Buy my book

Ahhhh, the lecture, what can I say.

Well, for one, I decided to see what people who purchased Tick... Tick... Tick...: The Long Life & Turbulent Times of 60 Minutes, by David Blum, thought about the book-

Check it out for yourself: Amazon.com: Books: Tick... Tick... Tick...: The Long Life & Turbulent Times of 60 Minutes

To sum up, most people liked it, although one person wrote:

"The book, as it is, is a very revealing portrait of the journalists who have kept 60 Minutes so good for so long. However, a little less gossip and a little more about the inner workings of the show would have been nice. Still, it's a fascinating read."

That sums up for me pretty much how I felt about the lecture.

Blum plugged his book, which was to be expected, but I'd like to have heard a bit more about the process of writing it, how to get people talking, how to develop story ideas, reseach, etc. Although, I guess the "selling" point - with this book, as well as with a lot of news stories, is the gossip.

I'm not surprised the team didn't get along, anyone thats worked in an office can pretty much attest to the fact that inter-office politics often get dirty. No one likes every single one of their co-workers. I probably would never have given any thought to whether the 60 minutes team got along or not, had I not missed my grandmother's 76th birthday to be there.

Some interesting, and irrelevant gossip, not much substance. Before the lecture I had no intention of buying the book, I can't say my opinion has changed since.

One thing that sort of irritated me is even Blum blamed Rather for the whole document fiasco, but later he said that the network reviewed the document for 3 months after the fact and couldn't tell whether it was real or not. When I asked Blum about digital media, he responded that you can't ever really be sure of anything, and should be suspicious of documents.

If the reporters who uncovered Watergate were suspicious of the documents and didn't run with the story - this could be a completely different country today...what I'm getting at is there must be a medium somewhere. Blum's solution, being cautious, also means being silent. And we all know what happens when journalists sit silently. I don't think that the issue is that clear cut.

Dan Rather took a risk, he paid for it. But at least he took a chance...should he have sat on the story, probably, but does he deserve to be crucified? A journalist can only be as good as it's source. And I suppose what distinguishes good and bad journalists comes down to judgment.

It's like that old adage we've heard our parents repeat a hundred times:

Look before you leap.