Jim Lehrer sticks up for traditional media.
In an address at the University of Texas last night, PBS Newshour host Jim Lehrer warned against “spicing up” the news. “You want to be entertained? Go to the circus, please. Do not watch ‘The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,’” he said. Lehrer added, while increasing numbers of Americans are going online for their news, he’s not worried about the future of traditional media:
“The bloggers are talkers, commentators, not reporters. The talk-show hosts are reactors, commentators, not reporters,” Lehrer said. “The search engines can search but do not report. All of them, every single one of them, have to have the news in order to exist and thrive.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Hagee
Health Care
Immigration
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
RNC Convention
Rove
Surveillance
Terrorism
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
Jim Lehrer speaks for himself. If the public desires a circus in the media, there is nothing wrong with the media being a circus. The media will rise or fall depending on whether people like it or not. After all, the media does not engage in social service - it’s a profit making enterprise that deserves every chance at succeeding and failing.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:03 pmIs this the same Jim Lehrer who habitually carries water for David Brooks, giving him a platform for White House mis- and dis-information, and never once challenging him?
Memo to Jim Lehrer: truth matters.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:08 pmJim
No one needs the old media to survive….and buddy…you are about the oldest media one can find.
Where were you at the start up of a useless war? Supporting it?
Where were the bloggers? Questioning it?
Jack Jett
November 6th, 2007 at 1:09 pmAfter all, the media does not engage in social service - it’s a profit making enterprise that deserves every chance at succeeding and failing.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
Wow! I didn’t think you/anyone could post anything as ridiculous as this.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:10 pmProfit making meaning total ignoring important news that society needs to be informed like marches in 11 cities against the war, like Chalabi who lied into Iraq now being hailed as someone with lots of energy and helpful?
Many of us are sick to death Birtney’s custody fight, who is in rehab and who just got out. That is what sitcoms are suppose to do, entertain. Programs professing to be news need to cover NEWS.
If you like the pretense lies and half truths stick with O’Reilly and Faux news. I would like some substantial news from supposed news stations. At least we had truth during the Veitnam era.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:13 pm.
I get my newz from Entertainment Tonight.
.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:14 pm“No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, 1804. ME 11:33
Sounds like a “social service” to me.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:14 pmIf the profit making media is so hated by the people, then, by definition, the people will (and should) take it down. If the people are not gonna take the enterprise down, there is huge hole in the argument that the media “must change”. Further, in today’s world, one can easily find and tune in to the media source that best suits one.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:16 pmAfter all, the media does not engage in social service - it’s a profit making enterprise that deserves every chance at succeeding and failing.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
Wow, what an amazing revisionist view of the constitutional necessity of the Fifth Estate.
It wasn’t until the media conglomerates created the concept that news must make profit that began the ‘bread and circuses’ mentality. Prior to that, when not held up to the same profit making standard of entertainment programming, the media did what it was supposed to do..
November 6th, 2007 at 1:16 pmAfter all, the media does not engage in social service - it’s a profit making enterprise that deserves every chance at succeeding and failing.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
Wow! I didn’t think you/anyone could post anything as ridiculous as this.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian — November 6, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
==========
Yes he seems to have forgotten the original function of journalism/news as a check and balance….but really, that so passe now, you know the founding fathers, the original vision of the Republic, the morals, values and ethics of a once great nation.
What sells now is terra’ terra’ and big shiny baubles all in conjunction with an ignorant and dumbed down flock of sheeple.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:17 pmjim lehrer is basically right. most bloggers are commentators, not reporters.
but so what? they do a better job at commentary than most of the professionals. when i read blogs i’m not looking for original reporting, i’m looking for fact checking and arguments about what others have reported. it’s still an important role to play.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:19 pmProfit is usually viewed by most people as money. That’s a sub optimal definition. Profit has to do with intelligence. If you make a profit, you enhance your intelligence. While money can provide a substantial impetus to intelligence, it, alone is not what defines intelligence, and so, profit
November 6th, 2007 at 1:19 pm“Original views” can always be taken down and “revised”. There is nothing sacrosanct about principles that have been laid down 300 years ago. The fact that they withstood 300 years of scrutiny and questioning is great tribute to their resilience, but does not constitute continued acceptance across all of time.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:21 pmIf the profit making media is so hated by the people, then, by definition, the people will (and should) take it down. If the people are not gonna take the enterprise down, there is huge hole in the argument that the media “must changeâ€. Further, in today’s world, one can easily find and tune in to the media source that best suits one.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
you really are overflowing with shit, shit. All lies, all bullshit, all the time from you. Go shoot yourself, you’re worthless as an American.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:22 pmWhile money can provide a substantial impetus to intelligence, it, alone is not what defines intelligence, and so, profit
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
You have shown that you have no intelligence, so your views on intelligence are immaterial. Money and intelligence have little or nothing to do with each other; you rightards prove that every day.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:23 pmJim,
Something is awry with your critical thinking skills if increasing numbers are going to the internet for their news and your not worried about it.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:24 pmIf the profit making media is so hated by the people, then, by definition, the people will (and should) take it down. If the people are not gonna take the enterprise down, there is huge hole in the argument that the media “must changeâ€. Further, in today’s world, one can easily find and tune in to the media source that best suits one.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
And therein lies the problem ……..Watching/being exposed to the actual news taking place is manifestly different than finding a media source that caters to an individual.
Hasn’t the dumbing down of Americans gone on long enough and in so many other areas ?
Being presented the news , accurately , has been at the very core of this nation for a long time ; that it has virtually disappeared to be replaced by propogandist nonsensical crap like FAUX Comedy Channel is one of the biggest reasons why this criminal administration is still in office…..
November 6th, 2007 at 1:25 pmHell Jim, most reporters aren’t “reporters” anymore. Somebody has to do the job, and many trained reporters have forgotten how it’s done.
Fair and balanced? Please…
November 6th, 2007 at 1:30 pm“Original views†can always be taken down and “revisedâ€. There is nothing sacrosanct about principles that have been laid down 300 years ago. The fact that they withstood 300 years of scrutiny and questioning is great tribute to their resilience, but does not constitute continued acceptance across all of time.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
Then why the insistence by all you GOP backers that the US has been , is , and always will be , a “Christian nation” ?
Especially when you consider that the Founding Fathers were Deists , not Christians…
November 6th, 2007 at 1:30 pmWell, most stories on this and other blogs have links to the original source… And they are newspapers, the BBC, network news, etc. It’s not impossible that blogs hire reporters to cover a beat, chase down a story, etc. (Talking Points Memo has.) But most blogs don’t. Keith Olberman also belongs in that “commentary” category, though sometimes he’s covering breaking news via MSNBC’s newsgathering (bridge collapse, debate coverage, etc.).
November 6th, 2007 at 1:36 pmLike most on this site Jimmy is filled with hatred, his hate makes him say stupid stuff…
Example: you really are overflowing with shit, shit. All lies, all bullshit, all the time from you. Go shoot yourself, you’re worthless as an American.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — November 6, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
Lehrer is a socialist, he believes the “state†should control information to the public through PBS a state owned news outlet ONLY. Always controlled, biased, and just what you need to hear to make you docile, content, and manageable.
Comment by Billy Hill — November 6, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
November 6th, 2007 at 1:38 pmThat means Lehrer has the same belief that this horseshit administration does……..
Profit is usually viewed by most people as money. That’s a sub optimal definition. Profit has to do with intelligence. If you make a profit, you enhance your intelligence. While money can provide a substantial impetus to intelligence, it, alone is not what defines intelligence, and so, profit
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
Poor hits. And by “poor” I’m not using a “sub optimal definition” and relating it to money. He would profit from some more profit.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:38 pmThe conglomerates will (and has) ‘dumbed downed’ the population. Ask most people on the street about Chalabi or what the Turks are doing in northern Iraq, and you will get a blank stare. Ask them who won ‘Americas most smartest model’ or if Jimmy is having Becky’s baby on ‘General Hospital’, you would find yourself in a heated debate on those topics.
As long as the news corporations have other business interests to attend to, the news division will always match that overall business need. So we have a conflict such as with the telcoms and the immunity issue. The telcoms need the government contracts and to remain profitable, so they do the governments dirty work to secure those contracts. The mighty dollar trumps all other issues and concerns - even spying on Americans. That is not a news function to be proud of…
November 6th, 2007 at 1:40 pmThe arguments offered here by “hits” are so ignorant that they do not deserve replies.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:42 pmUm…does everyone here realize that “media” is PLURAL?
It’s getting a bit tiring plowing through all the “the media is” and “the media does” references, as if “the media” is some sort of singular monolithic entity.
A news “medium” is an outlet or mechanism for delivering news. A news medium can be a television station, a newspaper, a website, a radio station, etc. “Media” is a plural term meaning more than one of these outlets.
Even though we have come to refer to “the media” as a term meaning all news outlets of any kind, THE TERM IS STILL PLURAL. Therefore, “the media are” and “the media do” are correct. And the correct pronoun is “they”, not “it”.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:44 pmWebsters meaning of intelligence - to examine objectively, the capacity to perceive and comprehend meaning. Which stations are examining objectively?
November 6th, 2007 at 1:44 pmlehrer is correct… we need reporters, investigative journalists…
there are some out there…
the problem is OWNERSHIP...
you all better pay attention to Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin … who wants to lighten the rules about
media ownership… BAD DEAL…
and he is in a hurry… final meeting (who ever knew there were previous ones?) is in seattle (i think) this friday…
i’m rather surprised that THINK PROGRESS hasn’t done a story
November 6th, 2007 at 1:46 pmabout this… it’ll be very bad news if martin gets his way…
…
Lehrer is a socialist, he believes the “state†should control information to the public through PBS a state owned news outlet ONLY. Always controlled, biased, and just what you need to hear to make you docile, content, and manageable.
Comment by Billy Hill — November 6, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
You’ve described your chosen leaders as well, hill billy. you are such a moron, it must hurt you to try to remember your name.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:46 pmThe arguments offered here by “hits†are so ignorant that they do not deserve replies.
Comment by Marie — November 6, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
Oh c’mon — even this one? You gotta admit, this is probably the most incoherent blather we’ve seen on TP for a long while. It’s impossible to reply to, but certainly worth a laugh:
“Profit is usually viewed by most people as money. That’s a sub optimal definition. Profit has to do with intelligence. If you make a profit, you enhance your intelligence. While money can provide a substantial impetus to intelligence, it, alone is not what defines intelligence, and so, profit”
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
November 6th, 2007 at 1:47 pmThe bloggers are talkers, commentators, not reporters
Really? Someone tell Judge Walton - he of Scooter Libby fame - who ruled pre-trial that Firedoglake should be granted journalistic rights to report on the case.
Blogger is a term, simply, for someone who writes a blog.
Some report, some commentate, some satirize, some just post pictures. But importantly, some do report - TPM, Firedoglake, Raw Story, Iraqslogger, Michael Yon off the top of my head. Some do it full-time, some do it some of the time.
But to reach blanket a conclusion that bloggers do not report is stupid. Counterfactually, were Lehrer correct, that would mean that any reporter that wrote a blog would have to stop calling himself a reporter. Because bloggers don’t report, you know.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:48 pmIt isn’t that reporters aren’t reporters its that all the reporters are being replaced by entertainers or being forced to become entertainers by the corporate for profit owners of the mainstream media….(which is only 5 corporations now …lest we forget).
We used to have laws that told the media they had to have public service news or something like that …but the corporate cronies did away with that. Who wants truth and facts when lies and innuendos fear and hate sell better?
We need to get rid of this overriding corporate influence throughout America. It is warping us and our future in the name of today’s bottom line.
.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:51 pmFrom the days of our founding, the press has been assigned the mission as guardian of the public trust - to search and present the news so as to inform the public. The fourth estate.
“our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” T. Jefferson
A press that is free to investigate and criticize the government is absolutely essential in a nation that practices self-government and is therefore dependent on an educated and enlightened citizenry. On the other hand, newspapers too often take advantage of their freedom and publish lies and scurrilous gossip that could only deceive and mislead the people.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:53 pmAfter all, the media does not engage in social service - it’s a profit making enterprise that deserves every chance at succeeding and failing.
Comment by hits — November 6, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
Some media are strictly about making a profit. They don’t care about what stories they report (or, in some cases, how accurately they are reported), as long as people flock to watch.
Other media, like PBS (which broadcasts Jim Lehrer’s NewsHour) are non-profit. With no stock price to worry about, the focus can be on accuracy, relevance, and objectivity instead of sensationalism.
Jim Lehrer is right. While sheeple flock to news sites where they can be entertained, there will always be enough people who want real news. It’s these people who will ensure there will always be a place for the Jim Lehrers of the world.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:02 pmyou are such a moron, it must hurt you to try to remember your name.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — November 6, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Hah! You want to see pain, watch him try to SPELL it.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:03 pmhttp://www.crooksandliars.com/ 2007/ 11/ 04/ bill-moyers-on-whats-wrong-with-our-media/
Four years ago, without public input, the FCC rolled back 30 yr old rules that limited a single company’s ability to be able to dominate local TV, newspaper and radio media markets. Thankfully, the rules changes triggered a massive public response and through legislation and lawsuit, they were defeated. Now FCC chair Kevin Martin is attempting to do it again by trying to push through a similar set of changes allowing further media consolidation as soon as December 18. This time, we needn’t wait until we have been sandbagged. You can help by contacting Congress and the FCC now to stop Kevin Martin before he gets away with slipping this one by us.
go here for links:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/ 2007/ 11/ 04/ bill-moyers-on-whats-wrong-with-our-media/
listening to ed schults while driving yesterday… he was ranting about the latest report (what i posted above)… and that martin has stepped up the schedule to november… this guy is out to strangle whatever hold the people have on the truth…
he needs to be stopped.
you can help.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:07 pmTell the FCC: No More Media Consolidation!
Contact your Representative
.
What is great about new media is that you have impassioned, opinionated people that are able to ditch the veil of impartiality that never really holds true anyway, and present facts and opinions together on issues coming from all places in the political spectrum. Bloggers, TV (via Youtube) and now radio hosts (via Blog Talk Radio), are able to report controversial news without worrying about how it will affect their audience or sponsors.
I recommend shows like Lightning Strikes at Blog Talk Radio (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lightningstrikes) for a fresh take on news, entertainment, and technology from media personalities, from a voice not afraid to talk about touchy issues. In fact, on November 12th they’ll be featuring Robert Jensen, author of “Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity” as well as “The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege”- two books focusing on issues that are refused mainstream national attention but I am curious to hear about. Opening up dialogues about gender roles and race (especially white privilege) is a necessary step toward change and growth- and it’s happening only in new media!
November 6th, 2007 at 2:07 pmInteresting article on this topic in the NYT today
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 11/ 06/ business/ media/ 06msnb.html?ex=1195016400&en=e2ed41f168e7de8e&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY
November 6th, 2007 at 2:30 pmA bump to missmolly #34
Well said.
I’ve been a viewer of NewsHour for decades now.
It’s news and opinion minus the bullshit.
Melanie Morgan got herself permanently banned from NH because her hackery and venom in not acceptable in that format.
That means that don’t mind losing the eyeballs of the red-state, Reich-wingnuts in order to maintain legitimacy, unlike most of commercial teevee.
Yeah David Brock is an ass and that’s why Mark Shields often rips him a new one.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:31 pmI’m a fan of Jon Stewart and The Daily Show. There ARE times when I want my news in the form of entertainment, and TDS is quite honest about delivering it in that format (heck, they even call themselves “fake news” — let’s see Fox News admit to that!).
November 6th, 2007 at 2:37 pm“Freedom of speech isn’t working out so well for liberals now that they aren’t the only ones with a microphone. It’s not so much fun when the rabbits got the gun!â€
Ann Coulter, 04/10/03
Comment by finallyinsf — November 6, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
This sounds like Coultergeist. By saying this, she implies 1) that only liberals champion free speech, 2) that there was some period of time where only liberals had a “microphone”, and 3) that liberals are against anybody besides them having a right to freedom of speech.
None of these is true, of course. But as Coulter has figured out (indeed, it’s the tentpole of her career), a strawman such as this doesn’t need to have any basis in fact. Set up strawman, knock it down, act as if you have somehow scored points against the evil liberals.
But Ann Coulter isn’t a reporter, she’s a commentator. She’s part of the sensationalist “news as entertainment” crowd.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:44 pmmissmolly, same here… big Jon Stewart and The Daily Show fan.
That’s exclusively what I watch (tivo’d) when I’m on the elliptical trainer… that and Cobert.
Even when I’m pushing 160bpm and up, I know I’ll still have a smile on my face.
Faux News is for the professional wrestling crowd.
November 6th, 2007 at 3:10 pmEven though we have come to refer to “the media†as a term meaning all news outlets of any kind, THE TERM IS STILL PLURAL. Therefore, “the media are†and “the media do†are correct. And the correct pronoun is “theyâ€, not “itâ€.
Comment by missmolly — November 6, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
“There are some things up with which I will not put!”
—Winston Churchill
There is the false idea bandied about that civility trumps a warranted outrage.
Civility is misused to police dissent and paper over the oh-so-civilly conducted substantive betrayal of responsibility by the likes of Lehrer.
Citing or calling for civility to enforce submission or coerce obedience to an illegitimate tyranny is a rationalization complicit in the abuse of power.
November 6th, 2007 at 3:20 pmLehrer will always have a place. However, he is not a journalist. Nor does he speak with acuity about the internets, the medias, or how diverse individuals (professionals and not) use different platforms.
When you interview a Wolfowitz or a Cheney, but fail to ask the obvious questions, the role Lehrer plays is called into question.
Journalism requires research, and reporting, and in multiple cases, Lehrer’s trademark is in not performing either function. Lehrer’s function is to refrain from asking pertinent questions. He then uses his famed ‘civility’ as a guise–because IT is the real product.
The story of the NewsHour, unfortunately, is inthe questions that are not asked. The research not performed. And ultimately, Jim Lehrer is complicit in Bush’s policies, in the direction teh country has taken, and in the resulting damage.
A ‘civility’ that substitutes for real reporting, and that precludes digging deep enough, is the worst sort of incivility. It is a costly breach of trust, a violation.
Jim Lehrer has every opportunity for years to pursue critical stories and ask the right questions. Far too often, his MO is the abdication of that role, which constantly softens the political costs of Bush’s illegitimate policies. Facilitating David Brooks’ RNC spin-laced fabrications will earn him a special place in hell, made easier to bear by not having to listen to Mark Shields mumble along without laying into the meat of an issue.
November 6th, 2007 at 3:37 pmLehrer is right that blogs need the MSM to thrive due to the fact that blogs don’t have the budgets or the access to do most of the reporting themselves but the success of blogs is due to the circus being in traditional media not blogs. Also, blogs serve one other crucial purpose: they act as fact checkers, something the MSM particularly despises.
November 6th, 2007 at 4:10 pmI agree with Jim L as far Blogger and Search engine -do not listen to any talk-show so it’s out of question.
Though that is only partial truth, as for the Consumers/Readers of Blog and Search Engine goes they are getting much diverse opinion than PBS’s news hour.
Also, even with being “Reporter” - and throw decades of experience in it- Majority of “Reporter” has failed miserably from Iraq, Abhu Gahreb, Gitmo, Water boarding, Iraq withdrawl, Housing bubble.
November 6th, 2007 at 5:18 pmAnd still failing to bring correct perspective to serious topics like Iran, presidential election..and so on.
Robert McNeil was 3/4 the team. Charlene Hunter-Galt the other 1/4.
November 6th, 2007 at 5:56 pmThe bottom line is $$$!
November 6th, 2007 at 6:31 pmI’m in my mid-50s; my father is a retired jouralist (managing editor of a small city daily). “Back in the Day”, broadcast news was a not for profit operation. It wasn’t intended to show a profit, if it did…great!. It was a loss leader. The networks, CBS,ABC,NBC were true believers the the concept of the “public owns the airwaves” and public service. The networks never expected a profit from their news division. Promote the prime time shows (the real money makers…Hell yes).
Since profit entered the equation, they (and the cable “news” outlets want to make $$$. They realize that good looking anchors draw viewers and celebrity soap operas and SEX will get attention (read viewers).
I’m just asking that News organizations merely go back to their roots. “Just the facts, Ma’am”. Don’t try to tell me what the person “meant” when they said what they said. The American people are smart enough to know what they meant.
Sorry, I’ll pull down my soapbox now.
Just remember, alternative media is growing for a reason!
You’re exactly right. News used to be delivered as a public service. Then the profiteers came in and realized they could sell it for profit, and the news media have consistently declined ever since.
There are far fewer foreign correspondents (too expensive), far too many inconsequential, frivolous, sensational and titillating news reports (the old “if it bleeds, it leads”) and the consolidation of media ownership have all contributed to the steady deterioration of journalism and consequently, a poorly informed public — open the doors to the likes of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, et al.
November 6th, 2007 at 9:32 pm“The bloggers are talkers, commentators, not reporters. The talk-show hosts are reactors, commentators, not reporters,†Lehrer said. “The search engines can search but do not report. All of them, every single one of them, have to have the news in order to exist and thrive.â€
******************************
Nice sentiments from Jim Lehrer (I’ve always liked his program) — but the one problem with his statement and the one thing which he doesn’t seem to grasp is that by and large, not even the reporters are really reporters anymore (or at least, not if they work for the MSM). They’ve become little better than public relations people, spin doctors — or worse, propaganda merchants. Admittedly, “yellow journalism” is certainly nothing new — but the journalists who uphold the true ethics of the profession by attempting to report the facts as objectively as possible instead of attempting to manipulate the reader into interpreting the events in a certain way — or not reporting certain events at all for fear of possibly upsetting one or more of the company’s corporate sponsors — seem to be going the way of the dinosaur.
November 6th, 2007 at 10:48 pm