Walter Cronkite dies at 92...he will be missed
- Login to post comments
Walter Cronkite, the CBS anchorman known as both "Uncle Walter" for his easygoing, measured delivery and "the most trusted man in America" for his rectitude and gravitas, has died. Cronkite was 92 years old. At the height of his influence, Cronkite's judgment was believed to be so important it could affect even presidents.
I remember growing up as a kid and we used to sit down and watch the news with Walter Cronkite for many years. In a way, it seems like yesterday. He will be missed.
Commie.
There used to be a show called "You Were There," or something similar.
I think Cronkite used to host that, but I can't find information about it. Was I dreaming?
From 1953 to 1957, Cronkite hosted the CBS program You Are There, which reenacted historical events, using the format of a news report. His famous last line for these programs was: "What sort of day was it? A day like all days, filled with those events that alter and illuminate our times... and you were there."
I won't miss him at all. He was a lying son of a beeswax.
I'm losing respect for those who dance on graves and would refuse to shake hands with the President of the United States.
I'm with Joe-. But for Walter, I think he was an example of his times- I have read much of what he wrote in WW2 (5 missions over Germany-and he DIDN'T have to go with the 8TH)- and it is good. I think his points on Vietnam were the crack of the face of objective journalism,although eric Severide(sp) started the "editorials' on CBS- and we have seen the fall from there. The idea of an editorial position is okay-if it is clear that it is editorial...but much today is clearly blurred in this regard.
I Liked Walter-not least because he sailed where I grew up- He was the last of the non-pretty to be a headliner on TV. He was AFTER his retirement a "One Worlder" and I am sure he more than leaned Left---but I do not believe that a reporter must not be political in his/her private life....but only in their Professional life. Walter was closer-and compared to what we see today, he is walkingly objective.
Oh-92 years....that is more than we all can hope for.
Ayn
I don't see how his offering his opinion, and it was offered as that, concerning Vietnam at the time can be seen as "lying" Mr. Stone. Much of the population at the time felt the same way and saw no point in more US military people dying 8,000 miles away while gaining no advantage for the US of A. Too bad 43 didn't learn from this fiasco.
charlie
Many Vietnam vets called c-span this morning and was none too pleased with him and his actions during the war .
I however remember my Grandparents watching him everynight .
Charlie -
Others here smarter about the Viet Nam war than I will, I hope, correct me on this. But I believe Bob's "lying" is perhaps a reference to Cronkite's reporting the Tet Offensive as a U.S. loss when he was a victory. That reporting did much to dampen American resolve about winning in Viet Nam.
skf
Walter Cronkite Has Blood on His Hands
On February 27, 1968, Walter Cronkite delivered his verdict on the (ongoing) war in Vietnam. The most trusted man in America pronounced that it was "...more certain than ever that the bloody experience of Vietnam War is to end in a stalemate."
The Tet Offensive, which battle prompted Cronkite's televised towel throwing, was a decisive American victory --
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/walter_cronkite_has_blood_on...
More than a few remember the Tet offensive as a failure for North Vietnam.
Great article, Al. Thanks for the link.
Let us never forget the Killing Fields.
In '71 my father bought, read, then handed me Don Oberdorfer's newly published book titled, TET!, saying, "Read this. Make up your own mind about the offensive."
This book covers "events in Vietnam on both sides of the fight". I've read several books on TET (by no means do I claim to be an expert, btw - just a war history buff) but imo by far it is the best one written by a civilian journalist.
Oberdorfer dedicates a fair share of his book examining how the first 'televised war' affected the opinions of those back 'home' in America.
He writes:
"In the case of the Tet Offensive, a few facts about the television coverage are known and something of the impact can be reasonably inferred -(remembering that the war was still ongoing at time of publication of this book - LMD).
"For those with a personal tie to Vietnam, the selective reality of the television film reports was more depressing than living in the war zone would have been. In Vietnam, most places were quiet most of the time, a fact which tended to be obscured in the reporting of dramatic conflict.
Television recorded the high points of drama and tension, compressed them into two-minute or three-minute stories containing the most electrifying moments, transmitted them around the world and broadcast them nationwide to the American public.
It is probable that a regular viewer of the Cronkite or Huntley-Brinkley shows saw more infantry action over a longer span of days than most of the American troops who were in Vietnam during the Tet Offensive...(pp. 259-260)
He also explored the "pictures that shocked the world" of SV police chief Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Viet Cong suspect on the street in Saigon. The AP photo which was 'blazoned across America's front pages', was printed twice within one edition for effect.
The NBC-television film footage of that same incident was worked and re-worked behind the scenes so as to present the greatest shock value in the shortest time, and was replayed over and over for several days on national television news. There was much backroom debate over exactly when the first airing of the film should take place for maximum viewing...and effect.
Oberdorfer examines Cronkite's change in attitude about the war and suggests reasons behind the change. He acknowledges how his reporting greatly influenced the public's opinion (includes polling stats to support his claims), but remains fairly neutral in his judgement of the man. I attributed that to the fact that they were 'colleagues' at the time of publication and most certainly he was practicing CYA (my opinion).
Nonetheless, it would be difficult to conclude from Oberdorfer anything other than Cronkite's 'reporting' - particularly on Tet - did indeed greatly reshape the nation's opinion on the war.
I for one do not remember Cronkite with "fond memories". He did indeed have blood on his hands, and like all of us will at some point, he has now answered to God for his deeds.
Just remember that every single Vietnam veteran you ever meet can honestly say, "We were winning when I left." The last American combat troops left Vietnam on March 31, 1973. Vietnam fell on April 30, 1975 after North Vietnam violated the terms of the Paris Peace Accords.
We were wining when I left, and that's the truth!
After TET the NVA ceased to be an effective fighting force and the VC were nearly wiped out leaving most of the fighting from that point on to the NVA.....The fighting at the American Embassy was way over played by the media...All 19 VC were killed..The only fighting that was prolonged was for the ancient capitol of Hue which we were reluctant to bomb or shell to much due to the ancient buildings..Before TET we were winning and NVA General Giap knew it and needed something the media and peace movement could use to alter public opinion before the 68 election in the USA and Cronkite and others were glad to help out...TET was Giap's Hail Mary pass and it fell incomplete though you'ld never know it by watching the news....Cronkite does indeed have the blood of every Vietnamese slaughtered after we left on his hands ..And there were many many THOUSANDS including many children of GI's ....
- Login to post comments
And that's the way it is.