Jim Lehrer Won't Have to 'Do Fisticuffs' on Chip McGrath After All
Jim Lehrer, the longtime anchor of NewsHour on PBS is upset with an article in the New York Times.
No, not that article.
In his bedroom, this past Sunday morning, Mr. Lehrer pored over a piece in the Times by writer-at-large Charles McGrath, entitled "Is PBS Still Necessary?"
"I was stunned," said Mr. Lehrer.
In the essay, Mr. McGrath questioned whether the "glory days" of public television were "past recapturing." He argued that the PBS lineup suffers from "mustiness." He suggested that the rise of cable television had eclipsed the need for much of PBS's programming. And he contrasted the current state of public radio (a success!) with that of public television (a mess!).
"Who would have guessed 40 years ago, when public broadcasting came into being, that the antique medium, the one supposedly on its way out, would prove to be the greater success and the one more technically nimble," wrote Mr. McGrath.
On Thursday afternoon, Mr. Lehrer told the Media Mob that he disagreed with the underlying comparison. "It's apple and oranges," said Mr. Lehrer. "I read that and I said, my god, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I don't know where he got his position. But it wasn't based on any reporting."
Mr. Lehrer added that he was not exactly ecstatic to find his own name mentioned in the piece.
"Jim Lehrer, 73, has been with NewsHour since 1975," wrote Mr. McGrath, "so long that some of his early viewers are now in assisted living."
"When he took that hit on me, I thought what the hell is that about?" said Mr. Lehrer. "If he had said, he's not only 73-years-old but he slobbers on the air and can't do an interview, I would have at least understood what he was up to. But just the fact that I'm 73...It was kind of weird. I was stunned by that. It's so over the top."
On Tuesday night, Mr. Lehrer invited viewers of the NewsHour to weigh in on the controversy over at the NewsHour web site. Afterwards, according to Mr. Lehrer, thousands of positive comments defending public television flooded in.
"I feel much better now," said Mr. Lehrer. "It's turned out to be a very positive development. It's rallied people. It's roused people. Fortunately, the folks who do watch us and care about us have reacted in a huge way. So I'm not going to have to do fisticuffs with anybody."
He looks better. Must have had the bags removed from under his eyes.
I used to watch that show 20 years ago but it is SO BORING now. It is definitely not with the speed of information today. Just like Sesame Street. Same people they had on 35 years agoare still there, greying and looking aged and irrelevant. Just as PBS is.
Of course PBS is antiquated and old. The same ten people watch the News Hour every night, that won't change. For certain CSPAN types, that lethargic, plodding reportage is right up their alley. Don't mistake this for a lack of attention span, this is more about the certain stories that appear, and the way those stories are told.
Leher, God bless him. He needed to leave back when Robin McNeil left.
Attention
It is unfortunate that many television viewers are more interested in watching stories informing us what Brad Pitt had for lunch today. Most people do not have the attention or interest to hear more than a 30 second story about Bush’s trip to Africa or real stories about the state of our economy. They pretend to be interested, but do not have the attention span to watch, listen, and learn.
I have a “Newshour” polo shirt that I received as a gift a few years ago. I am amazed at the positive comments I receive from doctors and other professionals. I often hear “that is my favorite program” or “that is the only news program I watch.”
For those who don’t watch enough PBS…it is spelled “Lehrer” and “Just like Sesame Street” is not a complete sentence.
You people are complete idiots. The Newshour takes the time to explore both sides of a few complex stories rather
than reducing information to a few sound bites. Is PBS news relevant? Only if you are interested in fair, impartial news presentation. The major networks appear to represent corporate
interests only. News Hour and Frontline are outstanding programs with no peers among the broadcast news. I'm 22 and have watched the show since I was a kid. If you think it's boring feel free to keep your attention focused on Britney Spears and whatever other irrelevant crap that entertains you.
The New York Times needs to know what "PBS" means before it says its eulogy (Is PBS Necessary? 2\17\08).
To understand public television and what it provides, the article makes a judgement by blindly feeling one of the legs of a sizable enterprise. Of an average 9800 hours broadcast by a public station on a single channel, PBS provides 1200 original hours, Nat. Educ. Telecomm. Assn. distributes 2000 hours per year, American Public TV is largest distributor of free programming and the Independent Television Service distributes independently produced services, all in addition to local and state productions. (Source: CPB, Balance and Objectivity ) With digital, each station now has 4 channels and they are full of programming variety and new services.
Most of the services public television provides to its communities of license and/or state are not even broadcast. For example, refer to this recent report (below) as one more part of a larger service. People across America rally to their public stations because they have a better understanding of what they provide to their communities in total.
Your welcome.
=-=-=-=-=
The 2007 results of a comprehensive survey of public television stations undertaken by SRI International reveals that more than 84 percent of the stations are providing educational services directly to their communities.
These services, which extend beyond the broadcast, range from special in-person reading programs for parents and childcare providers; to professional development resources for teachers; to online activities designed to spark student learning in subjects such as science and math.
The survey collected information from 165 public television licensees (representing over 300 stations) across the country. It focused on the off-air educational services that the stations provide to their communities, which often go unheralded. The survey challenged stations to describe their education programs, audiences, technology and how they evaluate the implementation and impact of their important education-related work.
Education Survey Highlights Include:
- Education is a core mission for public television stations.
- Public television stations provide education services tailored to the diverse needs of the communities they serve.
- Partnerships with local schools, universities, museums, libraries and community organizations increase the reach and impact of public television's education services.
- Public television is a critical resource for early childhood development.
- Public television is a resource for K-12 educators and helps increase student learning.
- Public television stations have a long history of working with universities.
- Public television stations provide high-value content.
- Public television stations use technology to create and broadly distribute education services.
- Public television's education services continue to evolve within a culture of continuous improvement.
- For public television, demonstrating impact is important.
Survey findings point to the significant work being accomplished in communities across the nation. It also demonstrates that public television continues to educate its diverse audiences by providing thoughtful, relevant and engaging content, with stations implementing a wide variety of programs and services and building strategic partnerships in their local communities.
To read the entire report, please go to http://www.cpb.org/aboutpb/education/services2008/
Cable TV can do everything you said, Dwight Bobson.