-
Preview: The Great Explorer November 25, 2009 9:20 AM
-
Preview: Congo Gold November 25, 2009 9:06 AM
-
Preview: Bob Ballard November 25, 2009 7:30 AM
-
Rooney on Thanksgiving November 22, 2009 10:25 AM
-
60 Minutes, 11.22.09 November 22, 2009 10:45 AM
-
James Cameron's Avatar November 22, 2009 10:15 AM
-
Maziar Bahari: Witness November 22, 2009 10:07 AM
-
The Cost of Dying November 22, 2009 10:06 AM
-
Web Extra: At Home, At Peace November 22, 2009 9:47 AM
-
Web Extra: Comfort and Costs November 22, 2009 9:44 AM
-
Extra: "A Peaceful Terrorist" November 22, 2009 9:44 AM
-
Extra: "Mr. Hillary Clinton" November 22, 2009 9:36 AM
-
Web Extra: A Defining Moment? November 22, 2009 9:32 AM
-
Web Extra: Target Audience? November 22, 2009 9:32 AM
-
Web Extra: His High-Tech Cave November 22, 2009 9:24 AM
-
Preview: Witness November 21, 2009 5:05 AM
-
Preview: The Cost of Dying November 20, 2009 11:47 AM
-
Preview: Cameron's "Avatar" November 20, 2009 11:43 AM
-
On The Set of "Avatar" November 19, 2009 10:34 AM
-
Kroft's Reporter's Notebook November 19, 2009 11:39 AM
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 24 CommentsI am writing to complain about David Martin?s interview with General Stanley McChrystal (September 27), the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Though McChrystal was transparently campaigning for more funding for war, Martin asked not one tough question, not one challenging follow-up. Despite the fact that McChrystal's arguments might have been lifted from Westmoreland's Vietnam playbook, Martin raised not a peep of doubt or skepticism about the feasibility of the General's plans. Viewers might have learned, for instance, that there are currently MORE U.S. military personnel in Afgahnistan (including private contractors) than the Soviet Union had at the peak of its occupation in the 1970s. Nor did Martin question any of the basic assumptions about why the U.S. is there, or what its mission is.
McChrystal has a public record of what can at best be characterized as poor judgement, and at worst as outright deceit and rank propaganda. Recall the 2003 Pentagon press briefings on the progress of the Iraq war, where he offered this zinger: "I could anticipate that the major combat engagements are over.? McChrystal also headed the unit that found and killed Abu Musab al-Zarquai, Task Force 6-26. That unit was notorious for its frequent use of torture. And McChrystal was involved in the cover up of the Pat Tillman friendly fire incident. Even a tepidly critical journalist would have broached these subjects, but Martin touched on none of this. He seemed more interested in gushing over a U.S. "war hero," admiring the General's personal qualities (even likening him to a monk).
I was shocked and kind of awed by the story's sheer propaganda. An old Soviet journalist couldn't have produced a better piece for the USSR's adventures in Afgahnistan. I don't expect radical muckraking journalism from 60 Minutes, but this kind of "news" has no place in a free press.
Sincerely,
Andrew Gebhardt
Guiding Light stands apart not only for its longevity but for its focus on family and friendship. Sure, GL has had its share of drama and trauma as well: affairs, faked deaths, babies switched at birth, cars driven off cliffs and a good cloning or two but the mainstay of Guiding Light has been family. That was why it appealed to my grandmothers 72 years ago on the radio, my mother 50 years ago, and to me as an adolescent and now as a stay-at-home mom of 3. And as it goes dark, I feel I'm losing a precious strand of connection between those 3 generations. Whatever problems my mom, sister and I were having, we could laugh and say they were nothing...at least we didn't have Roger Thorpe (or pick your villain) after us...or at least we weren't as crazy as so-and-so.
When Guiding Light first transitioned from radio to television, the powers that be were unsure if the switch would be successful. When the soaps were on the radio, women could listen while they were(supposedly)doing their housework at the same time. The decisionmakers didn't know if women would stop doing their housework long enough to take a break and sit down and watch a soap opera on the television. Were they crazy? Obviously, those people had never done a day's housework in their lives! It wasn't long before women all over the country were telling their children, "Quiet! It's time for my stories!"
And they were right. They are our stories. Soap operas are essentially women's stories(or at least more old-fashioned ones like Guiding Light are), told the way women traditionally tell stories: very personally, with lots of detail, maybe a little repetition, some drama. They're about family, surrounding the home and day to day life, who wore what, who said what, who's hurting, who needs help. And I'm wondering about the insight of the decisonmakers now just like the ones who weren't sure if women would take a break from housework 72 years ago to watch? Who's deciding that these stories don't matter? And that the older women who watch them and care about them don't matter either?
Also the cancellation of Guiding Light and the cross-country move of All MY Children really hurts the industry that once was centered in New York City. Where will the actors, actresses, writers, and others go to work in a fictional series? With only 2 soaps based in NYC, the number one reason that many ex-cast members left Guiding Light was to pursue options in Los Angeles. They don't have the same opportunities in NYC. You can't expect an actor to do a soap and do a play on Broadway for 8 peformances a week without burning out. I liked the Vegas style where it's 4 shows per week instead. I remember visiting the set of Guiding Light in 1993 in part thanks to a friend. It was one of hte memorable times of my life. I never thought I would have to say goodbye this Friday. I don't think it will be forever, maybe just a break for now.
I can guarantee that I will not record and watch Let's Make a Deal. I don't care for game shows, I hate the judge shows, and have little interest in the talk shows. I really feel sorry for Wayne Brady who is such a talented performer. I love Wayne Brady. CBS is setting him up for failure. Why would they deliberately do that? What do they think their viewers would enjoy? What would their sponsors think they could show to get the most "bang" for their buck? It sure won't be a stupid game show. I can only hope that CBS will learn to regret this decision instead of finding a rational way to fix this legend of a show.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 24 Comments