FIRST | PREV | Page 3 / 23 | NEXT | LAST

Go To Page:  GO

Most Recent Entries:

The Debt to our Elders

Jan 17 2011 6:15pm

I have a great rejection letter from the absolutely terrific L.A. broadcasting legend John Babcock in my home files.

John had taken the time to write a long and wonderful note about how I should "never give up" and all that stuff as he penned this note explaining that there were no openings for me at KABC-TV in Los Angeles after I had applied there for a job. I was working at another TV station in town, but really wanted to work for a better outfit, and John would have been my boss. He made the rejection sound so fatherly that it was almost as if he knew me. Of course, since he continually called me "David" in the letter, I was continually reminded that he didn't. (My favorite part was his line: "Always remember, you are David Carlin!")

But I would eventually get that job, and get to work side-by-side with a guy that still defies my ability to describe him. Here's a snippet from a website where his achievements are recounted:

Babcock, John: KDAY, 1955-57; KFWB, 1957-59; KMPC, 1959-61; KLAC, 1961-63; KABC, 1963-73. In 1970 Don Page of the LA Timesnamed John newscaster of the year saying: "John Babcock is one of radio's premier commentators and a leading documentarian." John was born the day of the 1933 earthquake and started life as an orphan. He was shuffled between foster homes until he was adopted by the Babcock family. While he was in his delinquent teen years, John was sentenced to two years in the Boys Republic of Chino. Many years later, he became the president of Chino's Board of Directors. "I am the first ex-student to be elected president of this risk school." After graduating from the University of Texas, John started out in the newspaper business and WOAI-San Antonio. He came to the Southland and started with KDAY. For part of his stay with KABC news he hosted a morning talk show. John was the California press director for Vice President Hubert Humphrey in 1968 and 1972. In 1973 John joined KABC television as a writer/producer and eventually went into news management. "When I was at Channel 7's news assignment desk I could get the reporters to do four stories a day. Then it was 3, then 2 and now they think they're doing a favor by covering one story." John retired in 1995 and was active writing and running the Boys school. His wife of 17 years is principal of the Dubonoff School for "kids at risk." Their daughter attends the Peabody Music Conservatory in Baltimore. John died February 1, 1997, at the age of 63. Former KFWB newsman Al Wiman said unequivocally that John "was the best news person EVER!"

Well, he was the best news person that I ever worked closely with, to be sure. And yes, he has passed away now. He sprang to my mind after I just posted an old picture of myself on our facebook site. It's from me back in my days of working with John, and a bunch of memories came flooding back. And also, with them, a bit of anger that people like John are not as remembered as their achievements warrant. What's so sad about that is that so many really talented people (who would have been remembered forever had their work been cast in the "digital stone" that is the Internet) are getting swallowed up by anonymity. This is, of course, the fate of more than 99% of all the people who have ever lived, so it isn't abnormal. But it seems a shame that such good talents are as unknown now as they have become (and people who couldn't carry their jockstraps will be remembered forever because of the historical good luck of being born in the current era).

When I knew John, he was a dinosaur in the business. KABC "Eyewitness News" was on top of the ratings in the late 1980s/early 1990s and John was decidedly "Old School" for such a hip (and yes, Hollywood) operation. They really didn't know what to do with him. He was a leftover legend there.

The station still let him produce his multi-part "mini-docs" and being his right hand man at doing that became my job. The subjects chosen for these documentary pieces were usually history-related (and you can see the stuff I learned doing this...or hear it rather...in every HH podcast we do. Thanks again John...). In addition, John taught me journalism (so did a bunch of other people that I have never gone back and properly thanked, but who deserve my everlasting gratitude. Paul Dandridge, Linda Breakstone, Mark Brown, Jim Hattendorf, Becky Martinez, Mike Merle, Jeff Michaels, Art Rascon, and Dan Spice to name but a few. Oh how much we all owe to people who never get thanked for the help...). John learned the journalistic trade the old fashioned way, and his experience dripped like honey on anyone who was willing to absorb it. As he got older he seemed more and more to WANT to pass along stuff to we young 20-somethings.

Famous John stories: He was in the motorcade in Dallas (last car, if I remember) when Kennedy was shot. He didn't see anything because the view from his location was terrible. He was one of the first ones to Parkland hospital since he used to work in that local media and knew the area well. He also spoke to Jack Ruby a couple of minutes before Ruby shot Oswald, and watched the whole thing go down. ("What are you doing here Jack?" was what John said to him when he saw him a few minutes before the shooting). He covered the Manson trials and Manson fell in love with the guy. John had letters from Manson framed on his wall (yeah...we news people are kooks...). He had GREAT Manson stories...

Even his youth was full of great stories. After getting caught stealing a car, John was put in a youth facility. His bunkmate was Steve McQueen (the two stayed friends, and both helped to give back to that facility after reaching adulthood).

Just watching the way John processed the info about a current situation was like a lesson in reporting. The questions that came to his mind that he wanted answered (I use the same sort of questions in many a CS episode), the way he quickly determined what was important, and who was involved is like a lost art these days in news reporting. It was like watching a detective. We lovingly called him "Babo" but he was more like a pit bull muckraker with a crusading mentality and a strong sense of justice. I just can't think of anyone even remotely like him in the current American mainstream media.

But at the end it was sad. Sad and wrong. John was slowly eased out of his position and encouraged to retire (poor health made that decision easier). What was so sad and wrong wasn't this fact, but the fact that the reason he wasn't a valuable asset to the news station anymore was that there was no place in the modern TV news business for a real, old-fashioned newsman (sorry ladies...but that's what they were called back in his day).

I keep thinking of what would happen if you could cosmically resurrect the great journalists of old, give them an Internet station where they could work together as a news team, and see what they could crank out. If they did this, John wouldn't have been one of their "lead anchors". A Murrow, or Cronkite or Mencken would likely field that spot. But John Babcock would be on that elite staff. And given the way he was even as an old man, he would be kicking some ass. The reporters of old were much more enterprising and investigative people than those who have today inherited that mantle. This devaluation in the quality of the Fourth Estate (both the individual journalist and the news outlets that employ them) could go a long way explaining how we got to our current state of affairs both in the USA and globally.

We all miss John Babcock now (whether you knew him or not).

A Baseline for Tragedy

Jan 12 2011 2:19am

Since I must be the last person in the country to express an opinion about the tragic killing of a ton of people in Arizona this week (including a federal Judge and the grievous wounding of the presumed main target, U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords ) I suppose I should point out the advantages of being last; it is nice to wait and see how a little time to absorb the event affects my thoughts about it.

I was on the radio the morning that the event many have compared this latest tragedy to occurred. When the Oklahoma City Murrah  Federal Building was badly damaged by a truck bomb on April 19, 1995. 168 people were killed in the attack. It was, at the time, the worst incident of terrorism on U.S. soil. I was on the air all day taking calls from traumatized listeners. People and pundits were saying many of the same things about that event when it happened, as they are saying now in the wake of this latest outrage. There was a ton of discussion about the "tone of the national debate", about the vitriol of conservative talk radio and of domestic right-wing extremists. Some predicted that the attack would be but the first of many more future assaults.

It wasn't.

Talk radio didn't change. The national debate didn't get any less heated (in fact, it would soon escalate with impeachment proceedings against the very polarizing president Bill Clinton). The right-wing militia types didn't fade away. And nothing bad happened. The attack by Timothy McVeigh was an isolated attack by a small group of extremists. It didn't represent some larger trend nor was it a foretaste of similar dire things to come. But many couldn't resist seeing it that way at the time, in the heat of the moment.

My wife was a reporter for a CBS News affiliate the day the Thurston High school shootings happened (May 21, 1998- 4 dead, 22 wounded ). She arrived on the scene within 30 minutes of the shots being fired, and was there for the next 16 hours reporting for CBS stations around the country. She saw it all close up. It was simple insanity. Everybody spent days seeking to find a way to explain it (it seems to be almost a human need to make sense of these sorts of things), yet in the end we were all just left with a feeling that probably would have been the same as if the intentional shooting of classmates by a troubled student had been a sort of natural disaster, rather than a human directed mass murder. A random lighting strike or tornado touch-down that just happened to hit here in Oregon this time, rather than someplace else.

Obviously it goes without saying that this latest killing spree in Arizona is a terrible tragedy. The actual number of dead and wounded is quite shocking. This gunman managed to do a lot of damage in his short, deadly attack. I am always stunned when I meditate for a while on the ripples of pain and anguish this gunman's lone act (which took seconds) will inflict on the families of the victims. That lone murderous moment will torture and haunt the loved ones of the victims (and some of the surviving victims themselves) for the many decades they have left to live. When you add up all the people affected, by the cumulative length of time they will be affected, it adds up to pain and suffering on a massive scale.

That having been said...is it normal? I know that's a strange question to ask about something that seems so obviously ABnormal, but I think it would help us put this event into perspective if we had some sort of a baseline with which to measure this recent attack. I mean, many have called this attack an "assassination attempt". It seems to me that based on what we know at this point, that's a fair assumption. If that's the case, how many assassination attempts (of prominent figures) are normal for the USA in any given decade? For example: we averaged a U.S. president assassinated every 20 or so years between Lincoln and McKinley. The "baseline" on that score has improved dramatically since then. Where are we now, numbers-wise, compared to the 1990s or the 1980s? Or how about for the 1960s?

Without having any idea what we should expect in terms of such tragedies, it is hard to know if this latest attack is an negative omen for the future or just what we might expect based on statistical data from past decades. If this is akin to a lighting strike, have we had more or less lightning than normal? It seems to me that this is a crucial question before we can determine if we are faced with a unique situation that signals the beginning of a trend that bodes ill for the future, or just the normal amount of hideous violence that seems to be a constant in our system.

Everyone on our discussion board at least, seems aware of the most likely outcome of all of this bad stuff happening: it is just going to be another excuse or rationale for our leaders to crack down in some way on us even more. And to be honest, I am not sure they could stop themselves if they tried. We put pressure on them to "do something about these tragedies!" and they try. But how effective can you be at stopping lighting strikes? (Or our latest version of Mark David Chapman, John Hinckley or Leon Czolgosz?). We live in a time where our elected officials seem to wield nothing but hammers, and every problem like this just looks like another nail to them. They will deal with it the way they have dealt with the other nails they have run into. Everyone blamed the Obama Administration advisors for the supposed line they uttered to "Never waste a good crisis". Well, that's not a philosophy that's confined to the advisors around the president. That's pretty much standard operating procedure for all our political class these days (with a few notable exceptions). I doubt they will waste this crisis either.

That having been said, please don't hurt any of them. It's a crime, a sin, it's evil and won't make anything better. One would have to be insane, I think, to believe otherwise.

The Illness of the Muse

Dec 23 2010 3:44pm

Well, I am not really sure how to say this, so I will just come out and say it. The next edition of HH is going to be late. I don't know how late, but it doesn't look good right now.

I think it would be hard to explain the process of making these HH shows. Much of it is regimented and organized. We have a reading/research period, followed by an organizational period when we lay out the episode (or in what becomes exponentially harder, a series of episodes if the subject is a multi-parter), we have an actual recording period where I do my audio parts and then at the end of the process we have a period when the sounds and background color is added. People think that the 60 day wait for a new episode is a long time...but it actually seems like it flies by for us as we feel pressed for time during each one of the production stages.

The one thing that can't be regimented though, is the creativity. This is both the hardest part of show production, but also the part I am most proud of. Yet it is totally subject to inspiration. In addition, even when inspired, an idea has to be tried out. After some experiments, sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. You can only imagine how many days this process can eat up (especially if it is not going well).

Well, for some reason, In the month of December, it seems historically to NOT go well. I don't know if it's the holidays (although that would sure be a convenient excuse to use, wouldn't it?) or what, but I am having an unusually hard time "accessing my Muse" right now. Obviously I find this a depressing and stressful situation. We are always upfront and honest with you all about where we are at any given time in terms of show releases, so I wanted to just make it clear to all of you that we are very behind right now. But we are working constantly on it.

It is very hard to do, but I try to keep reminding myself that in the long run, it is most important to get a good show out of all this Sturm und Drang we go through trying to create it. These shows are more like record albums than radio programs. We try to make them so that they stand the test of time. But that sometimes conflicts mightily with my 60 day deadline period (especially, apparently, in December).

These longer, multi-part subjects (like the Rome story we are doing now) are also killers. They involve many, many loose ends that we must always keep track of and make sure to "tie-up" by the end. It "complexifies" our organization exponentially. Yet many listeners consider our multi-parters to be their favorite HH productions. In addition, some of the best stories in history for us to mine are those that simply cannot be told within the confines of a single podcast episode. So, whattayagonnado?

Well, suffer through Decembers I guess. What was this whole post about again? Oh yeah...the podcast is going to be late. Maybe really late. My Muse is apparently sick. If you think about it, it was probably inevitable. Exposure to Ben...the coldness of December...it was a malady waiting to happen.

Let's hope the Muse returns soon. It pays the bills around here, after all.

Sorry everyone. Thanks for your patience. We will get the show out as soon as possible. We always do.

In the meantime, I hope you have a good holiday season. I hope we all have a good 2011.

The Assange Clone Wars

Dec 16 2010 1:14am

I just posted this in a thread on one of our forum areas. But it seemed worth posting here as well.

I was discussing the specific focus we are devoting to wikileaks and Julian Assange in hundreds of news stories around the globe every day. The media may talk about the criminal allegations in Sweden hanging over him, or someone may bring up the poor taste (and bad business decision as well) to label that infamous Apache attack video footage "Collateral Murder" in one of the recent "leaks" by the online whistleblowing entity. They could bring up any number of specific wikileaks or Assange criticisms. But all this will become moot once more of these wikileaks-type clones appear on the scene. Already some former colleagues of Assange's are about to raise the curtain on their own new whistleblower site.

Our specific focus on wikileaks and its most famous human face is a temporary luxury for those who want to focus on the peripheral in this story. Pretty soon, both Julian Assange and wikileaks will be but one fish in the sea. When that time comes, the debate will change.

From the discussion board comments:


Well, it seems to me that the debate about wikileaks specifically is already outdated. Those who were unhappy working with/for Assange are firing up their whistleblowing group now, and there will certainly, as we said in the show, be more of them cropping up as time goes on. Every one of them will likely apply their own individual leaking standards and practices. Specifically singling out one entity, such as wikileaks, will be meaningless as there will be many other groups, with various standards, morals, ethics and agendas of their own doing the same thing.

Wikileaks is the lightning rod right now and is taking all the heat at the moment and Assange and his motives are being deconstructed and debated as though he and/or wikileaks are some singular, once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon. He/they aren't...they're just part of the 1st wave of this stuff. It won't be so personality focused and driven when there are 20 or 30 Julian Assanges running around.

I personally think that this whole wikleaks thing (including the resulting hacking attacks that the media dubbed a "cyberwar" recently) is part of an almost 9/11 type moment for our government. In the same way the terror attacks created a "before and after" mentality (ie. a "Post 9/11 world") these wikileaks leaks created a cyber version of that. The government had been paying sort of passive attention to the possibility of an online whistleblowing operation exposing sensitive information in the past...noticing it (a bit like they noticed the potential for terrorists to run into buildings with planes) but not REALLY considering the reality of what it would mean until it actually happened. Now that it HAS happened, they seem ready to make up for lost time and treat it like a major security threat and start legislating with gusto on the subject.

You can bet the governments of the world (working in conjunction with powerful corporations...some with copyright and entertainment interests, others with net neutrality and infrastructure control interests to others concerned about having their secrets exposed by a wikileaks type breach of security situation) are applying their minds to the issue of "control" of the Internet as never before.

Now, I am told by a lot of computer old-timers that the Internet can't be controlled ("Dan, it was invented to survive a nuclear war" etc. etc. etc.). Hmmmmmmm...well, we may get to watch that proposition get tested in the not-too-distant future.






The Amazon-Firefox Plug-In

Dec 01 2010 10:55pm

One of the unexpected things that has helped us make enough scratch to keep podcasting is the program Amazon.com has to share revenue with what they call "affiliates". We signed up for this program, and are affiliates. If the affiliate posts Amazon's search window on their website, then any buying traffic that uses that window to make Amazon purchases will stimulate a rebate of a small percentage of the purchase price back to the affiliate (us).

Now, if you listen to our podcasts, this news is not new to you.  We promote this program on the shows (and thankfully, a lot of you are using it. It is only valuable if lots of people take advantage because the individual rebates are low...but they add up over time).

The main inhibiting factor is simply getting people to remember to do it.  But a new plug-in for Firefox browser users has made this a moot step.  Just install the plug-in and (we are told...we haven't tested it yet) you can just go directly to Amazon.com from then on and shop directly using your web browser and we will get the same credit that we would have received if you had remembered to go to our website and had used the built-in search window we have there.

If this sounds like a labor/time/trouble saving piece of equipment for you, you can find it by clicking here:
affiliatefox.net/install/install.php?hash=1e3e8e49a509e23658f678751a9e7554

And my extreme thanks to all of you who have supported what we do by shopping at Amazon.com via us. It really does help!

FIRST | PREV | Page 3 / 23 | NEXT | LAST

Go To Page:  GO