Scrupulous Journalism in "Good Night and Goodluck"

Edward R. Murro, in "Good Night and Good Luck" treats his audience with respect and expectation of competent understanding of what he reports. He uses eloquent, sophisticated language combined with carefully aggregated information and makes a strong case and argument with patient and polite presentation. His very actions to report the story directly oppose the poorly based accusations of Senator Mccarthy, hence giving them more power against Mccarthy. He does not back down in fear when he bears the conviction of the truth and he welcomes opposition. He presents the facts in a manner that his audience can take and make a judgement for themselves. By these standards Murro preserves the two main foci of Journalism: The pursuit of truth and the loyalty to the citizen.

Provided below are two videos to compare the actual broadcast with the film portrayal.

Reporter's Favorites: Alex Beam

My uncle put me in touch with Alex Beam, a columnist for the Boston Globe. He spoke to me for a few minutes about journalism movies and offered his favorite film. He called me back and said "Sorry I'm calling you on the weekend. I hope Im not interrupting. Are you on a sail boat?" Laughingly I responded by saying "Oh, no, I'm just in my room. Thank you for calling me back!" When I asked him the question he first mentioned an interesting film called "Zodiac", but didn't offer it as his favorite necessarily. When I asked him again he responded by saying essentially "I heard your question on my answering machine and wish I had a more creative answer, but I'd have to say 'All the Presidents Men' would be it." He went on to explain his choice by saying "Most of what I know about it [watergate] I know from the movie...First of all, there is a lot of stuff you could say about the movie. Robert Redford is clean cut. Dustin Hoffman is scruffy. You have the Yale educated Woodward and not much information about where Bernstein was educated. Woodward is a very patrician character..." And he contrasts this image with the image of Bernstein in the receptionists office. He goes on to say "[As a viewer one] Feasts on a lot of those details [especially] the portrayal of deep throat which is fictional by nature. Now we know it's Mark Felt, [but at the time] they (Bernstein and Woodward) were not candid about how they got in touch with him. They gave the world this image of meeting him in a garage."

So, a sort of typical answer to the question of favorite journalism film, but in my opinion elegantly explained by Alex Beam.

For some of his columns check out this website. (Image is sourced from this site as well)

Walking the Dangerous Line of Journalistic Novels

I was very intrigued by the efforts Capote made to redefine not only journalism, but writing in general. He fused journalistic truth with the structure of a novel. With a novel, to write an adequate story the author must know his characters on an almost deeply personal level to make them convincing. For Capote this is an aspect he focused on deeply, spending an enormous amount of time with the Clutter family murders, just to figure out what makes them tick. He had to get inside their heads, which is what novelists do with their characters, and journalists stray away from. Each part he was fusing was held down by the other. Capote couldn't finish the book until the actual journalistic event he was writing about came to a conclusive end. He was writing journalism, but because he was formatting it as a novel he had to wait on the events to transpire so he could adequately fit the narrative together fluidly. He broke his novel into several parts as he wrote to account for this. It's something that is more widely done today, but for Capote it was truly ground breaking mainly because he was writing as it was occurring, not just reporting the facts, but doing something even more difficult and challenging and that was stylizing the facts together to create a cohesive story as he gained more information and didn't even have the complete picture yet. Capote sums this up beautifully by saying "This book was an important event for me. While writing it, I realized I just might have found a solution to what had always been my greatest creative quandary. I wanted to produce a journalistic novel, something on a large scale that would have the credibility of fact, the immediacy of film, the depth and freedom of prose, and the precision of poetry.”

Also, here is an interview with Capote on his views on capital punishment:

Stuck In-between Ethical Journalism and Charming Journalism

Something that stood out to me about Broadcast news is how the love triangle really emphasized different journalistic approaches. Jane was stuck in the middle of two people who approached journalism differently, but were also different people all together. Tom is a handsome, not very intelligent, kind anchorman, while Aaron is a less than average, brilliant, arrogant on site reporter. Jane is stuck in the middle of these two people. She herself is kind, energetic, and intelligent and seeks to provide an honest quality to journalism that doesn't sensationalize the news, but presents it as it is. She's trapped between choosing two men. One (Aaron) fits her journalistic approach and matches her level of intelligence, but he's arrogant about it and drives people away. The other (Tom) is willing to fabricate aspects of a news report and insert himself into the story for a sentimental approach, something Jane has been fighting against. But, Tom is so charming Jane looks past that aspect about him. In the end, she finds that she can't mesh with either of them and ends up being single. For her, she had to have the aspects of being kind, charming, intelligent and journalistically honest. Something Tom and Aaron in part both possessed, but individually did not possess completely.

In this scene below Aaron expresses how he feels about Tom, and Aaron. He nails, in part, what Tom is doing to Jane and how she shouldn't fall in love with a man who doesn't agree with her standards of Journalism, no matter how charming he may be.

Pinacle of Excellent Journalism in "All the President's Men"

So far, out of all the movies we have watched this semester "All the President's Men," in my opinion, represents true journalism the best. This can most likely be attributed to the fact that it is based upon actual events in history that were still fresh in people's memory. I feel, while there is a lot of artistic direction and very carefully crafted choreography, it is more focused on journalism than being a "movie" so to speak. Of course, it does have a plot line, and story, but amidst that is a very strong central journalistic narrative. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein portray the utmost journalistic excellence as they pursue a story that puts their own lives in danger, as well as the reputation of the Washington Post, all to accomplish, essentially, the central goal of journalism, which is to inform citizens so they can be free and self governing. I found this movie to provide excellent examples of the elements of journalism. By pursuing this story they were also keeping those in the highest governmental courts accountable, and in check. They also verified their sources and worked very hard to get people to speak on record to cross check their information. They never inserted themselves into the story they were writing, and they never embellished the truth. They didn't side with any party, but rather they submitted to a cause, even while the media portrayed them as siding with the democrats and attacking the republicans.

The following video highlights the journalistic methods Woodward and Bernstein used, as well as a behind the scenes look of the film, and how it was crafted to best tell the story. It's really interesting to see how accurate this movie really was (even looking at the real journalists compared to Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman.)

Scene Compositon Exercising Dominance in "Network"

A particular scene in "Network" that I gravitated towards was the scene where Ned Beatty's character Arthur Jensen delivers a speech to Peter Finche's character Howard Beale. There were two things about this scene that I noted. First, the lighting. Jensen makes a point to close the shades behind him, to in part, impose higher authority over Beale to influence him. Jensen is the most lit in the room and Beale is cowering in shadow to demonstrate a shift in dominance. Second, I noted the language used in the scene. It's on an astronomical level, where Beale had been speaking from. Jensen condescends Beale by out doing Beale's religious zeal with his own, becoming the face of God to Beale. Watch this scene and take note of these two factors. Also, in addition to the lighting and language, the composition of the room and placement of the actors is significant as well. Beale sits at the end of the table closest to the entrance, while Jensen stands deep in the room across the large table, all the way on the other end. His speech is allowed to echo through the room. Everything builds towards Jensens dominance over Beale in this scene. You can view the scene here.

The Circus and it's Ringmaster

When watching "Ace in the Hole" I was struck by the actions above ground compared to the situation underground. Everyone on the surface had a false sense of optimism about getting Leo Minosa unstuck from the ancient indian mines. Not only that, but the situation had turned into a spectacle, to the point where people were literally celebrating and having a circus above a suffering Leo Minosa. In this movie, the type of journalism that is portrayed is selfish, and sensational. Tatum bends the truth to tell people what they want to hear, which in part is reflected in the overly positive gathering next to the ancient indian mines. What comes next is a process of acceptance, and in my opinion redemption. Chuck truly realizes what he's done, and accepts his own fate. His announcement to the audience is chilling when he says "The Circus is over." I feel this scene is the most powerful scene in the movie, because it shows really how out of hand the entire situation has become. Chuck must yell over the jubilus crowd several times, and even when the sound quells down he still yells "Listen," almost to quite their spirits as well, and lay the gravity of the fact that they have all turned a suffering, trapped man in a mine into a circus, and that he was the ring master.

Both Ends of The Spectrum: "Sweet Smell of Success" and "Deadline U.S.A"

I find it interesting to consider just how different the movies "Sweet Smell of Success" and "Deadline U.S.A" were. On one end ("Sweet Smell of Success'), you have complete and utter corruption of journalism, and on the other you have journalism at it's peak of excellence, even in the face of being shut down ("Deadline U.S.A). Both movies provide two extremes that are almost unrealistic to real world journalism. Corruption runs rampant in "Sweet Smell of Success", and is all muddled up in personal conflict, control and egotism. Meanwhile, even while "The Day" is shutting down ("Deadline U.S.A.") it's workers are still dedicated to the cause, and everyone seems to have potential to be a hero. Not only that, it seems utterly patriotic, especially the music, playing a familiar patriotic theme, The Battle Hymn of the Republic whenever it's main character speaks about the mission of journalism. Deadline U.S.A is capable of representing the workings of a newpaper business very accurately, and in a movie review by Bosley Crowther it is claimed to do "all right by the trade." Crowther notes, also, it is melodramatic, and if anything that adds to the hint of unrealism this movie offers. In "Sweet Smell of Success," J.J. Hunsecker uses his power in journalism to manipulate those around him, including his sister. The characters are shallow and manipulative, and edge slightly away from realistically human. Both movies carry such extremes of both ends that, depending on the journal, if you take a little of both of these and add a hint of unpredictability you would get a closer representation of real journalism. Both are great films though.

Two Forms of Journalism in Citizen Kane

In Citizen Kane two forms of journalism are presented. One is Charles Foster Kane’s yellow journalism approach, and the newsreel reporter’s more traditional approach. The movie begins with a sensationalized view of Kane’s life, with general facts, hyperbole and no account for his personal life or motivations. Upon his death the newsreel reporter Jerry Thompson is intrigued by his last words, Rosebud. In a search for the truth a representing reporter gathers information from people who knew Kane personally, gathering information from reliable sources and patching together a fairly accurate account of Kane’s life. Through the story it is discovered that Kane approached journalism mainly from behind his desk, not seeking out reliable sources but rather, sensationalizing the news, using his publication to attempt to influence people. In many cases Kane was self absorbed, seeking what was best for himself and searching for something that made him happy. In the midst of this he proved to be a poor journalist, but was able to muster a strong public image that people gravitated towards because of his confidence. At the end, the very same type of journalism he had been producing was used against him, to spread false scandal about him. Concerning journalism, it’s very interesting that such methods are juxtaposed in such a manner: Kane’s method is revealed through the process of proper journalistic methods, but even in the end the most personal motivations could not be found out really highlighting in the end how no matter how much information you seek to find you cannot find it all, and that Kane was truly alone in his own world.