Uncle Walt Signs Off

In the early days of television you were nothing without a signoff. Everyone from Miss Nancy on Romper Room ("Goodbye Harold, goodbye Ida, goodbye Irving," etc) to Jimmy Durante ("Goodnight Mrs. Calabash, whereever you are.") had a distinctive way of closing their programs. Even news people weren't immune. Edward R. Murrow ended See it Now with "Good night and good luck." On The Today Show, Dave Garroway would simply utter "peace," while Huntley and Brinkley liked to wish each other "goodnight" (they must have gone to bed early).

Walter Cronkite would sign off the CBS Evening News by saying, "And that's the way it is." But was it? The Nation didn't think so when it took Cronkite to task in 1967 for not-- apologies here to Howard Cosell for borrowing his closing phrase-- telling it like it was on his program. A couple of months later, Cronkite responded to the criticism. After reading the exchange, I'm not sure who was more correct.

Cronkite was obviously a fine newsman and anchor, but I think he was much more interesting when he stepped away from the anchor perch and said what was really on his mind. After leaving the program, his comments about the media and government were invariably well thought out, pointed, and, of course, right on target. Would he have been as widely admired if he had used his program as a bully pulpit? Would he have lasted as long on the air if he had? After all, Murrow's See It Now broadcast exposing Joseph R. McCarthy as a bully was probably the most honored news program in the history of television. But that program also led to Murrow's downfall at CBS because it made him too controversial in the eyes of his bosses. On the other hand, the program marked the beginning of the end of McCarthyism, and the only reason it happened was that Murrow was willing to sacrifice his career if it meant putting an end to such evil.

Would Cronkite have done the same had he been in Murrow's position? Somehow I doubt it, and his career as an anchor bears that out. Yes, we were all moved by the way he took off his glasses and his eyes got all misty when he broke the news that JFK had died. But Cronkite was no Murrow. He was Uncle Walt, "the most trusted man in America" in large part because he reported the news. He didn't make it. He left no fallen tyrants in his wake. And that's the way it was.

Here's the 1967 editorial and Cronkite's response.

I'd be curious to hear what you think.

The Nation also printed a wonderful tribute to Cronkite by Kurt Vonnegut that addresses many of these same issues much better than I can. If Vonnegut he had been a TV newsman (if only), we know what his signoff would have been: So it goes.

I guess I need one as well. "This is Jeff Kisseloff from The Nation's archives...someone turn on a light, I can't find my way out of here."

Comments (1)

1. On the type of broadcast that Walter Cronkite did, particular, verified occasions of government lying could have been news items - but observations about overall government dishonesty probably would have been out of place. He could have done news broadcasts that gave more prominence to the particulars - but he was no doubt under time & other constraints. However, the perception that the network news was reporting in a way that was accepting of the government's ultimately undermined much of the public's trust in news organizations.

   Since even which "objective" stories news organizations choose to report has an effect on how the general public perceives the world, it's got to be a difficult call. Now we have complete information overload and news organizations reporting stories that they think will draw viewers instead of the stories that they think are, on balance, the most impotant to the body politic.

   Posted by cdlepthien at 07/22/2009 @ 3:28pm