. Considering all that I had witnessed in the last seven years since 9/11, I sat with my mouth open in a catatonic cantaloupe stupor. I could not move from the chair if I had wanted to. I needed to honor Robert Redford, and I needed to see who wrote it. I had to commit the name to memory. "Fire!" my daughter said playfully trying to get me to move. I would not budge.

Lions for Lambs was written by Matthew Cornahan and produced and directed by Robert Redford who reaches into the depths of human nature and knows how to pan the fool's gold from the nuggets that are real. He is a keen observer of human nature, and he was brave to do this film. The Bush administration is vindictive. The older Redford gets, the deeper he is drawn into the heart of any matter. And this film matters.

When I got home, after a menopausal outburst in the shower(as not to frighten the kids,) I pulled it together and Googled Matthew Cornahan.  I could not find out much about his personal background.  Was he a politician? Was he a reporter? Was he a college Professor? Could he have been a soldier?  How did Cornahan and Redford understand every nuance of what a velvet censorship is like? Had Carnahan lived under a dictatorship?

Meryl Streep played the part of the seasoned reporter who wakes up to find she has to chose between stenography and propaganda, and writing what she knows from her experience to be true.  I will not  give the ending away, but the reporter Streep plays has a choice to make. Does she do what she is trained to do, or does she regurgitate a press release and let the manipulators put more lives at risk?

Matthew Cornahan and Robert Redford 's knowledge of the events following the invasion of Iraq is nothing less than brilliant. "The Velvet Censorship" was a complicated erosion of values and the turning points are right there on screen to witness.

Now that the film is out on HBO, I took a deep breath and decided to watch it again.

As I did, I thought of the journalists who recognized the censorship and refused to play a role in it. I thought about the corporations running newsrooms today and how they censor by encouraging infotainment. I thought about today's reporters who don't know their history and are incapable of helping viewers put things in perspective. I thought about the corporations who now own once great newsrooms -- corporations who curry favor with the White House to keep gobbling up more Television and Radio stations. I thought about the courage it took to speak up knowing it could cost careers.

Fear is a powerful sedative, but there are many town criers (reporters) who refused to report only what the White House told them to. This is for them. They are American heroes.

Helen Thomas: Who would have thought after all those soft ball questions all those years lobbed at every President since John f. Kennedy, she would turn out to be a pit-bull? I am ashamed I did not see it before. I want to thank her for insisting the President tell the American people what he was up to. She never did get many answers, and she certainly fell from grace at the White House, but she showed more gumption than anyone else in the White House Briefing" room. "Mr. President what is the mission?" "Mr. President how did Afghanistan turn into Iraq?" " Mr. President the military still hasn't captured Bin Laden." On she went with countless questions which turned the President's face crimson.

I will forever call her Mt. St. Helen.

Dan Rather:  The last of the big boys. He is one tough Texas SOB. CBS and Viacom needed to win favor with the White House and Rather, who breathed life into CBS for years, and earned -- EARNED -- America's trust was thrown out like yesterday's garbage. He is now suing CBS. Rather refused to join the George W. Bush PomPom Brigade, he lost his job and now says he cannot get another one. We are talking about Dan Rather here folks. Then came the accusations against him. I cannot wait to hear his version of how CBS sabotaged his career after he criticized George Bush. I hope he has the fortitude to keep plugging. The world needs to understand what CBS did to him and how the "Tiffany" network is forever tarnished. Dan Rather is an American hero.

Paul Steiger was managing editor of The Wall Street Journal until Rupert Murdoch bought the paper. Steiger has formed an independent- non-profit- news organization called Propublica with some of the best reporters in the country on board. Steiger plans to deliver news to Americans without fear of retribution from commercial interests. He is a journalist in the true sense of the word. He is a stellar example of a man who still believes in the "Fourth Estate." Without it, citizens are uninformed and there is no democracy. Steiger is a patriot.

I thought of mark Ash, the director of Truthout.Org.  His on- line news service has been subjected to every shenanigan imaginable. His paper has been re-directed to subscriber's spam boxes with alarming consistency and his fortitude fighting to deliver alternative views to the American people makes him a present day revolutionary. When this velvet censorship is over Mark Ash should be honored.

I also thought about the dozens of journalists from all over the country who have written me with stories such as this one: "There's a military base right across the street from our television station where soldier's bodies are brought home. We were told never to point our cameras in that direction or ask questions about what's going on there."

Lions for Lambs is for those journalists -- not who tried to stop the war -- but who tried and continue to try to get truth about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the public. There are many, many others. Perhaps you can make your own list. The names of those -- many black listed today -- who refused to become stenographers or spread propaganda -- no matter how much we all want the lies to be true.

Seven years after 9/11, and a little more than two weeks before Memorial Day not much has changed. The mission in Iraq is still unclear. With few embedded journalists there, there is no way to know for sure who is telling the truth. PBS' Frontline recently did a story featuring one platoon who video-taped themselves doing their duty just in case the American people had forgotten them.

See: here

If only journalist would be allowed to do their jobs again, Hollywood, soldiers and others would not have to.

There are many journalists who have refused to cheer for the administration and read its press releases without checking for facts. But perhaps this film will help American citizens recognize  manipulation and think twice before keeping quiet.

Ode to Katie Couric and Dan Rather

May 9th, published on The Huffington Post and The Bay Area Guardian.

 

When Katie Couric was given the title of "America's Sweetheart" it was a death knell. America relishes devouring its sweethearts.

If the news magazines and newspapers are correct, Katie Couric's career at CBS, much like Dan Rather's, is toast. But the last chapters of this complex and revealing human drama are not written yet. Even so, the plot, the sub-plots, the lawsuit, the public's perverse interest, and the motivations are nothing if not Shakespearean.

Two years ago, Couric was the first woman to anchor one of the "Big three" networks' evening news broadcasts. On that day, I was called by local reporters for a quote. My own career in television began 26 years ago, about the same time as Couric's. "It's about time," I told the newspaper reporters, clearly focused on Couric breaking a glass ceiling and becoming a "first."

Couric and I have a few things in common. Bay Area viewers watched as I grew up before their eyes just as Katie Couric grew up in full view of the nation. Wives use to say in various ways, "You are the only other woman I will let my husband bring into the bedroom!" The intimacy of television is still very real, but the truth tellers of old are becoming history .

Couric's story certainly includes sexism, ageism, feminism and perhaps other isms. But to focus on those age old problems is to miss the big picture. And the big picture reveals what happens when broadcasting becomes just another business run by people with little or no concern for anything but profit. In this case, Westinghouse, Viacom, and CBS.

The new sales people in charge of many of today's commercial conduits of broadcast news want happy faces on the young women who "read" the news. When the chirpy attitudes evaporate and the young woman grows up -- the order is placed for fresh meat. It's pliable and can be controlled. That's both sexism and ageism. It's certainly nothing new.

In editorial meetings across the country probably at this very moment some male manager is delivering a good ole condescending nose- snort directed at the smartest woman in the room. The woman whose experiences with the new corporate media's lack of public concern and relentless pursuit of profit--has made her void of anchor charm.

It's a peculiar problem for a woman such as Couric in television news because women as objects of desire or objects in general is certainly becoming more popular again. Couric let the network photograph her legs, and use photo- shopped pictures for her publicity shots. Not a good move on her part.

But, that's nothing compared to some of today's female anchors who appear to enjoy being objectified. Farah Fawcett hairdos, layers of lip gloss, and air brushed make-up can make the most determined journalist give up. One recently posed in a bikini.

But perhaps the real focus should not be the "first" female aspect of this drama at all. It should be the relentlessly predatory and unfaithful way in which the new corporate media treats its talent--much like it treats the public. It does not care for either. If CBS believes someone else can bring in more revenue and less controversy, it's out with the old and in with the new. The once revered "Tiffany" network is irreversibly tarnishing itself by eating its own.

Westinghouse, Viacom and CBS were giddy with desire for Katie Couric when she was perky, effervescent and full of mischief. But that fades fast when it becomes clear the stockholders and corporations who buy commercials are the real objects of desire, and those sitting in that chair are not pleasing them. Often times those are the very entities committing crimes against citizens. Hopefully you understand the inherent contradictions in that.

The look on Couric's face these days resembles what I imagine a Christian must have looked like standing naked in the coliseum when the lions were turned loose. It's gut wrenching to watch.

It reminds me of the look on Dan Rather's face while bearing witness to his final days. It was brutal. He was a deer in the headlights appearing to be genuinely stun-gunned into a stupor.

As the most recent CBS-Viacom-Westinghouse drama unfolds and the curtain opens -- Americans are getting a view of the "Tiffany" network now controlled by a false wizard who has taken up residence in what was once the Emerald City.

Experienced Reporters Unwanted

Published  in The Huffington Post April 7th.

Several experienced Bay Area reporters were "let go" this week.

This is a national trend in local television news that can only hurt a democracy.

Wake up, dear friends.

Your local news has the money to buy a helicopter and install expensive high definition, but not the money to hire experienced investigative reporters to help protect your community? Shame on those handful of money-grubbing corporations who own the air waves these days. They have sold out the citizens who once depended on them.

News is now considered just another sales "product." That is a direct quote I heard from one local television executive.

If you think the corporations don't have the money to hire experienced reporters to protect you -- what ARE they buying? I can name two things: Helicopters and High Definition: One supplies empty calories, the other distracts with pretty pictures intended to look like news.

I recently published an op-ed called. "Switch Channels When the Helicopter Arrives!" The helicopter provides nothing but filler. It's truly mind-molesting to consider the logic of these mega-media-corporations. They begin losing money on newscasts, so they add more! What kind of stinkin-thinkin is that? Instead of making one newscast great, they have 10 mediocre ones! Then they have to fill the endless hours with cheap enfotainment a la helicopter shots of traffic jams, car chases, and grass fires.

Consider how many times anchors sound like third graders and look even sillier by tossing to endless helicopter shots that do nothing but distract viewers by taking up time. I suppose they think that if it is a grass fire on high definition it will look like news!

The money they spend on toys could be spent on experienced investigative reporters instead.

High definition also cost a fortune, and it too insures some destructive results. Inexpensive, and inexperienced anchors and reporters are guaranteed after high definition is installed. Why you ask? It's simple really -- only 20- and 30-years-olds look good on high definition. Wrinkles, thinning hair and age spots don't. Even though the seasoned reporter might deliver invaluable information, some idiot from some focus group tells the corporations " I just hate her hair!" The corporations next move? An ad -- fresh meat wanted.

This new "fresh meat' rarely has the experience once required to sit in that chair or report on a community they hardly know. They look and sound good, but what about protecting the citizens in their communities? Do they understand that's their job? More importantly, the corporations don't want them too smart or asking too many questions. That's why the investigative reporters are out...the naive and beautiful are in. I call this a form of censorship, the viewers are the victims.

If the public does not understand that experienced reporters are fired because they complain about what journalism has become, and they don't look good on high def., the corporations will continue adding cheap broadcasts with inexpensive and inexperienced anchors and reporters, many of whom have never walked outside the studio to learn about the communities they are supposed to protect. They can, however, ad-lib beautifully when it comes to car chases, grass fires and traffic jams. "Man oh man, look at chopper threes pictures of that grass fire-- the wind is certainly blowing!"

How can journalists protect you, and help you put events in perspective with a sense of context without understanding events themselves? They simply cannot. I have become convinced the leaders of many media corporations get confused if they try. They too have been dumbed down and fear questions might lose corporate sponsors.

At least now, viewers are speaking with their remotes. Local television news has gone from Chez Panisse to McDonalds. It is self-destructing by appealing to the lowest common denominator. Once great broadcasts have become tabloid provocateurs. Did any local broadcast lead with the Scooter Libby trial over Anna Nicole Smith? If they did, I did not see it. One involved treason that reached the highest levels of government, the other involved a sad little girl whose lack of self-reflection and self-esteem led to her death. Her story was perverse, Libby's story revealed a government out-of-control.

Rupert Murdoch and Fox News seem to be the media corporate icon and network all other corporations appear determined to imitate -- dumb down the audience, and they won't notice their own well being is compromised.

I understand a news anchor "reporting" from The San Francisco Bay Area does not live in the community he claims to inform. How can that be? It's much like a police officer refusing to patrol his or her beat. Without understanding the community, how can journalists keep its citizens safe? Reporters and anchors have to understand what's happening outside the studio door in order to ask the right questions and provide perspective and context. Side note: that same anchor, I am told, flies "home" every weekend and does commercials in his spare time. Holy smokes! How sad for the viewers who need a news organization to trust.

Remember when Tom Brokaw refused to do commercials years ago? He said his network might need to expose wrongdoing by those corporations someday, and the conflict of interest would stand in his way. Now the bar is so low, a snail with limbo skills would have trouble sliding under it.

I have written many articles on the media. There are some fine people still working within the corporate system hoping they can change it. I am very proud to know them. But, lets face it, the real free exchange of ideas is happening online and outside the mainstream media.

Soldiers do what reporters should---lift the cam-cords, press the button and record reality.

Published  in The Huffington Post and The Bay Guardian April 1st.

Tomorrow night you can watch the mother lode of reality shows. It’s called “Bad Voodoo War,” and it airs on PBS’ Frontline. “Bad voodoo War” is the story of a platoon of thirty soldiers in Iraq armed with both military might and cam-corders.  Cameras are attached to their humvees and carried in their hands as they take us on a mind-molesting mine-field of monotony that turns into an eruption of violence and leaves viewers sitting as anxious as nervous fingers on a loaded gun.

Director Deborah Scranton (The War Tapes) uses her brilliant “subject as reporter” theme to tell “Bad Voodoo’s War.”  With very few “embeds,” (journalists reporting from Iraq ) Scranton jars us into the reality of war by forcing us to see through the eyes of the soldiers.

She chose a California based National Guard unit with seasoned soldiers.  Almost all of them have seen prior active duty. They are not wide-eyed “want to be” warriors. They know the ropes, and they know a meaningful mission when they see one. Viewers get the impression there are many reasons to doubt this mission is worth the lives of the extraordinary men Scranton ’s cameras introduce us to.

At 18 years old, when most of our sons are working to get into someone’s pants, Jason Shaw learned how to tie tourniquets around his pant legs to keep himself and his fellow soldiers from “bleeding out” during battle. While fighting for control of the Baghdad airport in 1993, the18 year old Shaw was awarded the military’s third highest award for valor, The Silver Star.

He lost six of his best friends during that tour, returned to the states and moved to California to help care for the child of one of those buddies killed in action. Shaw, suffered from post traumatic stress syndrome, lost his girlfriend and his religion and insisted on returning to die with his “brothers” if he had to. He did not want them in a fight he might be able to help them win. His fear of them dying on the battlefield without him was stronger than his fear of returning to Iraq . He is now 22 years old in “Bad Voodoo War.” I wonder if he understands the bravest people are always afraid.

By now you know, the group calls itself “Bad Voodoo,” taking the nickname of their trusted Sergeant First Class Toby Nunn. It shows incredible insight on Nunn’s part, the group’s father figure. Nunn adopted the name while in the Balkans where Muslims and Christians were arguing over religion and wanted to know his. He said he was “Bad Voodoo.” The name stuck. The message clear—religion is nothing to kill over.

In the PBS Frontline segment, to air Tuesday night, Nunn and his platoon’s mission on this tour is to “Secure military and non-military elements going into Iraq .” The 30 man platoon protects the convoys as they drive from Kuwait into Iraq in an area known as IED ally. (Improvised explosive devices) It is clearly one of the “worst stretches of theater,” Nunn explains. Toby Nunn is not one for hyperbole, so when he says the road is dangerous, his men believe him, and it did not take long for them to see for themselves.

“The (new) surge, he says, has brought so many forces and so much equipment.” What Sergeant Nunn does not say is his 30 men are road Kamikazes. They keep their eyes peeled day and night for road side bombs, many bombs on IED alley are not on the side of the road at all, but in the middle, and those are often the hardest to see in the dark even with night goggles because the bombs are buried and waiting for a tire to trigger an explosion. Nunn uses his tripod and camera to show shrapnel following an explosion and explains how it flies—Helter Skelter-- jagged and burning hot—cutting off legs and body parts and destroying what appear to be very vulnerable military vehicles. If an IED awaits the convoy, Nunn and his men will find it one way or another.

When they make it through a particularly stressful 48 hour convoy escort alive, Nunn resembles a doting father, walking past the men’s beds making sure they sleep before he considers closing his eyes himself. He wants to hug them for their bravery, he knows he cannot. He would gladly give his life for them, and after watching the documentary, is it clear they know this. As Sergeant First Class Nunn takes one last look at his men, before trying to sleep himself, he knows tomorrow will only bring another kamikaze trip down the most dangerous road in Iraq.  Lying awake alone—ever vigilant—he sometimes talks to the camera as it were his closest confidant.

The road “Bad Voodoo” is guarding is the only access road the Bush administration and private companies (supporting and benefiting from the war) have to bring supplies in. This was certainly not the battlefield Nunn and his men were trained to navigate.

It’s a strange coincidence that I know Toby Nunn. I met him after his tours in the Balkans, Afghanistan and then his first tour in Iraq .  We met through a friend of mine who was on Nunn’s striker team during one of Nunn’s first Iraqi tours. I was told by my friend that Toby Nunn was “one of the finest soldiers” he had ever met. My friend is brilliant in his own right, so I agreed to meet Toby Nunn. I am proud to know him. Just as the men he watches over in “Bad Voodoo war.”

Toby has a loving wife and a new baby girl as well as two sons. In Iraq , he now has thirty sons. They listen to his every word. They know he can help save their lives. When Toby got the call to return to Iraq , I remember thinking, “So much is given by so few in this country." They fight, so many of us can pretend there is no war.  Many Americans can’t wait to get home from work to watch reality shows, but this time Toby’s reality is scheduled to air. This is reality that teaches. Thank goodness for director Deborah Scranton.

There are many things disturbing about his film. Why are U.S. soldiers protecting private contractors on “death ally” when the contractors “Bad Voodoo” protects, clearly have the money to hire private security of their own?  It’s time for Toby Nunn and his men to come home. They have given enough.

Another question that haunts me that Toby Nunn and his men are not allowed to answer in this film is-- what are they risking their lives for? What is in those convoys of trucks and tankers going into and out of Iraq ? What they carry in them would give the country great insight into the bush administration’s agenda. I hope whatever they are risking their lives to transport is helping to protect America and not lining the pockets of multi- billion-dollar-corporations who care little for anything but profit. Toby Nunn---and his men should not be sacrificed for money. They are priceless.

In one segment of the film, Nunn tries to communicate to Iraqi police. It is an impossible situation, and clearly Iraqi police have no idea how to lead. At one point, an Iraqi police officer asks, “Who do we complain to when they (Iraqi police) disobey orders?” No infrastructure is in place. How can American soldiers teach Iraqi soldiers who lived under a dictatorship how to lead? They are trained to be followers.

One final note to Toby and his men if I may? Toby is seen talking late at night to the cameras. He wonders if anyone cares they are traveling the highway of death everyday. He wonders how long they can live with the uncertainty and monotony and sleep deprivation and IEDs. He wonders out loud and without judgment if anyone understands what this war has become.

This is for you “Bad Voodoo.”  It is a poem I recently put under the pillows of my children when they arrived for our latest family reunion. The poem is written by the poet e.e. cummings.

“…here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud and the sky of the sky of a tree called life; which grows higher than soul can hope or mind can hide—and this is the wonder keeping the stars apart.

I carry your heart—I carry it in my heart…”   

“Bad Voodoo,” take the personal pronouns and turn them into the collective.  WE carry you in our hearts. Come home safe to us.

Dear Anchor Woman in the Bikini

Also published in Huffington Post on 2/28/08

---

Dear anchor woman in the bikini,

I am sorry, but I am determined NOT to commit your name to memory, or should I say mammary.

I am the reporter who wrote the story about the United States quietly ignoring a United Nations treaty on discrimination. The treaty was supposed to insure U.S. reports on discrimination, racism and torture by Americans -- that included abuses by the U.S. military anywhere in the world. Abu Ghrab and Guantanamo would likely have caused concern about spin control, so the U.S. just quietly ignored its promises. My story was on the left; your bikini-waxed thighs were on the right.

Guess which story people are still talking about today? Guess which story got the most attention? Guess why I am writing this now? It's simple really. You need a history lesson. Objectification is not the same as admiration. It is just a sad attempt for anatomical standing ovations. You are an anchor woman for goodness sake.

I'll bet you could have heard a pin drop in the editorial meeting the next day. I'll bet the other women in that room wanted to strangle you while the worst of the men looked lasciviously at your behind. Hoping the pictures weren't bluffing.

I often lecture journalism students attending universities and one thing I tell the broadcast journalists is to go to Hollywood if they just want to be on a star. Do us all a favor, because if the mirror is your magnet, you should never, ever call yourself a journalist, even if Rupert Murdoch says you can.

When I first started in television journalism I had a co-anchor who refused to let the female anchor co-lead. In other words he had to begin every newscast. This, of course, was sexism. We all knew having the man begin each broadcast just reinforced the woman as his pretty but un-equal appendage. In fact, this was such a big deal to those of us fighting to be taken seriously, the woman before me quit partly because she was the last female anchor in the country not allowed to alternate leads with the male anchor and subconsciously conveying to the audience she was second rate. Now this may sound silly, but remember, equality was the issue. The male already made an ungodly amount of money compared to the woman.

When I came on board, I signed a contract agreeing that in six months we would begin alternating anchors. On the night of the switch over, I noticed the producer's rundown did not reflect the agreement management had made with me. I called the general manager at home and reminded him of the date. I then heard the anchorman's phone ring at his desk as I walked into the "green room" which, by the way, is never green and never glamorous. I looked up to see the anchor man standing there.

Look up my resume after reading this if you want to understand how truly absurd this was.

He said, "Leslie, I believe you have earned your stripes around here." I had been reporting from all over the world for the last 14 years. He continued, "I have decided to let you lead the broadcast tonight. As of tonight we alternate." He had decided. I smiled and could barely bring myself to say thank you. I know to this day he considers me ungrateful. I've even read about his belief he "gave me the job." What he gave me was a glimpse of the road ahead.

Please bikini girl, keep your clothes on. There are enough obstacles to overcome.

On the Media

I hope these articles speak for themselves..all were published on The Huffington Post: Thank you Dan Rather was published also in Truthtout.org

One of my very dear female friends told me the other day while discussing how low the standards in journalism have gotten that I did not change--the business did. And that's just it. It's nothing more than a business owned by a handful of mega-media conglomerates. In many cases, profit dictates content and with these guys no amount of profit is ever enough. Too many in-depth stories create conflict for the media corporations, so many have just stopped doing them. That leaves the public without advocates. We know the corporations are stronger than the politicians, so we desperately need good journalists. We the people, need to get the FCC to break these media-monopolies up so all the nation, with all it's varied voices can be heard one again. Perhaps then, reporters can get back to doing their jobs.

Thank You, Dan Rather

Free Press?

Switch Channels When the Helicopter Arrives

Stop the Play-By-Play and Get in the Game

That's America Baby

Idiocracy: Why the Media Is Not Protecting the People

Racism and Sexism

A Lover's Quarrel With the World

We Have Mighty Hearts We Just Don't Have the Money and the Power Anymore

Such is Life

Bring on the Lobotomy

Rosie's Heart

Please comment

Silence

First published on The Huffington Post

The dumbest question on earth turned out to be the only pertinent one.

I was sitting at the anchor desk in San Francisco when President Bush delivered the State of the Union of 2003. We all expected an update on Afghanistan and instead the president pulled the now famous bait and switch. Magically, with no Democratic consensus, Osama became Saddam, and Afghanistan became Iraq. As the president was speaking, I called out to the camera people and the floor director in the studio. "I don't believe this, are you guys listening to this? Bush is preparing to go to war on another front without congressional approval." The president likened Saddam to Hitler and said Iraq had nuclear (Nuke-you-lure) weapons, biological weapons and chemical weapons. He used his 66 percent approval rating at the time to buy silence from the press and here's how that occurred in my life.

A camera person laughed and said, "Les, Bubba is about to rally the nation to another war. Wasn't Saddam Bubba Sr.'s nemesis?" The lights are bright, but I looked out into the dark studio and said, "Jesus, we have to say something. We can't just blithely sit here and pretend this is not worth discussing. The president is using 9/11 fear to start another war." The member of the Texas-Oil- Silver- Sperm- society is about to connect 9/11 to getting the oil fields and the enemy his father couldn't."

I waited, fearful that reporters from Washington would not speak up. I was fearful I would have to be the one to bring it up. Fearful that the new administration in our Fox affiliate would expect us to shut up and pretend we did not hear. I would later find out that's exactly what was expected of me. It was a new role for a loud-mouth girl from Texas, and one I did not know how to play.

Just a few years earlier, questioning power and asking fearless questions had earned our newscast the award of "Best Broadcast in the Nation," by the Project for Excellence in Journalism. PBS announced how rare we were and showed my picture. But, the good ole' boys in charge now did not really understand any of that. Now, in this fearful post 9/11 world, the new managers talked about Christianity, stared down those who cursed in the newsroom, and fired people so heartlessly they made them attend their own "goodbye parties" to save face. The other reporters had to watch this deceitful dance and were stricken with fear and loathed to speak up. I suppose that was the point. The world felt as if it was upside down, and I was now working for the "flat earth society."

When the president finally ended his speech, there was a recap by the reporters. It was stenographic in nature. There was no analysis, and no indication that another illegal war had been declared. I then opened my mouth. What I said next began the unraveling of a spotless 25 years of reporting.

"I did not hear any mention of the current war in Afghanistan or Osama Bin Laden." I said, hoping to prompt the seasoned reporter to point out the obvious and open discussion. Instead, he simply said, "That's right Leslie, the president did not mention Osama or Afghanistan." I sat there stunned.

As I left the studio, I was relieved to see that CNN was discussing the bait and switch that had just occurred. I left feeling a sense of dread. I found out the next day when I got to work, the feeling was justified.

As soon as I sat down at my desk the phone rang. The boss wanted to see me. This was the same boss who told me earlier not to make comments about global warming because he and the other bosses did not believe in it. I replied "As soon as the corporation figures a way to make money from global warming, they'll lead the charge against it." I am nothing if not a smart ass. I have since learned to suffer fools and pick my battles more carefully. But until then, I had never been censored in any way. Not on the air, and certainly not in the newsroom.

I walked toward the boss' office knowing the new ultra-conservative regime did not know my history as a reporter, and they did not care. I doubt any of them had read my resume. Controversy is the essence of news and they wanted no controversy. It cost them commercials.

"Hello, boss," I said. He got right to the point. "Never ask a question like that again. I've been fielding phone calls all day about it. Viewers felt it was unpatriotic."

So now, after 25 years of reporting from around the world, I was expected to be a stenographer. Again, I was a smart ass. "So, I said, perhaps we should change our promos from in-depth-coverage to See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil." He was pissed. He rose from his chair to dismiss me. I walked back to my desk as the newsroom watched. My crime was to ask a reporter's question following the State of the Union. I did not know the rules had changed and all questions following 9/11 were seen as unpatriotic. This same corporation had just banned The Dixie Chicks country band from their radio stations for making an anti-Bush statement.

Four years later, the nation wants to know where reporters were when it needed them most. I have heard a hundred times that the press has failed them. I, for one, was getting my ass kicked for merely pointing out the obvious.

Free Press?

American voices of dissent have been systematically silenced -- tonight's debate gives us a glimpse into how Fox network controls American politics during such crucial times in history.

One of the first things Russian president Vladimir Putin did in his ruthless exercise of power was to drive media moguls in charge of the fairly new "free press" into exile and put his loyalists in charge of Russia's fledgling media outlets. His goal, as has been reported by many print journalists is to "Restore Russia to greatness and consolidate his power." He sees the two as "inextricably connected" according to the magazine This Week. (December 21st) Controlling the free exchange of ideas is Stalin-esque right? Can we all agree on that?

So, what makes Fox network and ultimately Rupert Murdoch's exclusion of Ron Paul from tonight's debate any different from what Putin is doing in Russia? Voices that do not kow-tow to the powerful mainstream media are finding themselves outcasts from it. Have Americans completely forgotten the Constitution? Is the government so deeply entangled in the bed sheets of these mega-media corporations that voices of dissent are squelched without public outcry? Apparently the answer to that is da.

Fox news network depends upon the war. It made its name by being cheerleaders for it. The network itself depends on the industrial military complex and so do many of the other six mega-media corporations who own the airwaves. At least one, NBC, owned by General Electric, is making huge profits from the war.

In regard to Ron Paul and tonight's debate, Rupert Murdoch and Fox should never be allowed such Putin-like tactics. But much like Russian President Vladimir Putin maintaining power, controlling the people and protecting profit is more important than being public servants to the people our airwaves were meant to serve. In the beginning the airwaves were charged with the responsibility of being conduits of information from all points of view. How things have changed.

Ron Paul talks about the fourth amendment: privacy rights. He says, "Americans never have to give up liberties to be safe." Benjamin Franklin said it first, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Paul even defends Republican Mitt Romney's right to any religious belief he prefers. A strict Constitutionalist, Ron Paul does not believe religion should ever play any role in electing our officials. However, Paul defends any candidate's right to believe whatever he wants as long as that candidate does not make it part of his political platform. Paul knows that a country that votes for the person with the "right" religion is a country destined to fall apart. Paul calls it "a soft form of fascism." Wars fought in the name of religion in the world today are too numerous to count.

Separation of church and state, and personal religious freedom are just two reasons the revolutionary war was fought and America was founded. Ron Paul reminds anyone who will listen of that as well.

Paul also talks about "raising a new generation that understands virtue cannot be legislated," and he is the darling of online voters. That alone must threaten the networks as network ratings dwindle when Paul's followers turn off the tube and get online. That could be the real reason Paul was excluded tonight.

I am not a Ron Paul voter. I am an American who wants to learn as much as I can about every candidate.

Kucinich was stopped from speaking in Iowa and now Ron Paul.

Shame, shame, shame Fox network -- Murdoch and Putin should be pen-pals.

Stop the Play-By-Play and Get in the Game

Reporters, do your jobs. Please, we need you desperately. This play-by- play "analysis" of politics has got to stop. Endless hours of speculation about which candidate called the other "nice" and what it means. Children on the playground have more profound dialogue.

I hung a map of the world up the other day and ran out of thumbtacks before I could pin-point all the countries that now hate us or think we are involved in sabotaging them.

A world spinning in chaos and reporters get sucked into conversations and elaborate speculation about the political implications of the "N" word---"NICE?" This country is in so much trouble, one government teacher wrote me the other day and said she had no idea what to teach her students. She asked, "Do I tell them their president committed treasonous acts?"

Reporters have a duty to push the dialogue forward with analysis. This tit-for-tat reporting does not do anything but make the bad guys happy and frustrate the voters. It's all inside the beltway stuff. Ordinary citizens don't give a rats behind about who called who nice or not and the potential political impact it may have on which candidate.

Ordinary citizens do care that corporations they work for are downsizing, they cannot afford health care, their children are getting a poor education, and our government agencies are protecting corporations instead of its citizens. Ordinary people worry about their pension plans and social security. With two wars on two fronts our little blue planet may not be around much longer to fight over.

Please, reporters, help Americans focus on the issues. They are complicated and not conducive to a 30-second soundbite. Unfortunately that means citizens have to find a conduit for news that is not corporate sponsored. There are a few good ones left...but most media corporations no longer do their jobs. Find good non-profit publications for now. Support the reporters who ask the questions you would, and support that publication financially.

There is much to do. Get out of the play-by-play box reporters, get in the game and direct the conversations into productive dialogue. This country needs you.

Switch Channels When the Helicopter Arrives

Buying a helicopter in television news changes the way we look at things.

There's an old saying that if all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. That's what the chopper does.

Suddenly, those traffic jams, freeway chases and back-yard fires are a lot more accessible. Because they are accessible and "live," they can make a three-car-pile- up seem like a hostage crisis. The boys in charge of news are buying their toys. They are not paying for the investigative reporter who walks the beat and enlightens viewers.

The "reporter" inside the helicopter, if there is one, is often the weakest of the litter. Usually, the guy who does the traffic reports in the morning. As a result, the chopper shots provide little or no context, no sense of proportion or applicable knowledge, and the noise and intrusion a helicopter often creates adds more chaos just by being there.

In local news, helicopters are all the rage. They fool viewers into believing they are watching something that matters. This phenomenon began with O.J. and his attempted freeway non-chase. Hordes of Americans watched. Consultants took note and began singing and shouting out loud in unison. "Get a helicopter, Eureka! That's the ticket! America will begin watching local news again!"

Los Angeles newscasts take this to such extremes producers and news directors would interrupt "The State of the Union" for a good helicopter shot of a fleeing robbery suspect. If a lie detector test between the president and the other criminal were involved -- I might even be tempted to watch. Now THERE'S a Murdoch moment. But enough about criminals and deception and back to the helicopters that bring you the "news as it happens."

Begin counting the number of helicopter shots in your local newscast. Make a list and then jot down where the camera points its lens. It's usually something of little consequence, and it usually does not deliver knowledge of any substantial meaning. "Boy oh Boy" the anchor gushes, "That grass fire sure is smoky!" No reporter on the scene, No live van, No editing, No play back machines No producers. It's cheap -- it fills up the never-ending news hours -- and most of the time, that's why helicopters are used.

Eventually the helicopters take on a life of their own. They are named like children, and anchors become their advertisers. (Promoting-doting parents.)

Imagine what it feels like to be a 49-year-old anchor woman, who remembers when she use to do real journalism, forced to utter words such as, "As you can see from chopper two, three or four -- that traffic's something! Don't expect the spouse to be home for dinner any time soon." I always pictured five-year-olds in The Bay Area running to their television set salivating and pointing. "Mom, hey Mom, the helicopters on!" I wonder how the media-corporation measures that demographic? Chopper four is brought to you by the latest transformer toy and pampers! Truth is, the media corporation does not care if you are informed, it only cares the television is on. That means ratings and that means advertising dollars.

Where are you Ted Koppel? Can't you grin and poke fun and say in your trademark way, "With all due respect, the American people are getting bamboozled?" Nope, you and the other great ones are gone. Too tired, I guess, to fight the consultants and salespeople now running the Murdoch news. Funny thing about helicopters and high definition and all the toys -- something had to be subtracted to pay for it, and it was investigative reporters who kept the country safe, loved their viewers like neighbors, and took pride in warning them of potential danger. Those few mega-media-corporations who own all the nations conduits of information today, with a few exceptions, cater to commercial interests only. When that happens, the media corporation cannot offend anyone who might buy one of those commercials. My, we are certainly in a mess. This democracy is fragile, and those who decide what Americans should know don't want them to know it, or won't spend the money to provide it.

Who are the heroes in today's self-destructive media -- besides the helicopters? The anchor who can fill 20 minutes with meaningless grass-fire-helicopter-banter. Hum let's see --Ted Koppel or an air-brushed babbling anchor person who earnestly believes the grass fire on the side of the road effecting no one is news.

The bar is now so low, a snail with limbo skills might have trouble sliding under it. Perhaps local news slogans should be "how low can we go and still make money?"

There's a national tug of war for the nation's airwaves, and the good guys, the few newsrooms that hold out for real journalism are losing. Reporters who ask tough, socially responsible questions are often considered pains in the ass by management, sometimes demoted, sometimes fired, and even ignored at press conferences that these days are apparently often faked anyway.

The Rupert Murdochs of this world are controlling what you and your children put in their minds...the king of the reality show who teaches the masses to connive, manipulate, steal, and lie their way to unearned recognition holds all the cards. Perhaps he will buy more helicopters! The forth estate is bankrupt.. Chez Panisse is now McDonalds...and the helicopter shots are just more empty calories.

Judith Regan's Story Seems Like a Walk in the Park to Me

It happens everyday in the relatively new world of mega-media-corporations, and it began with the FCC approved media mergers of 1996. That gave those with money the right to buy all the media outlets they could afford, thereby controlling agendas and conversations in a democracy. They are now so powerful they have no fear of retribution and therefore few ethics. The "People's airwaves" are now owned by arch conservatives. You want more proof: Here's my story. I will deliver it in headlines:

2005:

I wrote and produced a story on Ringling Bros. Barnum & Baily Circus and its abuse of the endangered Asian elephants performing around the world. The abuse is well documented by a few brave members of the USDA and Ringling workers as well.

Ringling is owned by Kenneth Feld, who according to documents in two lawsuits against him, is a bad dude indeed with friendly ties to not only the Las Vegas Mafia but just about every conservative media corporation in the country -- including News Corporation. (ala Judith Regan) Kenneth Feld and Michael Eisner own Disney on Ice together. Disney owns ABC.

I won a National award for the elephant abuse story. In that story I used the Circus' OWN video to make my points. Hard to argue with that -- one might say! But that does not stop the Corporate media or corporate Cronyism.

Next thing I knew, high profile Ringling Bros. attorneys flew into The San Francisco Bay Area and complained to my bosses that their eyes were playing tricks on them. What viewers witnessed in my reports did not really happen. In other words, viewers did not really see what they saw. That took a lot of nerve since the video was taken by RINGLING ITSELF and obtained by me through my sources.

This was the head smacking moment when I began to understand what I had blithely stepped into. Lies and deceit so intense it would make Machiavelli blush. I found out about a lawsuit against Kenneth Feld by Jan Pottker who claims Feld ruined her journalistic career by bugging her home, having her followed and interfering with her publishing efforts in unfathomable ways. See: The Greatest Vendetta on Earth by Jeff Stein.

Kenneth Feld had the former head of covert operations Claire George on his payroll at the time. Claire George is another bad dude whose worship of money and power makes all things duplicitous possible. Feld's former CFO admitted under oath during a deposition that Kenneth Feld did some horrifying things to Ms. Pottker. Nine year later, and millions of dollars spent to postpone a trial -- Pottker waits for justice and Feld continues to manipulate the press and disregard the first amendment. He can -- he's got the corporate media on his side.

2006:

I found out most of Ringling Bros. endangered Asian elephants traveling the world have been exposed to or have full blown M-Tuberculosis. The same strain of tuberculosis human beings carry and contract. TB in elephants is unheard of in the wild.

I tried to tell my Fox affiliate station of this huge public health issue. I was told "We do not see the story."

I lose my girlish enthusiasm and become completely void of anchor charm.

Meanwhile, in the nation's capitol, Ringling's attorneys are asked to release medical records in Federal court that would later prove my t.b. story to be correct. Patrick Ryan of the Los Angeles County health department says "Elephants exposed to M-TB should never be around the public--because there is no way to tell when they are cured." Don Francis, a world renowned epidemiologist who help discover AIDS and ran the Centers for Disease Control first AIDS division, looked at my evidence and said, "Ringling showed reckless disregard for public health by taking these exposed and infected Asian elephants around the country."

Washington based attorney Katherine Meyer is representing several of the largest animal rights groups in the country and suing Feld for abusing the Asian elephants including knowingly covering up the fact that most of them tested positive or had M-Tuberculosis. That case has been pending for almost eight years. Ringling's attorneys have filed enough delaying motions to make Linda Blair's head spin.

Ringling attorneys claimed in federal court that they should not have to release the medical records of the elephants (which include evidence of horrible beatings) because the information would be miss-used like it was by "The reporter in San Francisco." That would be me.

I am voted best anchor in Oakland magazine.

Shortly after that magazine is published, an anonymous half page defamatory article is written in The Oakland Tribune calling me a "dumb blonde." My recently hired Fox affiliate bosses begin to wonder -- between the Ringling attorneys, the Oakland Tribune article, and my increasing disillusioned attitude, if there's something amiss. They also notice Ringling has not been advertising with the station since my stories began.

As far as I know, the Oakland Tribune article was the first of its kind in any major newspaper.

It was unsigned-outside-an-editorial-section and written by an anonymous source called "The grump." "The Grump" had never written anything negative about anyone before. Previous to the article about me, he wrote mostly about things such as duck poop around our lovely lake Merritt sticking to the shoes of joggers.

Kenneth Feld's M.O. was all over that story like shit on tennis shoes.

A genetically close member of Feld's family called to tell me Kenneth Feld planted the "Oakland Tribune" story. I ask for an investigation by my Fox affiliate. They refused. "Just ignore it," they said. I later found three other reporters, sans Jan Pottker, who have been through similar adventures with Kenneth Feld. See: "The Scary Circus."

One extremely well known reporter had his fiancé stolen away by a muscle bound babe who apparently had a lot of Kenneth Feld's money to throw around as enticement.

2007:

I quit my high-profile-high-paying job now that I understood the propaganda and corporate cronyism and greed involved.

Kenneth Feld, who at first called my stories about M-TB in his elephants a lie, has just sponsored a Ringling Bros. conference on TB in Asian elephants positioning himself as the endangered species savior. He invited the world's experts to Florida and pretended the t.b. was shocking to him. Despite very clear evidence he tried to hide it from the public since 1993.

I got an e-mail from the same Feld family member who said "I had guts" for telling the Ringling Bros. tuberculosis story and Kenneth Feld's subsequent 15 years of covering it up. In other words be careful! Feld would still get me in some nefarious way. As a journalist, I can only say I hope the elephants will now get help. But media corporations with stockpiles to lose in commercials by reporting the truth are rare -- if not gone forever.

When I was just 26, I reported from Moscow. The Cold War was still silently raging. Reporters writing anything negative about the government did so underground. If they were caught, they lost their jobs and their reputations. That's if they were lucky. If they were unlucky, they got thrown in jail. Today, in America, substitute government for corporation then sadly in the land of the "free" add media corporation.

We Have Mighty Hearts We Just Don't Have the Money and the Power Anymore

Reading my morning paper, I note two things: Mariane Pearl says, "Celebrities are doing the job of journalists," and blogger James Boyce wonders why the American media has deserted us --specifically, in regard to the bloodbaths in Burma.

Where to begin?

I read A Mighty Heart. Thank you Daniel Pearl. I will tell my grandchildren about you someday. Mariane, I reach my arms out to you where ever you are, wanting to hold you close. Danny was a hero-brave until the ruthless-hateful-end, and you dear one are a heroine. You wrote your story without hatred or malice. With that you disarmed the enemy. You obviously have seen enough hate and misunderstanding to last many life times and you clearly know, as Ghandi said, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

It is true celebrities are telling the stories after they are written. Celebrities are not embedded journalists as you and your dear Danny were. You were embedded in the truest sense of the word. The two of you did not act a part, you lived smack in the middle of one of the most dangerous areas of the world after 9/11 and tried to find out who was responsible for it. That is braver than holding any gun and firing.

What Danny Pearl did throughout his career was what all good journalists do. It is what keen intelligence is about. It's making contacts and following leads, and sometimes the lead is a trap. That's just one reason good journalism is dangerous. I still struggle to inhale when I think of Mariane and Danny Pearl together. I feel sick at heart when I think of Danny Pearl's end and the two of them now apart. It seems that Danny was ahead of everyone after 9/11 - certainly the C.I.A. What we all understand now is that Pakistan is a breeding ground for terrorists, and in some respects, the most dangerous country in the world for Americans. Danny Pearl was learning who the terrorists were faster than the C.I.A. That's why embedded journalists are essential to understanding our global politics, and it's another reason he wasn't found soon enough to save his life. He was moving in un-charted territory. His bravery was astounding.

When a journalist is embedded, there is no amount of propaganda in any country that can hold back the bonds of friendships made and walls broken down. That leads to understanding. Who--What--When--Where-- is easy, WHY is hard. Understanding WHY is what leads to peace. Danny Pearl tried to write the WHY stories. Ironically, one reason national and local news have pulled reporters out of hot spots around the world was Daniel Pearl's killing.

After Daniel's death, I was preparing to try, like so many journalists, to get into Afghanistan. My boss at the time was a reporter, not a sales person and he believed living in the Bay Area, with a community of more Afghans outside of Afghanistan than anywhere else in the world, we had an obligation to be there. The insurance company did not agree. We were told by Cox Broadcasting that it would take millions of dollars up front to insure me. I could not go.

In today's Media corporations, it all gets down to money. Can the station still sell commercials without the coverage from Afghanistan? Yep, you bet your chador it can. If you throw in some celebrity news instead of tragic stories around the world, the ratings might even go up.

What about responsibility for informing the public? If the media corporations don't inform but instead create more chaos because there are no first hand accounts--this fragile democracy I fear will become even more uninformed, more fragmented, more racist, more homophobic, more xenophobic and celebrity obsessed.

Daniel Pearl complained in one of his emails that a clearly biased story was making news in Pakistan. It was explosive in content and was reported as fact in the Pakistani news. Are we really so far away from the same thing? Without reporters on the scene, there are no objective eyes. There is no objective voice. There is mis-information that could lead to World Wars swirling around our lives in cyberspace and in newspapers and on the mostly corporate owned airwaves. Brave embedded reporters like Danny and Mariane can give us perspective, but they also risk their lives doing it.

Reporters also ask themselves-- if I risk my life to inform the world, will it make a difference? Will the world care or will Americans turn on their computers and read the celebrity news before they read a first hand account of what's happening in Burma, or Pakistan, or Iraq. Perhaps Americans are so overwhelmed they will tune out the news all together. It's work these days to keep a democracy alive. Knowledge and participation takes more and more time. But, what is the alternative?

If it does not contribute to the bottom line, it is not important to most media corporations. When the Rupert Murdoch's of this world own The Wall Street Journal I'm afraid this fragile democracy is screwed. Watch the documentary Out Foxed. 

Then encourage and contribute to non-profit news organizations.

Such is Life

Writing the balls to the wall Blog on Dan Rather was my first. It's true, I was a virgin blogger! My parents must be proud of my prolonged chastity and every teenager in America must consider me an imbecile. Such is life.

Getting pissed leads to pontification, depression has a lot of energy as well. The resulting geyser of emotion was labeled a blog, and I'm now a convert since I got more mail from one blog in one day than in 25 years of reporting for the corporate media. Famous people wrote me. I will not drop names, but suffice it to say they too believe Dan Rather deserves his chance to explain his latest brawl with the Bushes who apparently use the big stick and the big lie, and they do take prisoners. But, according to Jimmy Carter don't treat them too well.

Motivated by an understanding of the stink of corporate cronyism and corporate media dirty tricks, I read so many op-ed pieces about Dan Rather I was stunned by how quickly and judgmentally Americans now discard their heroes. Kurt Vonnegut wrote about the human traumas that distort emotions and can make us all feel disengaged, and dehumanized. When people are made to feel helpless, they lash out--sometimes at the wrong source.

9/11 traumatized us, and now as if written from a manual for dictators and bullies, we divide instead of unite and the bad guys never have to worry about a powerful and unified movement. Buckshot hatred scattered and unfocused. In Dan Rather's case, he risked his life more times than I can count in war zones from Vietnam to Afghanistan to help us gain knowledge that can only be gathered by reporters on the ground at the scene. How many Anchors do that today?

As for me, I took some hits from bloggers who said I was guilty for not leaving the corporate media sooner. What did the angry voices think I was doing since President Bush decided to illegally invade Iraq? If I wasn't being a pain in the ass at work fighting for discussion and analysis, I was directly questioning why, for instance, we dropped the Israeli Hezbollah war story---which was only 30 seconds long anyway -- for a story on a new Wal-Mart coming to the Bay Area.

The media managers changed after the war. Many came from sales. And most were middle-- aged white men who played golf together and made sure Sunday was spent at church. Have you noticed the more out of control people feel, the more churches are built? A big mouthed girl who loved Linda Ellerbee, Molly Ivans, Ann Richards, and Barbara Jordan is not exactly their dream date.

Here's just one story illustration that made me begin to believe I may have been up against the same type situations locally, as Dan Rather was nationally.

I remember coming into an editorial meeting with pictures of a car bombing in Baghdad in 2004 on a day the afternoon white house press release said, "All was quiet in Baghdad that day." I had received an e-mail an hour earlier from a friend fighting in Iraq who took pictures of a car bombing proving the white house press release to be bird cage liner. There were bodies on the road, blood was everywhere and a person clearly burned alive inside the car. Either the Bush administrator hadn't gotten word yet, or journalists were given lies to tell the public.

No one had actually told me I wasn't a journalist anymore, so naturally I thought this was a story. I walked into the meeting put my computer down, clicked on the picture and asked every producer, editor, and reporter to come and look. Before 9/11 and the Great Bait and Switch, State-of-the-Union speech of 2003, journalists in the room would have fought over who would do the story. They would have run out the door looking for those who could explain the contradiction. Instead, I found myself smack dab in the red zone.

"We can run these pictures, show the white house press release and compare what a soldier says with the misinformation the white house is putting out," I said. A newsroom and editorial meeting are never quiet, but at that moment there was silence. Then an interrogation began. "Where did you get those?" A recently hired news manager asked angrily. "From my friend in Iraq." "How do you know it's today?" Someone barked across the room with sarcasm? "Well the date, see it's in the right hand corner of the video showing it was taken just hours ago Iraqi time." I pointed like a third grader to the numbers on the top of the screen. I felt as vulnerable as a soldier in a humvee without bullet proof glass.

I waited. Then in an "Alice in Wonderland" kind of way, the conversation moved on without mentioning the e-mail and the car bombing. I vaguely heard someone suggesting a story on a 100 year old woman's birthday party! Now that's journalism. I interrupted with a smart ass remark. "So, I suppose we need to change our promos. Instead of In-depth news all the time, how about See, no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil, as our new promos." A friend shot me a look. I shut up. I trusted him to know I had gone too far. I was trying to land in a hotspot in a new 119 million dollar military aircraft, the V - 22 Osprey. My ass was grass.

Thank You Dan Rather

Thank you Dan Rather

It's balls to the wall time, and as a fellow Texan, you sure came through.

As an investigative journalist who worked as both a reporter and anchor for the San Francisco Bay Area's highest rated newscast for 22 years, I can only say what happened to you nationally was also happening locally. You were told to conform to a Republican agenda or shut up. When you refused to march in step, you got Bush-whacked.

I read your brief and I know the drill. The erosion was slow and many of us barely noticed the small chiseling away of who and what we once were. Anchors and reporters depend on high ratings. If ratings fall in television, people get fired. In the months following 9/11, the President's approval rating was still hovering around 70 percent, and that's when many in commercial journalism lost their way. To disagree or even ask a disagreeable question regarding the President and his decisions was interpreted as disloyal by many media corporations.

But now we have learned. Get the trashcan ready to catch the chips, because the chisel is swinging back the other way and we as journalists are about to regain our voices and America's trust. Dan - the Man - as we call him in Texas is reminding the media conglomerates how it is supposed to work. News and those who report it are not supposed to be for sale. Dan remembers, and he's about to explain it to us on a national scale, but first some explanations from my field of vision as to how we got here.

On January 2003, President Bush delivered his State of the Union address. Osama bin Laden turned into Saddam Hussein, and Afghanistan turned into Iraq. The press knew this was a bait and switch, but fearing reporters and anchors might appear unpatriotic, the corporate media made it clear that even if George W. Bush played twister in the nude while a few sheets to the wind instead of going to constitutional law classes at Yale, we were not allowed to talk about it.

Viacom and CBS, according to Dan, wanted to curry favor with the White House. There are very few media conglomerates that didn't. Cox Broadcasting banned the Dixie Chicks from radio stations because their lead singer made a remark under her breath criticizing the president! Not wanting to appear unpatriotic, the town criers did not cry out. Many corporate media reporters became stenographers, not reporters on that State of the Union day. Those in television journalism, particularly those working for a Fox affiliate, were not allowed to ask questions that could be perceived as unpatriotic, and every question was seen as unpatriotic. Monarchs and dictators don't allow questions. They also destroy those who speak ill of them. "Scooter - Valerie." "Rove - Anyone." Blackwater was running around in the name of the United States shooting first and asking questions later like third world rebels, and back at home, Fox became the fastest growing network with fearless leaders who believed in not only reporting the news but spinning it as well.

Just seven years ago, I looked up from my desk and saw my image on the MacNeil-Lehrer NewsHour as our staff of independent journalists was described as the best local news in the country. But war broke out and the Internet took off and all over the country local news ratings dropped as viewers turned to the national networks for news from the war fronts. Contrary to all logical thinking, local reporters looked at their retirement plans and their kids in college and promptly puckered their lips on the behinds of corporate media and smooched. If my kids were still in college I would not have the courage to write this now. In response to fewer viewers, local television panicked into a downward spiral and many a trusting viewer decided to go elsewhere. Corporate media was demanding reporters adapt to the point of our own extinction.

Morphed into propaganda machines - cheerleaders with pompoms - it was heartbreaking to watch the demise and media corporations always bass-akwards responses. With two wars on two fronts they decided to go "Local." Only local news. The war and the profound implications of it were relegated to 30 second stories buried deep into the newscast. (they don't need to know about that.--but there's a grass fire up the road!) If that's not manipulation, I don't know what is.

Here are some other sad results of this corporate bullying toward some of the best journalist in the country:

Anchors and reporters stopped asking why. The corporate media demanded nationalism without skepticism, believing ratings would fall further if reporters did their jobs.

Anchors and reporters starting taking their stories from satellite feeds coming directly to their desks and then standing in front of a chroma key delivering a story they did not collect and sometimes did not write. If viewers think every newscast looks the same that's why. It is.

Anchors and reporters allowed chroma key pictures of conflict areas to appear behind them giving viewers the false impression they were on the scene of the conflict instead of demanding to be sent there. Some could not even point out on the map behind them where the conflict was.

Anchors and reporters allowed management to hire entertainment reporters and producers. It's cheaper to entertain than to inform because an informed public makes wakes from slumber and makes noise.

Anchors and reporters began allowing precious hours meant for journalism to be filled with helicopter shots of the latest grassfire, traffic jam, or car chase, ala O.J.

Anchors and reporters allowed news directors and sales people to dictate their "look." Good journalism does not have a "look."

Anchors and reporters did not fight back when their investigative pieces were dropped. Managers feared losing advertising dollars and reporters acquiesced.

Anchors and reporters and producers agreed to story counts. Tell the story no matter how complicated in thirty seconds - throwing random and massive amounts of information at viewers without context.

Anchors and reporters started wearing American flags on their lapels. Some of whom never voted in any election.

Anchors and reporters began using genetically altered language: "War on Terrorism," without explaining that many people in the world think Americans are the terrorists.

Anchors and reporters started referring to the United States government as "We."

Anchors and reporters were handed press releases regarding corporate "mishaps" and began reading them verbatim. Like so: "Blank Oil Company had an explosion today; shelter in place, close the doors and windows, and don't go outside. However, the 'You've Got To Be Kidding Me Oil Company' says everything is fine."

Anchors and reporters agreed to report news that was already reported in newspapers and radio. Doing their own stories or advancing others creates controversy and potential lawsuits, betraying the sacred oath of corporate cronyism.

Anchors and reporters agreed to be physically altered in photographs, and airbrushed with make-up like playboy bunnies, as the media corporations ignored the news and invested in High Definition - hoping a grassfire on HD might look like news.

Anchors and reporters started advertising. "If you liked that story there will be more at six." "If you want to get more information go to www. you're_an_idiot.com. Makes you just want to scream: I'm here now; tell me now!

Anchors and reporters allowed producers to lead with Annie Nicole Smith instead of the "Scooter" Libby trial - making it clear that all sense of proportion and good judgment had been lost.

Corporations in this country are always a reflection of those in the White House. This White House is the Wild West, and corporations, even those who are charged with helping the public gain knowledge, are mining for gold. But today, when we had almost given up, Dan put his holster on.

Published in Truthout.org and The Huffington Post