Cronkite, at U.N. Conference, Says U.S. Media Fail Audience on Nuclear

[cal04]

Cronkite, at U.N. Conference, Says U.S. Media Fail Audience on Nuclear Story

When it comes to reporting on nuclear arms, the U.S. news media let readers and viewers down, giving them only part of the story, former news anchor Walter Cronkite said Wednesday. The celebrated CBS retiree, joining in a panel discussion on the sidelines of a U.N. conference on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, said narrow reporting means the U.S. public is "largely unaware" that the 1970 treaty obliges their government to move toward full nuclear disarmament. "There's been a lot in the news about nonproliferation," Cronkite said, referring to Iran and North Korea, whose nuclear programs, under fire from the U.S. government, make daily headlines.

"But, unfortunately, the nuclear disarmament obligations of the nuclear weapons states receive far less attention in news reporting, at least in our United States," he said. Another panelist, Marian Hobbs, New Zealand's minister for disarmament, also criticized media coverage of arms control.

"We need the media. We want a media that informs us of other people's opinions, not just American opinion, or your country's opinion," she told the international audience. Under the nonproliferation treaty, more than 180 countries commit to not pursuing nuclear arms, in exchange for a commitment by five nuclear powers - the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China - to negotiate toward nuclear disarmament.

Nonweapons states, on the other hand, complain increasingly that U.S. actions, such as talk of building new nuclear arms, run counter to treaty obligations. Cronkite agreed. "It simply seems the United States and other nuclear weapons states are actually trying to evade their obligations and responsibilities under the treaty," he said, adding that he visited Hiroshima after the 1945 U.S. atomic bombing of that Japanese city and since then has been "a campaigner to get rid of every nuclear weapon."

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBDAHPAC8E.html

[burrowowl]

1. Would that there were 100 Cronkites

in MSM and that they were allowed to speak on U$ TV.

[Lindacooks]

2. The U.S. media fails us on EVERYTHING

eom

[dbt]

3. Kick for the morning crew.

Methinks Uncle Walter doth speak too narrowly, though.

[3161 worker]

4. We need limit the nuclear material out there

The 1970 treaty is useless unless we stop the proliferation of current material within the pipeline. Russia is not at all secure, and we are spending big taxpayer (DOE$$$) on security for the Russian facilities.

[htuttle]

6. Actually, we USED to spend big $$$ on security for Russian facitilies

Bush cut that money way back, so they aren't nearly as well protected as they once were. I believe he cut the funding for that in 2001, and again in 2002.

http://dir.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/05/16/loose_nukes/index.html
http://www.sptimes.ru/archive/times/667/news/n_3269.htm

[AlGore-08.com]

5. He's spoken more broadly before

http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/programs/public-events/evening-for-peace/2004/transcript.htm

21st Annual Evening for Peace
Broadcasting Peace: A Conversation with Walter Cronkite

The following is a transcript of the live interview conducted by Sam Donaldson with Walter Cronkite, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation's 2004 Distinguished Peace Leader.

(snip)

Cronkite: I think it's more important than our lifetime. I would think that this election (2004) is perhaps the most important in the last century, going back to perhaps the Civil War.

Donaldson: You have to explain that. Why?

Cronkite: I expect to. Why is because we have taken a 180 degree turn in our policy and foreign policy. We have adopted this incredible decision as announced by the president in his announcement of our policy future, which is a compulsory thing they have to do every couple of years. And he announced the system of preemption. With this preemption and the unilateral nature of it, as practiced by the administration very shortly thereafter, we have established a foreign policy that is unsustainable in a world that we hope will be governed by peace rather than war. As a consequence, we are on a very, very dangerous course for not only the United States but for civilization. The suggestion that one should take preemptive action if that nation believes that it is threatened by a neighbor, for heaven's sakes, that may sound possible to sustain if you are a dominant nation such as the United States . But what do you do if you translate that same program to one of the African neighbor nations, to one of the Middle Eastern neighbor nations? As soon as you sense that you are endangered by your neighbor, you are therefore entitled, because the United States has established this wonderful concept, you are therefore entitled to go to war. What kind of a future is that for the world? It is incredibly impossible to sustain that kind of a foreign policy around the world among all the nations of the world that are entitled because of our leadership, to say, well, the United States does it, why can't we do it?

Donaldson: Well, the president says it's us against them, that we live in a dangerous world, we must defend ourselves and we're gonna divide the world up between those who support our policy and those who don't. Those who support us will be our allies, and those who don't will pay the piper.

Cronkite: I'd say that's one hell of a way to behave to those who believe with us, to tell them that either you're with us or against us - either you accept what we say we will do or you cannot be part of the game. That hardly seems to me to be a foreign policy that is very practical of long endurance. It may suffice for a moment, but it's not going to live very long in the history of our universe.

Donaldson: Walter, do you think we are safer or less safe because our strike against Iraq ?

Cronkite: Far less safe.

Donaldson: Why?

Cronkite: Because as we read every day in the press and occasionally hear on television–

(snip)

Cronkite: As with almost everything else to be solved with our national being and for world peace, it's going to require a lot of education. We begin with that. We've got to improve our educational system to the degree that we have a literate society to which you can appeal with a reasonable argument rather than the passion of the moment or the passion of the past that has to be preserved. That won't work. We have to have a revolutionary change. You know, Tom Jefferson, old Tom said at one time that the nation that expects to be ignorant and free, expects what never can and never will be. We are on the precipice of being so ignorant that we cannot function well as a democracy.

Donaldson: And that is a terrific segue to our business. We have distinguished members of the educational community here with great universities and all that. But our business, the news business, tap into it. Are we helping in this process that you describe today?

Cronkite: No. We're not participating in it at all.

Donaldson: What happened to us?

Cronkite: Well, what happened was cable. Not actually what the cable people are doing, but the fact that there is such a profusion today of various cable channels and cable stations that they have drastically reduced the audience for the traditional networks, that is, the old timers NBC, ABC, CBS. They have so reduced their income that they do not dare to do anything except the cheapest kind of entertainment programming. And they will not give an adequate amount of time or consideration in any other way to informing the American people of the problems of our time. They're not helping to educate the people in any way. Now, that is in parallel, if you will, with the failure of our educational system. We have now wasted so much money with cutting the tax rates of the rich in this country that we do not have enough money left to be sure that no child is left behind. We've got so many children left behind today, it's unbelievable. We're not able to build the schoolhouses that are needed, but most of all we're not able to pay our teachers what they deserve. These are the people we have employed to raise this educational level of the American people to the degree that we do not fall to Thomas Jefferson's forecast; that we are an intelligent people that can understand the issues of the day and vote accordingly. We are in a position today that we cannot do that job. We literally cannot pay teachers what they're worth.

(More... )

[dbt]

7. Thank you!

I wish he'd speak to us for 30 minutes each weeknight. It ought to be the law!