On April 15, 1949, listeners tuned in to a new FM network based in Berkeley, Calif., and heard for the first time, "Welcome to KPFA." To celebrate the 55th anniversary of the country's first public radio network, that premiere is scheduled to be rebroadcast Thursday, April 15, on Pacifica's "Democracy Now."
The occasion seems like a good time to talk to Amy Goodman, the firebrand journalist who, along with Juan Gonzalez, co-hosts "The War and Peace Report" on "Democracy Now!," now airing on more than 200 radio and TV stations across the United States and around the world. Goodman has also just published a book, written with her brother David Goodman: "The Exception to the Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers, and the Media That Love Them."
In the interview, Goodman talked about her first experience of hearing Pacifica, soon after she'd returned home from college. She grew up on Long Island as the daughter of politically aware parents. Her mother taught women's studies and her father, an opthalmologist, was active in Physicians for Social Responsibility.
The following is an edited version of the Book Babes' interview with Goodman:
Book Babes: Do you consider yourself an activist or a journalist?
Goodman: Both, both.
Is there a contradiction between the two?
Oh, I don't think so. I think what matters as a journalist is that you're fair and accurate, and that when someone is on the air, he or she feels like there's a chance to represent his or her point of view.
Do you give yourself a political label?
No. And I think labels are breaking down in this country right now. Conservatives, like progressives, care about privacy and civil liberties, they care about corporate control of their lives. They're deeply concerned, for example, about what's happening in Iraq right now — just the disaster that it is, the fact that hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds, more than 600 U.S. soldiers have been killed. A number not used very much is that more than 18,000 have been medically evacuated from Iraq. The media does a disservice to the servicemen and women in this country when they don't provide a forum for discussion.
Would you bristle if someone called yours a politically leftist program?
I just don't see what meaning that really has. I mean, we provide a forum for many different voices. We describe "Democracy Now" as a daily, grassroots, unembedded, international, independent news hour.
There's been a lot of talk lately about the government failing to connect the dots about 9/11, but the media didn't connect them, either. What do you think have been the biggest media misses of the past 10 years?
The media has simply served as a conveyer belt for the lies of the administration. There's a reason why journalism is enshrined in the Constitution, because it is supposed to be the check and balance on government. Instead, they have, for the most part, served as a megaphone for those in power. I think it's getting worse, because now the media are the most powerful corporations on Earth.
Look at the week leading up to the invasion of Iraq: FAIR, the media watch group, counted up the number of interviews done (on the major networks and in several major newspapers): 393 around the issue of war. Three of 393 were voices of anti-war representatives. This was at a time when most people were opposed to war.
In your book, you describe your outrage at an Overseas Press Club banquet, where you were receiving an award, when you discovered that the club was also honoring U.N. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke. Later journalist Leslie Stahl offers to drive Holbrooke home. Is this an example of what journalist I.F. Stone warned about: the danger of journalists playing tennis with the people they cover?
Yes, exactly. I mean, just that night, the fact that you had this journalistic organization honoring the highest principles of journalism, and they were feting a politician. Now, that should not be happening. We were there to cover those in power, not to applaud them. And it's interesting you bring up I.F. Stone. In the book, we quote him talking to journalism students, telling them to remember two words: Governments lie. The media is supposed to dissect those lies.
You are pretty hard on The New York Times. But I notice in your book that you frequently use The Washington Post as a source. Are there some print or electronic journalism sources that you can point to as doing the right thing?
Oh, there are a number of people within establishment media who are doing a good job. But what matters most is the drumbeat coverage. What is the voice that gets heard most? You have the occasional person express a dissident point of view, but the important thing is, who is defining the discourse? Even now, after no weapons of mass destruction were found, the same group of people is wringing its hands, saying, how did we get it so wrong? Why not invite in someone who didn't get it wrong?
In the book I talk about appearing on the Sally Jesse Raphael show, and the most interesting response I got was from women on southern military bases who said, "We agree with you but we can't have these debates on military bases. It's up to you in civilian society." And that's why the media is so important. It allows us to have a national discussion and debate and dialogue about the most important issues of our day.
From your point of view, you're just providing a forum. Some people would say, however, that your program favors the anti-war point of view.
The most important test is that people feel when they come off of our program, whatever their point of view, that they had a chance to voice it, that they weren't shouted down, like on the right-wing talk shows where you're used as a prop for the hosts who spout off. This is about allowing people to speak and hash out issues.
So you allow people with right-wing views…
Oh, we have a good amount of debate — someone in prison talking with a government official, a grassroots activist with a member of Congress. The way the corporate media works, that is rare. The debate is usually between the Democrats and the Republicans. Even for me, being invited onto the establishment media, they will call me and say, OK, will you be supporting Clinton? Well, of course not. I'll be there as a critical observer.
But you were an anti-war voice on Sally Jesse Raphael's show. So that was a time when you voiced your opinion.
Oh, absolutely, but I don't use my program as simply a way to spout my point of view.
Do you think what you criticize as the lack of diversity in views can be traced back to when the FCC dropped its equal-time rule during the Reagan Administration?
I think it's too easy to just talk about the right-wing media where the hosts go on their diatribes, like on Fox, because that makes it look like the rest of the broadcast media is mainstream, and I don't think it is at all. The media does not represent the mainstream, and I'm talking about the networks, I'm talking about The New York Times. I mean, you have these networks that put retired generals on the payroll. Where are the peace activists on the payroll? Forget being paid. When are they brought into the studio?
Journalists are always told to follow the money. Yet political issues seem to always take precedence over economic issues. Even on your program.
Well, we talk about the crony connections. I mean, if you look at what's going on in Iraq, with the U.S. corporations that are making a killing off the killing. I think this is what unites people across the political spectrum. These are giants, almost monopolies that are profiting off of this policy, and it goes to the whole issue of how the electoral system works, and the issue of campaign finance reform, and what politicians get paid for the legislation that gets passed. And the other thing that breaks down political lines is the fact that some of the top people in these corporations, people like Ken Lay of Enron, seem to get off scot-free. Meanwhile, the people in their companies, thousands, have lost their jobs and their pensions. That, people identify with.
What role do you see books playing in this election year? You wrote a book, we presume, to make a difference. Can books make a difference?
When the information flow has been so stopped up, people will find a way to get information out. But it's not just about people writing books, it's about people reading them, about people being hungry for other points of view. It's why "Democracy Now" is is in such demand. People are fed up with being presented with this uniform point of view. The establishment media has formed a uniform blockade on information, and we're calling for a break in the silence.
