Talk:Edward R. Murrow
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Template:FACfailed is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see Template:Article history instead. |
This article (or a previous version) is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination did not succeed. For older candidates, please check the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations. |
Murrow and Harriman
Any place in this article for a discussion of Murrow's relationship with the teenage Pamela Hariman (then Pamela Churchill)?
Small World as influence?
From the article: Beginning in 1958, Murrow hosted a talk show entitled Small World that brought together political figures for one-to-one debates. As a further example of Murrow's effect on TV journalism, this form of TV debate continues today with Sunday morning political talk shows such as Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and Meet the Press with Tim Russert.
Actually, Meet the Press had already been on the air for 11 years before Small World debuted, and Face the Nation had been on the air for 4 years. So I don't think Murrow can be considered the pioneer in this area. --Metropolitan90 02:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- I cut the second sentence, per your comment. If someone has something useful to say here besides the first sentence, which I left, please do. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:28, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Wobblie connection?
Asking for clarification: The article on the Industrial Workers of the World links to Murrow. Wasn't that a baseless accusation by Joe McCarthy made to paint him as a radical? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.240.182.32 (talk • contribs) 25 Nov 2005.
- Not sure, but we should remove it pending citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
- It appears he had connections to the IWW. It's not clear whether or not he was a member. NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1872668) states:
Throughout the time Ed was growing up, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), "the Wobblies," were organizing in the Pacific Northwest, pursuing their dream of "one big union." The powerful forces of industry and government were determined to snuff that dream. IWW organizers and members were jailed, beaten, lynched, and gunned down. A lumber strike during World War I was considered treason, and the IWW was labeled Bolshevik. Ed Murrow knew about red-baiting long before he took on Joe McCarthy. There was also background for a future broadcast in the deportations of the migrant workers the IWW was trying to organize. Near the end of his broadcasting career, Murrow's documentary "Harvest of Shame" was a powerful statement on conditions endured by migrant farm workers.
For the rest of his life, Ed Murrow recounted the stories and retold the jokes he'd heard from millhands and lumberjacks. He also sang their songs, especially after several rounds of refreshments with fellow journalists.
Voyager640 00:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- My dad sang Wobbly songs, too, but he certainly wasn't a Wob. They had good songs, what else can I say? -- Jmabel | Talk 07:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Abolitionists?
Does it to make sense to describe Murrow's parents as being abolitionists in 1908? --Tar Heel 08:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Not unless his dad was really old and his mom a biological miracle. Should probably say something like "descendant of Quaker abolitionists". -- Jmabel | Talk 06:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Inconsistancy
See It Now states "The broadcast provoked tens of thousands of letters, telegrams and phone calls to CBS headquarters, running 15 to 1 in favor of Murrow." however this article states "The broadcast provoked tens of thousands of letters, telegrams and phone calls to CBS headquarters, running 10 to 1 in favor of Murrow." Which one is correct? Cacophony 09:18, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
KBE
Since Murrow was an American citizen and an unpretentious man, I doubt he ever styled himself, "Edward R. Murrow, KBE", so why do we begin the article by calling him that? -- Jmabel | Talk 02:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Having allowed about 24 hours and receiving no response, I am removing. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- I doubt anyone styles themselves that way, but it is done on all other Wikipedia biography articles because it is part of the facts about the person. Ben davison 12:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- If you are a Commonwealth citizen, it would be reasonably common to use such a title, or to use Sir, but in the U.S. this simply isn't done. UK honors like this certainly carry a cachet in the U.S., but a national sense of republicanism tends to prevent the actual use of titles. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- While it might be an entirely appropriate and customary for a British subject to be styled in a formal reference using academic, honorary, professional, and social name suffixes, references to U. S. citizens generally exclude these. I agree that the "KBE" is out of place for Murrow. Of course the honor itself is a fact pertinent to Murrow and should be (and is) noted elsewhere in the article. — JonRoma 07:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Sources
Can someone explain the weird "Sources" section, which appears to be nothing but a dead intenal link? I'm inclined to remove this, but thought I'd give a day or so in case there is something salvageable here that I am failing to understand. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Murrow and McCarthy
Considering that Murrow only began critical reporting about McCarthy in 1954, well into the fall of McCarthy, wasn't he just jumping on an already rolling bandwagon, and has he been given too much credit for his part in the censure of McCarthy? DTC 17:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- The article doesn't really give him all that much credit. It says McCarthy contributed to his own downfall as much as anyone else including Murrow.--Alhutch 17:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good point, perhaps this is more a criticism of "Good Nite and Good Luck". DTC 17:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know about how realistic it was but I thought it was a good movie. The guy who played Murrow should win an Oscar.--Alhutch 17:48, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good point, perhaps this is more a criticism of "Good Nite and Good Luck". DTC 17:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Ashes pun
From the article: "His ashes (from his cremation, not his cigarettes) were scattered on the site of his upstate home, Glen Arden Farm."
This seems wholly inappropriate and unencyclopedic to me and I think it should be removed. Any thoughts?--Alhutch 09:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
10-to-1, 15-to-1
Is there any basis for this edit] that changed a longstanding "10 to 1 in favor of Murrow" to "15 to 1 in favor of Murrow"? - Jmabel | Talk 05:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- see "inconsistancy" above. It makes sense that this article and See It Now should agree with each other, but I can't see a source for either figure. Blufive 22:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
USIA?
There needs to be more clarification on what the USIA is. The place in the article where it's mentioned doesn't even tell what USIA stands for, or when he was appointed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Michaelshull (talk • contribs) 21 April 2006.
- Looks like this has been dealt with. - Jmabel | Talk 05:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
"So long, and good luck?"
The article says, "with every night's German bombing raid, Londoners who might not necessarily see each other the next morning often closed their conversations not just with "so long," but with "so long, and good luck."" This doesn't make sense - a Londoner would never say, "So long." It's an Americanism. They almost certainly would've said, "Good night, and good luck," just as Murrow himself did. If nobody has any objections I'll change the article to reflect that. -- Hux 17:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Murrow School of Communications at Washington State University?
Wouldn't be a good idea to include a mention of the communication school at Washington State University, Murrow's alma mater?--Msr69er 02:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)