|
WSWS : Arts
Review : Film
Reviews
A timely film on Murrow and McCarthy
By Peter Daniels
8 November 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Good Night, and Good Luck, directed by George Clooney,
written by George Clooney and Grant Heslov
Edward R. Murrow is one of those public figures for whom the
adjective legendary, often attached to his name, is not altogether
out of place. The American broadcast journalist, whose career
spanned the quarter century from 1935 to 1961, stands out as a
towering figure when compared to every current television anchor
and pundit, without exception.
Murrow, born in 1908, joined the Columbia Broadcasting System
during the days of radio in the Depression years and became widely
known for his broadcasts from London during the Blitz in World
War II. He then made the transition to television in the postwar
period, when he hosted both the well-known See It Now newsmagazine,
as well as the lighter Person to Person, with its celebrity
interviews.
Murrow has been dead for 40 years, and the period when he spoke
to Americans through the medium of television seems very distant.
He was a journalist when there was still room for journalism on
the small screen, and he was a commentator who wrote his own scripts
and who never talked down to his audience of millions.
A high point of Murrows television career was his confrontation
with Joe McCarthy, the redbaiting junior Senator from Wisconsin
who climbed aboard the anticommunist bandwagon and whose name
became synonymous with the period of witch-hunting hysteria that
began after the Second World War and peaked in 1954.
Murrows exposure of McCarthy is the central subject of
the new film by George Clooney, Good Night, and Good Luckthe
title of the movie is taken from Murrows television sign-off.
Clooney, best known as a television and film actor, is an outspoken
liberal and Murrow is clearly one of his heroes. He has made a
serious and thoughtful film, despite some obvious limitations.
Fifty-one years after the events portrayed in the film, this re-creation
should be widely seen, if only to make this crucial period come
alive to the many who have only the faintest idea of the significance
of McCarthy and McCarthyism.
To say the film is timely is an understatement. Todays
headlines point to the existence of a McCarthyite campaign of
character assassination and dirty tricks, this time orchestrated
from the White House, not by a junior Senator from the Midwest.
Just as in McCarthys day, the prime victims of the campaign
are not simply or even primarily the Communist menace
(in todays version, the terrorist threat). No, the campaign
is directed against those within the political establishment itself
who do not line up with sufficient enthusiasm behind the policies
of preemptive war, the use of torture and other blatant violations
of traditional bourgeois legality.
Moreover, as Clooney clearly wants his audience to note, there
is no Edward R. Murrow challenging the use of smears and lies
today. On the contrary, the television and print media has generally
gone along with them and in key instances legitimized them, at
least until recently.
Clooney presents the events of 1954 in documentary style. His
use of black-and-white not only conjures up the period of black
and white television of the 1950s; it also meshes well with the
decision not to use an actor to play McCarthy, but rather to let
the Senator speak for himself through old television footage,
including hearings before his Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.
The story is presented from the vantage point of Murrow and
his associates at CBS, with almost all of the action
taking place in the CBS studios. The screenplay, by Clooney and
Grant Heslov, relies heavily and quite powerfully on Murrows
own scripts for his See It Now programs.
Murrow produced several episodes of See It Now dealing
with the anticommunist witch-hunt. This climaxed with the broadcast
of March 9, 1954. Murrow used recordings of McCarthy in action,
enabling the newsman to marshal his arguments all the more effectively.
No one familiar with the history of this country can deny
that Congressional committees are useful, Murrow told his
audience. It is necessary to investigate before legislating.
But the line between investigating and persecuting is a very fine
one, and the junior senator from Wisconsin has stepped over it
repeatedly.
Murrow invited the senator to make a rebuttal on a subsequent
edition of the show. McCarthys performance, presented via
archival film, is absorbing to watch. He calls Murrow the
cleverest of the jackal pack ... 20 years ago he engaged in propaganda
for Communist causes.
The film also includes brief excerpts from the Army-McCarthy
hearings of 1954, where the Army attorney Joseph Welch shames
McCarthy with the soon-to-be-famous words, Have you no sense
of decency, sir? At long last, have you no sense of decency?
These hearings came several months after Murrows exposure
of McCarthy, and took place against the background of a public
shift against McCarthy and his methods.
All of this material is well edited and fascinating. As for
Murrow and the rest of the CBS newsmen (and one woman), the cast
is uniformly excellent, beginning with David Strathairn as Murrow.
Clooney himself plays Fred Friendly, the producer of the show,
Murrows closest collaborator and a major figure in the development
of television news in the postwar period. Others in the cast include
Robert Downey, Jr. and Patricia Clarkson as Joe and Shirley Wershba.
The Wershbas are alive and testified to the accuracy of the portrayals.
Ray Wise portrays Don Hollenbeck, the CBS newsman who was driven
to suicide by redbaiting attacks in the press. The off-screen
death of Hollenbeck, and the reaction of his colleagues, drives
home the seriousness of the witch-hunt and its human consequences.
One major weakness of the film is the relative absence of historical
context. The confrontation, understandably, is between Murrow
and McCarthy. More background is needed to fully grasp the significance
of this conflict, however.
McCarthy was not the only witch-hunter, nor was Murrow, for
all of his integrity, a man who singlehandedly defeated him. The
anticommunist crusade was stepped up almost immediately after
the end of the Second World War. By 1948, 10 unions had been expelled
from the CIO union federation on charges of Communist influence.
The Korean War began in 1950, followed by the Smith Act trials
of the leaders of the Communist Party and the arrest on espionage
charges of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were executed in June
1953. Police departments in all major cities set up Red Squads,
working with the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover, to spy on subversives.
The Internal Security Act of 1950, also called the McCarran Act,
was followed two years later by the McCarran-Walter Immigration
Act, which included provisions banning entry into the US and the
deportation of non-citizens deemed un-American in
their views.
Murrow, while clearly a principled liberal, went along with
much of the anticommunist campaign as the Cold War began. In fact,
he later headed the US Information Agency in the Kennedy administration,
after leaving CBS.
The official anticommunism was crucial in producing McCarthy,
in setting the stage in which he could carry out his attacks.
Whatever Murrows doubts or disagreements, it was only when
McCarthy began to provoke growing opposition within the ruling
elite itself that Murrow took the initiative to produce his exposure.
This does not mean that Murrow was not sincerely devoted to
the defense of democratic rights. His role encapsulates the contradictions
of American liberalism, and in this period Murrow took a far more
principled position than most.
He clashed with the owner of CBS, William Paley, over the show
on McCarthy, as well as on many other occasions. Paley, portrayed
in the film by Frank Langella, is a media mogul of a far different
type than his counterparts today. He clearly respects Murrows
work, and the two meet and argue as equals, on a first-name basis.
But Paley is not prepared to sacrifice either CBSs profits
or his political influence so that Murrow can proceed with his
hard-hitting exposures. At one point Paley angrily tells Murrow,
I write your check, and threatens to put an end to
the show. Eventually Paley told Murrow he was tired of the constant
stomach aches over the program, and the last episode
of See It Now aired in 1958.
To his credit, Clooney wants his audience to consider the pertinence
of Murrows story today. Where is Edward R. Murrow
when we need him? the film seems to ask.
This raises important and complex issues related to the nature
of the media in capitalist society and the important political
changes that have taken place in the past 50 years, including
the sharp shift to the right within the ruling elite.
The decisions of the media, a part of this ruling elite, are
not solely based on commercial considerations, but on the fundamental
interests of the ruling class as a whole. In the 1950s there was
a more significant constituency within the elite for certain democratic
norms. Even then, Murrow was eventually pushed aside.
There are a handful of older television news figures, people
of the generation following Murrow, who undoubtedly have tried,
as they see it, to follow in Murrows footsteps. Their fate
has not been a very fortunate one.
Dan Rather, when he tried to conduct his own exposure during
the 2004 election campaign, left it on the level of Bushs
National Guard service, falling into the trap set for him and
soon resigning from CBS in semi-disgrace.
Bill Moyers, the longtime television commentator, primarily
in public broadcasting, is perhaps closest to the mold of Murrow.
But Moyers has been marginalized for many years and recently left
his PBS newsmagazine program after a virulent campaign against
him by the ultra right.
If there is no Murrow today, it is not primarily the result
of personal traits, but for more fundamental political reasons.
If Murrow were around now, he would not be hosting See It Now.
The tone today is set by Rupert Murdochs media empire,
which mockingly adopts the fair and balanced motto.
Someone like Murrow, openly acknowledging, as he did in one sharp
exchange with Paley, that there are not two sides to every
question, would not even get a hearing.
Good Night, and Good Luck opens with Murrow delivering
a speech to broadcast industry executives in 1958. His comments
are remarkably prescient, as far as they go, and it is difficult
to imagine any major figure in the media making them today. We
are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent,
said Murrow. We have currently a built-in allergy to unpleasant
or disturbing information. Our mass media reflect this. But unless
we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television
in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse and insulate
us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at
it and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture
too late.
Murrows worst fears about the use of television to delude
a mass audience have long since come to pass. While his own outlook,
as expressed in his 1958 speech, did not go beyond an appeal to
the consciences of the corporate leaders, this in no way minimizes
the significance of his career. Good Night, and Good Luck
accurately depicts an important episode in American history, and
it deserves a far wider audience than it is likely to get.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |