|
|
townhall.com
Dennis Prager (back to story)
March 4, 2003
Dan and Saddam
CBS News constantly referred
to Dan Rather's interview with one of the world's cruelest tyrants as a "coup."
A coup? For whom? Was it a coup for the American viewing public? Of course
not. Other than the lengths to which Dan Rather went to be obsequious to a
tyrant, Americans learned nothing from his interview with Saddam Hussein. Was it
a coup for the news profession? Again, no. No news was learned, nor was any
likely to be.
No, it was a coup solely for CBS News and Saddam Hussein. That the world of
television news (not only CBS) regards it as a major achievement shows the
depths to which television news has sunk. Obviously, the industry sees ratings
as its reason for being.
The moment it was announced that Dan Rather had secured an audience with
Saddam, I suspected (and said so on my radio show) that the only beneficiaries
would be Saddam and CBS. The only way it could have been newsworthy is if Rather
had asked hard questions.
For example, Rather might have asked the world's most powerful sadist:
What would we think of a radio network that had nationally broadcast an
interview with Adolf Hitler in 1944 in which the fuehrer was asked nothing about
Nazi anti-Semitism or the concentration camps? An interview in which the
American reporter had warmly clasped the Nazi leader with both hands? An
interview that had been procured through the services of an American Nazi
sympathizer (as the Rather interview was procured through the services of the
longtime friend of America's enemies, Ramsey Clark)? Would we have deemed such
an interview a "coup," or a moral fraud which only gave Hitler an opportunity to
portray himself as a decent human?
That is what CBS News and Dan Rather did -- and the news community is giving
them high-fives.
All this is sad, even angering, but not surprising. For decades, television
news has largely been a failure, almost entirely avoiding many of the world's
great events -- from the Soviet war in Afghanistan and the Chinese crushing of
Tibet, to the mass murders and slavery in Sudan, the genocide in Rwanda, and the
slide of middle-class Argentina into destitution -- in favor of drama and
entertainment in the pursuit of ratings. Just think how much time television
news devoted to the O.J. Simpson murder trial.
That most Americans get almost all their news from profit-driven television
news is bad news. And non-profit, government-owned newscasts (as in Europe) are
even worse. With the exception of image-driven events such as the 9-11 attacks,
television news is a failure.
If you want to know what is happening in the world, read good newspapers,
listen to quality talk radio, watch quality TV talk shows, and spend time on the
Internet. But don't rely on TV news for news.
And if the Dan Rather-Saddam Hussein interview prompts people to get their
news elsewhere, that will truly be a coup.
Now, of course, few, if any, reporters would have
asked Saddam Hussein these questions. (Television reporters tend to restrict
tough questioning to democratically elected leaders they don't like.) But if one
is not going to ask a dictator anything approaching the truth about his actions,
why bother interviewing him? Isn't the whole thing morally compromised and
journalistically meaningless?
©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Contact Dennis Prager | Read his biography
townhall.com
|
|