104th Edition
Lessons from Edward R. Murrow
During the Battle of Britain, CBS reporter, Edward R. Murrow, became to Americans, the voice of London. Not the official spokesperson for the British government, but the voice of the commoners, the people in the street, those perpetually in harm’s way during the relentless Nazi bombardment during that dark period beginning in 1940. As Lynne Olson explains in her wonderful book, “Citizens of London,” Murrow’s “heart and soul was the cause,” to tell the story of the Blitz and motivate America to do more to help the British survive the onslaught. To do so, Murrow abandoned well-established journalism policy of objectivity and neutrality. Was that the right thing to do and what do journalists think about the standard of objectivity and neutrality today?
Before Pearl Harbor, the overriding public and political sentiment in America was to remain neutral and to avoid direct intervention in Europe’s war. From his firsthand experience on the ground in London, Murrow was convinced that the survival of Great Britain depended on American assistance, not only as the Arsenal of Democracy, but eventually direct involvement. History has proved that his premonitions were correct. In essence, brushing aside journalistic standards for objectivity and neutrality were justified in his case.
The timeless question, therefore, is when is it justified to cross the line? Surely it is when it comes to situations involving injustice, or threats to freedom and liberty. The problem is that it is sometimes difficult to determine when situations that strike an emotional chord are really matters that all of us, not just journalists, should fight for passionately no matter the risks to reputation and lifestyle.
Today, there are all kinds of issues that motivate some people to fight wholeheartedly while other people struggle to understand what the fuss is all about. We disagree and argue about climate change, health care policy, appropriate pronouns, free or controlled speech, the exact definition of hatefulness, and the proper balance between responsibility and entitlements. We even debate how space in overhead bins on airplanes should be allocated, and how much of a person’s hard-earned income should be sent to the government. The list is endless. Everyone has an opinion, and everybody is entitled to one.
But journalists are supposed to be held to a different standard, at least professionally. Is that standard still in place and adhered to? I’m curious to find an answer to that question. Admittedly, as I write this blog, I don’t have one.
As I’ve written about many times, our country remains largely divided. To a great extent each side is worried, if not convinced, that some existential threat exists at the core of the other side’s philosophy and agenda. Arguably, the media, including some leading journalists, fuel emotions on both sides, while they willingly abandon professional standards of objectivity.
If, as history will eventually determine, their concerns justify this abandonment then they will have done the world a great service, similar perhaps to that which was made by Edward R. Murrow during World War II. If, on the other hand, history determines that their bias did not serve some worthwhile cause, they will have caused some cost or damage which society, or certain individuals within society, will end up paying. In short, we all benefit from the actions of the wise and courageous, while the costs paid for the deeds of the selfish and foolhardy are imposed more so on the innocent and powerless.
That is why it matters what causes we decide to fight for and how we go about it. Have we checked our motives? Do we understand thoroughly the laws of unintended consequences? Have we studied history and learned the lessons it always teaches? Do we understand the role of grace and humility, and most importantly, are we willing to surrender our will and trust in God’s sovereignty?
Questions to ponder, as this amazing story, of our amazing country, continues to unfold.
Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, stay tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks!
Michael Kayes
*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.