Bill Moyers' speech to the National Conference for Media
Although I am opposed to copy and paste, I don't want to change a word of this: It may be one of the most important speeches of our times.
From Free Press, May 16, 2005 (date corrected from orginal website)
By Bill Moyers
The following is the prepared text for Bill Moyers’ speech to the National Conference for Media Reform on May 15, 2005. The event in St. Louis was organized and hosted by Free Press (www.freepress.net).
Click here to listen an audio recording of the speech.
Click here to watch a video of the speech.
To join Free Press’ campaign to put the public back into PBS, please add your name to our petition calling for the resignation of Kenneth Tomlinson and the creation of a series of town meetings across the country on the future of public broadcasting.
I CAN’T IMAGINE BETTER COMPANY ON THIS BEAUTIFUL SUNDAY MORNING IN ST. LOUIS. You’re church for me today, and there’s no congregation in the country where I would be more likely to find more kindred souls than are gathered here.
There are so many different vocations and callings in this room — so many different interests and aspirations of people who want to reform the media — that only a presiding bishop like Bob McChesney with his great ecumenical heart could bring us together for a weekend like this.
What joins us all under Bob’s embracing welcome is our commitment to public media. Pat Aufderheide got it right, I think, in the recent issue of In These Times when she wrote: “This is a moment when public media outlets can make a powerful case for themselves. Public radio, public TV, cable access, public DBS channels, media arts centers, youth media projects, nonprofit Internet news services … low-power radio and webcasting are all part of a nearly invisible feature of today’s media map: the public media sector. They exist not to make a profit, not to push an ideology, not to serve customers, but to create a public — a group of people who can talk productively with those who don’t share their views, and defend the interests of the people who have to live with the consequences of corporate and governmental power.”
...
We’re big kids; we can handle controversy and diversity, whether it’s political or religious points of view or two loving lesbian moms and their kids, visited by a cartoon rabbit. We are not too fragile or insecure to see America and the world entire for all their magnificent and sometimes violent confusion. “There used to be a thing or a commodity we put great store by,” John Steinbeck wrote. “It was called the people.”
Shortened May 21, 2005 - please read or view the full speech at the links above


6 Comments:
I guess you probably know by now that Bill Moyers has been one of my biggest heroes for ages. Thanks for sharing this, Paul!
I have a list of online speeches of his somewhere in my blog from last year. If I can find it, I'll post it here for supplementary viewing materials. Thanks!!!!
Just last night Dad had ABC News on, and now that Peter Jennings has taken time off for his cancer, it's sounding more and more like Fox news. The language in some of the commentaries were just plain loaded. :( Like when discussing that terrorist we are allowing asylum was "just what Castro wants." Nor did they mention what he had done with our government.
I mean, I am just hearing the crap as I walk into the room. I listened to another loaded report on that Newsweek story and decided I had had enough. At least we can get stories from the BBC and the United Nations online.
5/18/2005 02:50:00 PM
If the broadcast news media cannot, or will not give a news story more that 150 words, they simply are not reporting - they are reading releases, just as Bill Moyers said.
The current climate of discreditation of the media, which the media itself is feeding (ABC talks bad about CBS, then NBC talks bad about ABC, then they all jump on Newsweek.
Walter Cronkite had something to say about this downward spiral of news a few years back when all the outlets were shedding reporters and staff.
The Serialization of news and it's denegration into what we now call infotainment. One Fox viewer actually wrote that she like Fox better because the 'reporters' were more attractive.
I'm sorry but I'd rather get my news from someone with a full frontal cranial cleft, who told me as much about the story as they could, than pay attention to a store front Manequin that croons about how they 'feel' offended or pleased, and tells me nothing.
I trust 'handsome' or 'plain' just on gut reaction, before I trust 'pretty' and 'stunning'.
5/18/2005 03:33:00 PM
I don't think I care whether they are handsome or pretty. I care what sort of language they are using. When they say things like policy X was "just what [So-and-so] wanted" or they are "falling into his hands," then I am instantly skeptical.
When they discuss military issues in terms of "our boys" versus "the terrorists," I am skeptical.
There's language that clearly gives away their renunciation of objectivity.
Students should have to take courses in recognizing this sort of spin. We talk about education all the time. Maybe seeing through propaganda should be a required course because there is a methodology to such a thing. Any political side can abuse language.
5/18/2005 09:21:00 PM
I have printed the speech for later digest, but I wanted to comment that if you think there is any objective, no nonsense reporting on any mainstream media, you are sadly mistaken. Although I prefer (you would call it Fuax) Fox News, I know enough to pick the nuts out of the brownies...
That didn't sound right...X-P
5/20/2005 03:39:00 AM
OK, Gecko. How about you give us some examples of nuts you have seen in the brownies on Fox News. I'm curious to know just how many of the nuts you have identified.
5/21/2005 02:10:00 AM
Well, just for you Sheryl, I would have to say that Geraldo Rivera is certainly a nut. Happy?
5/22/2005 11:43:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home