logo
‘Good Night, and Good Luck' Remembers When TV Had a Conscience, and a Spine

‘Good Night, and Good Luck' Remembers When TV Had a Conscience, and a Spine

In the Broadway play 'Good Night, and Good Luck,' the CBS newscaster Edward R. Murrow (George Clooney) allows himself a moment of doubt, as his program 'See It Now' embarks on a series of reports on the anti-communist witch hunts of the 1950s.
'It occurs to me,' he says, 'that we might not get away with this one.'
It is a small but important line. We know Murrow's story — exposing the red-baiting demagoguery of Senator Joseph McCarthy — as history. And history, once set down on the page and stage, can seem inevitable.
But Murrow's success was not preordained. It required hard, exacting work. It required guts. It required journalists to risk personal ruin and some of them to experience it.
It's a point worth remembering. And it hits especially hard at this moment, when CBS News, headquartered just blocks away from the Winter Garden Theater, is again under political and financial pressure to rein in its coverage of the powerful. History is repeating, this time perhaps as tragedy. (CNN is airing the play's June 7 evening performance live, as if to give the news business a shot in the arm.)
In 'Good Night, and Good Luck,' adapted from the 2005 screenplay by Clooney and Grant Heslov, all ends well, more or less. (The 'less' is implied in the stage production by a 'We Didn't Start the Fire'-like closing montage that ties the division and chaos of the past several decades to the cacophony of media.)
Murrow ultimately received support — however nervous and limited — from his network. Its chief, William S. Paley (Paul Gross), fretted about pressure from politicians and from the 'See It Now' sponsor, the aluminum company Alcoa. But while Paley complained about the agita Murrow brought him, he did not pull the plug on the McCarthy investigation.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Video Explores How 1920s Filmmakers Pulled Off Death-Defying Stunts Without Dying — GeekTyrant
Video Explores How 1920s Filmmakers Pulled Off Death-Defying Stunts Without Dying — GeekTyrant

Geek Tyrant

time16 minutes ago

  • Geek Tyrant

Video Explores How 1920s Filmmakers Pulled Off Death-Defying Stunts Without Dying — GeekTyrant

A new video from Lost in Time dives into some of the wildest and most iconic movie stunts from the silent film era. This is a behind-the-scenes look at how legends like Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd, and Charlie Chaplin pulled off seemingly impossible feats of physical comedy and danger… without modern safety gear or visual effects. 'In this video we're breaking down how they pulled off the craziest stunts in the 1920s from Hollywood legends Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin and Harold Lloyd. I have made 3D animations showing exactly how each scene was filmed, and it is amazing how creative they were back then.' And those animations really drive it home. Watching them reveals just how much thought and trickery went into making these death-defying moments is fascinating. This is just a reminder that the roots of modern movie magic were built with brains, not just bravery.

Navy veteran's $500M defamation lawsuit against Associated Press advances with first hearing
Navy veteran's $500M defamation lawsuit against Associated Press advances with first hearing

Fox News

time18 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Navy veteran's $500M defamation lawsuit against Associated Press advances with first hearing

Zachary Young's high-stakes defamation lawsuit against the Associated Press continues to inch along in Bay County, Florida, as the U.S. Navy veteran seeks to clear his name. Young successfully sued CNN for defamation earlier this year after saying the network smeared him by implying he illegally profited from helping people flee Afghanistan on the "black market" during the Biden administration's disastrous 2021 military withdrawal. When covering the trial in January, Associated Press media reporter David Bauder wrote that "Young's business helped smuggle people out of Afghanistan." Young's legal team has said that the Associated Press article "went even further than CNN's falsehoods," and the veteran is seeking nearly $500 million in a defamation suit against the AP. On Monday, Young's legal team responded to the AP's motion to dismiss the suit. The AP had insisted Young's complaint is "without merit" and unjustly challenges the outlet's free speech rights, but the Navy veteran's legal team believes the motion failed to address "core issues." "It does not dispute that the term 'human smuggling' implies criminal conduct, nor does it offer any valid explanation for its use of that term, even though a court previously ruled that Mr. Young committed no crime. AP's own Stylebook defines 'smuggling' as illegal," Young's attorney, Daniel Lustig, wrote. "Dozens of AP articles reflect that usage. Just days before this filing, AP published a story about a man sentenced to 25 years in prison for 'smuggling people,' reinforcing that understanding," Lustig continued. "Even after receiving notice, AP refused to retract or revise the statement, not even to use a more accurate term such as 'evacuate' or 'rescue.'" Young's attorney believes the most "notable" part of the AP's motion to dismiss is that it never denied that "smuggling" refers to a criminal act. "Instead, it argues that the statement, in context, was not defamatory. That is not a defense, it is a concession. Under Florida law, if a statement is reasonably capable of a defamatory meaning, it is a question for the jury, not one to be resolved on a motion to dismiss. AP's attempt to invoke the anti-SLAPP statute to shield such a statement is both legally unsupported and fundamentally flawed," Lustig wrote. Young's legal team has also filed a motion to amend the complaint to include punitive damages. The 242-page filing suggested this case "exemplifies the very scenario in which punitive damages are warranted to punish and deter such consciously indifferent conduct by a media organization." On Tuesday, each side appeared for the first hearing in front of 14th Judicial Circuit Court Judge William S. Henry, who also presided over the CNN trial. The Case Management Conference, conducted over Zoom, was largely procedural and offered a chance for each party to explain why respective motions should be heard. Judge Henry scheduled the next hearing for July 3. He is expected to rule on both the AP's motion to dismiss and Young's amended complaint. The AP has referred to the lawsuit as "frivolous" in past statements to the press.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store