The Public Eye Chat With…Scott Pelley
Brian Montopoli: What do you think about the fact that James Inhofe, who until recently chaired the Environment and Public Works Committee, has cited your work as one of the prime examples of the media hyping global warming? A lot of conservatives have gone to comments you made to me…and said 'this is the mainstream media's attitude, and it's unfair and one sided.'
to listen to the interview.
Scott Pelley: That interview I did with you has become somewhat famous around Washington, apparently. First of all, let me say I am not familiar with what Senator Inhofe has said about me specifically, although I am aware that he brought my work up on the floor of the Senate. I think it's important to know that Senator Inhofe is a very careful and capable representative of the state of Oklahoma, which is where my family is from. And one thing Senator Inhofe knows is his constituents. And a lot of his constituents are honorably employed by the oil industry and companies that serve the oil industry. There's nothing wrong with that. And there's nothing wrong with him being an advocate for those constituents.
I think Senator Inhofe comes at this from a particular viewpoint, and that is that petroleum products should not be blamed on global warming. The science, however, is overwhelmingly on the other side of the question. The recent international conference on global warming, which was sponsored by the United States, concluded with 90 percent certainty – which is all you can get a scientist to say – that human activity, i.e. greenhouse gasses, particularly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels, is the principle driver of the warming trend that we have seen over the last several years.
And there is no debate any longer that there is a warming trend. I've just come back from Antarctica a few weeks ago, where we were shooting a story, and there are manifest, obvious changes down at the bottom of the earth that the earth is warming.
Brian Montopoli: Your interview that aired on Sunday, with Marine Sergeant Frank Wuterich, has generated…some criticism from those on the Internet who think you may have been too hard on Sergeant Wuterich – one blogger wrote that it was "one of the most outrageous displays of media bias ever." Can you talk to me a little bit about that, and a little bit about trying to be even handed in an interview like that?
Scott Pelley: I was tormented by that story, to be honest. We've been working with Frank Wuterich and his wife and his lawyers for many months now – about eight months – to get that interview done and on the air. And let me just say, my personal feeling is, I hate what happened to those soldiers, and the civilians. It is a tragedy on all sides, and one that the insurgents clearly intended, because the Marines were attacked in a residential neighborhood. This worked out exactly the way the insurgents would have had it.
Was I hard on him? I gave Frank the opportunity to answer the tough questions. If I had thrown softballs at him, at the end of the interview, people would have said, "Well, we don't really know what happened there, because Pelley didn't ask him any hard questions." So we did go at him vigorously on all of the points that he wanted to make. Questions we wanted to ask, and points that he wanted to address. I think that when you interview anyone with vigor and facts and passion, you find that the answers are all the more legitimate and believable.
The other thing I'll say about that is, this was an unusually long story for "60 Minutes." Most pieces on "60 minutes" are about 12 minutes long, this piece was 26 minutes long. And the reason for that was all the context – we reported a lot of stuff that you hadn't heard before. How hostile Haditha was. How hostile the average residence was. What the Marines had been going through before Frank Wuterich's battalion went into the city. The terrible losses the Marines were taking. So our hope was to give you the context that Wuterich and his men weren't through a happy city and decided to take 24 innocent civilian lives. It's a great deal more complicated than that, and I think all of that came through in the story.
It's interesting, I've been in touch with Frank since then, and he says we did exactly what we said we would do, and he believes he was treated fairly, and he was greatful for the opportunity. And that's really all I care about – is that I'm fair, and we did what we said we would do.
Brian Montopoli: Is it intimidating to interview a president? Does the power of the office cause you to think twice about interrupting or asking questions that might bother the president?
Scott Pelley: Not in the least. Not in the least. I'm always leaning forward in interviews with the president. I believe it is our highest and greatest responsibility to put tough questions to the people in power. And I thank God that I love in a country where the President of the United States feels like he has to sit down with the likes of me. That is just unbelievable to me, and I'm so proud to do it, with any president, Democrat or Republican.
I don't find it intimidating in the least, because from being around presidents a lot, I know that they're just regular folks. I interviewed President Bush on Air Force One once. We finished the interview, he walked into his cabin, and he realized there is something he meant to say and he'd forgotten to tell me. So he came back in to tell me, and he wasn't wearing a shirt. And I have no idea what he said, 'cause I'm just thinking "I'm standing in front of the president, and he's not wearing a shirt." But it's moments like that that you realize they're just regular folks. They are. Trying to do the best they can. And I find them fascinating but not intimidating.
Brian Montopoli: What's the hardest story you've ever done?
Scott Pelley: Well, I don't know what we mean by difficult, exactly. If you mean the most wrenching thing I've ever done, that was being at the World Trade Center on 9/11, and standing there as the buildings came down. I had covered the World Trade Center bombing from years before, and one of the facts that was rolling around in my head from that day was that at any given moment, there are 25 thousand people in those buildings. And so when I saw the buildings start to come down, I remember thinking at the time that I was witnessing the death of 25,000 people.
What we didn't know, at that moment, was that there had been a bit of a miracle, and that was that the buildings had been very thoroughly evacuated. The 2,000 plus people who were killed at the World Trade Center site were almost exclusively those who were trapped above the impact points. So in terms of emotion, that's a very humbling thing, that makes you feel very small. And I found myself, maybe for the only time in my career at this point, probably not wisely, but maybe the only time in my career, I fell to my knees and prayed to God that those people would be taken as painlessly as possible. That is something that I will never forget.
Brian Montopoli: From all the interviews you've done in your career, are there any questions where you wish you could take them back? Are there any moments where you thought, looking back, I wish I had handled that differently?
Scott Pelley: What a terrific question. I have lots of regrets…I do remember something that was accidental and inadvertent at an American hospital in Iraq. There was a young woman – I feel terribly about this to this day – there was a young woman who was being treated in the hospital. She had broken her neck in a car accident and was paralyzed from the next down. Beautiful, beautiful young woman, probably about 18 years old.
What had happened was she'd been traveling in a car that got, for whatever reason, too close to an American convoy, and the convoy had opened fire on the car. Her husband was killed, and the car rolled over and she was crippled. She did not know that her husband was dead. And she didn't speak English. I was working through an interpreter, and I asked the interpreter to verify what I had been told, that her husband had been killed. Not verify it with her, but to verify to make sure I understood with the doctors that we had been talking to.
He unfortunately, and in a flash, interpreted that as something I wanted to ask her, and he did. And she found out at that moment that her husband was dead, and burst into tears. And I was really responsible for that. This woman had such trouble and heartbreak in her life already. I had contributed to that and made it worse. And I very much regret that moment.