Friendly was the producer. The director who came up with the winning formula was Don Hewitt, who then created 60 Minutes.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
AP banned from White House
- Thread starter tbolt909
- Start date
- Status
Yay, everybody gets a trophy, even if posthumously. Let's praise them all. Camera operators, sound techs, everyone who took part.
None of that matters when the point is that the program exposed him for what he was.
None of that matters when the point is that the program exposed him for what he was.
Credit where credit is due. Keeping the facts of history straight is all the more important with AI distorting so many "facts" with inaccuracies gleaned from incorrect web postings.
In this case, there is a significant difference between the director who developed the concept and the producer who made it broadcast ready.
So the details of history are unimportant. I see... two guys fought it out somewhere northeast of France and the little short guy lost and the French were not as important any more.
Good lord even for some of the posts on here this is remarkably inane. Look, y’all want to argue if the host gets credit, the producer gets credit, the director gets credit or everyone gets credit, all these years after the fact, have at it. Maybe we could accept that the program played an important role in the downfall of a monster. Praise the damn janitor at the studio. Be as pedantic as humanly possible.
People frequently refer to things like TV programs be referencing the people on camera. Walter Cronkite didn’t work alone either but his name is invoked frequently as an example of a certain era. No one is pretending world history didn’t exist because they don’t also cite the roster of producers, writers, directors and everyone else.
By all means, share the whole credit roll so we don’t dare forget someone who worked on the show.
People frequently refer to things like TV programs be referencing the people on camera. Walter Cronkite didn’t work alone either but his name is invoked frequently as an example of a certain era. No one is pretending world history didn’t exist because they don’t also cite the roster of producers, writers, directors and everyone else.
By all means, share the whole credit roll so we don’t dare forget someone who worked on the show.
You are just arguing for the sake of argument.
Oh spare us this projection.
The AP has announced a lawsuit against the administration:
apnews.com
AP sues 3 Trump administration officials, citing freedom of speech
The Associated Press is suing three Trump administration officials over access to presidential events.
apnews.com
Congrats to the AP for this. But at the same time other media companies we have mentioned here would have to sue the FCC for the same issues like 1st amendment issues.
The AP can file a lawsuit, but what's the End Game? All the courts and judges are corrupt, right? Trump is a convicted felon, but millions of people didn't care. He also encouraged a mob to storm the Capitol because he refused to accept the 2020 Election results. The Gulf Of Mexico has been around long before the US even existed. Trump's sick Orwellian strategy to change history and facts should have Americans very concerned. In "1984", those who didn't embrace the Party became "Unpersons" and were vaporized from history. That's where this is headed...
Last edited:
OK, while this is supposed to be a non-pure-politics board, I have to correct this; the whole issue involves a traditional media market, New York City, that is almost 100% Democrat; much of it is vocally anti-Trump.
The conviction was for supposed crimes involving valuation estimates on properties for the purpose of obtaining loans. I've been involved in doing loans with major banks going back to the 70's; everyone puts in their estimates and the lender evaluates during its due diligence process.
This is like my trying to sell my house for $800,000 when surrounding homes are going for $300,000. I listen to offers for less, and eventually "the art of the deal" lets us find a point where the seller and buyer agree. But in this case, the court thought that a certain property in Florida was worth well under $50 million and higher declarations were illegal lies. In fact, lesser surrounding properties were worth over $500 million and the one in question was estimated at over a billion by knowledgeable local real estate experts.
The local media treated the valuations as lies, not part of normal real estate deals. In reference to the valuation of Mar-a-Lago, terms like "exaggerated", "inflated", "unrealistic" were used in print and broadcast. Of course, in Journalism 101 at Michigan State they taught me that you don't apply flavored adjectives to news items; you don't say "a crazy bystander yelled obscenities" but, instead, "a bystander yelled obscenities".
A nearly "pure blue" judicial system with nearly all blue jurors did not 1) understand business practices that all of us use and engage in, and, 2) disliked Trump for other reasons not related to the case and, finally, 3) they had heard from totally one-sided media that lies about valuations had been made.
This was an incident where nobody was injured, nobody was cheated and where a standard business practice was painted as a crime using a unique interpretation of an ancient statute.
I have listened to the audio and there was no encouragement to "storm" anything. In fact, the language used and available to hear online called for the crowd to peacefully protest, not to attack.
Yet there are many who see all these actions as a needed campaign to reestablish American credibility and influence, particularly in The Americas. The moves on getting the Chinese out of the Panama Canal (they were operating the ports at either end of the canal we built), on trying to bring the trade imbalances with Canada and Mexico to the forefront and the threats about our neighbors allowing nearly uncontrolled masses of people to use their territory to reach the U.S. border are all needed. Perhaps there is too much "showmanship" and a lack of traditional diplomacy, but many of us see a bad situation in need of remedy, no matter which party leads the charge.
To make this post have some semblance of radio and broadcast content, there have been numerous evaluations of the percentage of traditional media journalists who are registered to each party. All of those evaluations show a percentage in the high 90's that are Democrats, with a huge percentage who have actually made donations to that party at some level. So we have a media infrastructure in radio, video and print that is decidedly among the ranks of one party.
To me, that imbalance among journalists and their frequent employment of un-journalistic language is vastly more of concern than Trump calling Trudeau "Governor" and silly stuff like that.
Staten Island is solidly Republican, as is a good part of Trump's home borough of Queens.
And DC is even more Democrat than NYC. My point is that the local media, whether in Boston or NYC or Philly or DC or Baltimore, is severely biased and the jury pool is both almost entirely Democrat and highly influenced by tainted local media.
Assuming they don't read the NY Post.
And what percentage of NYC and the Boroughs population is in Staten Island? "New York City" (city and boroughs) is registered Democrat in an overwhelming majority. That influences everything from traditional media coverage down to "street talk".
New York is not all that Blue. The only office elected city-wide is the mayor and New York City has elected Republicans Seth Low, Fiorello LaGuardia, John Lindsay, Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg. The last two in this century.
Bloomberg "became" a republican just for that election.
Wikipedia: "Bloomberg was a life-long Democrat until 2001, when he switched to the Republican Party before running for mayor. He became independent in 2007, and registered again as a Democrat in October 2018."
The rest are rather ancient history, just as saying California is Republican because Arnold was governor long ago.
You have no credibility by posting this comment. You have defended Trump at every turn and say the media is biased against him. You rationalize every lie he utters. The attack of the Capitol wasn't a peaceful protest. What exactly did Trump want his followers to protest peacefully? He lost the election and was having a tantrum like a 3 year old. Maybe Fox News has a job opening for you.
The media has an impossible task trying to cover a Sociopathic President when any fact checking is considered to be treason or heresy...
Last edited:
- Status