Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 28, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Wishful Thinking About Natural Gas
Rising Heat Hits Indian Wheat Crop




The Sixth Extinction
War of the Whales


Truthdig Bazaar
The Mitfords

The Mitfords

By Charlotte Mosley
$26.37

more items

 
Report

My Quarter Century With Mike Wallace

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Apr 9, 2012
AP/Bebeto Matthews

Mike Wallace waits near his office to see a colleague in New York in 2006.

By Barry Lando

I worked on “60 Minutes” for more than 26 years, most of the time as a producer with Mike Wallace. Each report on the show has “produced by” written on the artwork introducing it, but most viewers have no clue what “produced by” really entails.

Indeed, the great irony of “60 Minutes” was a question of truth in packaging. That is “60 Minutes,” which prided itself on ruthless truth telling, exposing cant and fraud, was, in itself, something of a charade.

The fact is that although viewers tuned in to watch the ongoing exploits of Mike, Morley, Harry, Lesley, etc., most of the intrepid reporting, writing and even many of the most probing questions posed in the interviews were not the handiwork of the stars, but much more the effort of some 30 or more very talented producers who researched and reported the stories that the stars presented—as their own exploits—each Sunday night.

I was willing to go along with that system because it allowed me to help shape what was the most powerful news show on television. I was also willing to rein in my ego because Mike Wallace brought so much to the team himself: a sharp, penetrating mind, an uncanny ability to seize the essence of a story, to sense an opening in a tense interview then thrust with a rapier-like question for the journalistic kill.

To Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, who had once been a radical underground leader, Mike asked, “What is the difference between the Yasser Arafat of today and the Menachem Begin of 1946?”

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
Seated cross-legged on the floor in front of the Imam Khomeini in 1979 during the hostage crisis, Mike asked, “President Anwar el-Sadat of Egypt calls you, Imam—forgive me, his words, not mine—a lunatic.” Khomeini’s shocked interpreters refused to translate until Khomeini insisted.

Or to Arafat, in a backstreet building in war-torn Beirut. After Arafat excoriated the U.S. for ignoring the human rights of the Palestinians, Mike leapt at the opening to ask the PLO chairman about a small article he had found in the back pages of the Times, in which Arafat had praised former Ugandan dictator Idi Amin.

Mike asked a startled Arafat, “In other words, Mr. Chairman, Idi Amin, the butcher, you admire?”

Afterward, Arafat’s aide, Mahmoud Labadi, said to Mike as we were wrapping our equipment and PLO armed toughs roamed the room, “Mike, you’re not going to use that part about Idi Amin, are you?” Mike smiled and asked ever so quietly, “Mahmoud, do I tell you how to do your job?

“No,” said Labadi.

“Then please don’t tell me how to do mine.”

Remembering our hasty retreat from the site of that interview, one of our camera team, Andy Thompson, writes me: “Our drivers were convinced we wouldn’t get out alive. Crews set off in two sets so that someone would get out OK!”

On another occasion in western Iran, we were with a group of journalists being escorted by a particularly crazed Iranian colonel to cover the war with Iraq. After the colonel had delivered a long diatribe against the U.S. government, Mike turned to him and said, “You know, colonel, I don’t think much of your government either.”

Later that evening, in a room off the hotel lobby with other journalists watching the evening news, the colonel entered, unholstered his .45, strode up to Mike with a wild look in his eyes and moved forward until the muzzle of his revolver almost touched Mike’s forehead. Everyone in the room froze. Mike looked up at the colonel and with his hand pushed the revolver so it pointed toward the ceiling. The officer grinned and pulled the trigger. The gun was empty.

Mike was part reporter, part actor playing reporter. He had a flair for the dramatic, the ability to achieve almost instant rapport with interviewees no matter their wealth, achievement or background. He made them forget the camera and the lights; he was totally with them in the moment, fascinated by whatever they happened to be saying, from a famine-stricken mother in Ethiopia, a child dying in her arms, to the crooks of all shapes and sizes who attempted—almost always unsuccessfully with Mike—to lie their way to respectability.

Mike’s political agenda never seemed to get in the way. There was no story that he wouldn’t agree to go after, from detailing the enormous power of AIPAC (the pro-Israel lobby in Washington) to the peccadilloes of Walter Cronkite, who we accused of accepting airline tickets for a piece we were doing on the widespread practice of press junkets. Mike’s targets were often livid, but their rage only heightened his pleasure. He loved controversy, being the center of a story, seeing the sparks fly.

Though he greatly admired the Shah of Iran, was charmed by his wife and Iran’s ambassador in Washington, when I suggested a report on the Shah’s brutal secret police (the Savak), Mike immediately concurred.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By JJR, April 13, 2012 at 4:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Patrick Henry,wrote: “We need a hundred more like him.”

Won’t help, he just reports what he’s allowed to—backing down to CBS and corporate interests about censorship of his team’s disclosure, showing lack of principle as he had unlimited opportunities elsewhere.

There are NO journalists in the mass media who will tell the truth as they’ll soon be fired. I remember years ago, Time Wize of the NY Times(?) after his retirement said: “If I spoke the truth, I’d soon be walking down the street whistling Dixie”(paraphrased). (The same applied to Dan Rather when he went to England and “spilled the beans” to some effect, and he was fired from his job (if I remember correctly).

Yes, it’s the “class war” which is raging by the upper class against all other classes to keep the unjust system going and the people controlled.

No, it’s not the Mike Wallaces that are needed, it’s the likes of independents such as Chris Hedges, Robert Jensen, John Pilger, Noam Chomsky, Eric Margolis, Robert Fisk and many others even in the USA!  And there are other organizations such as Project Censored, and the internet which give reliable analyses— not propaganda by the wealthy, the Pentagon and the lackeys in government to deceive and rob the public for upper class interests. Mike Wallace helps, but it’s almost insignificant to informing the public.
 
JJR

Report this

By ijr, April 12, 2012 at 5:37 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The failure of Wallace to stand up when the chips are down, is the tradition of American mass media journalism from way back. It replaces the police-state and the military in sustaining the system for the wealthy.
  I remember shortly after the end of the Vietnam war, Mike Wallace interviewing some Vietnamese official after the US had just moon-cratered the country and killed some 4 million Vietnamese and crippling tens of millions more, said contemptuously “My, what a basket-case you have here!”

Report this

By joe r, April 11, 2012 at 6:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

60 minutes always went like this. Tic tic tic tic your getting screwed this way
tic tic tic tic and your getting screwed this way tic tic tic tic and your getting
screwed this way and guess what? You can’t do anything about it. Tic tic tic
tic.

Report this

By mudplanet, April 10, 2012 at 9:06 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I admired Wallace and I liked the show, but it’s a sad commentary on American journalism that that’s almost as good as it gets here. When the US was funding and helping run a systematic campaign of torture and murder in El Salvador the best 60 minutes could do was interview the puppet president - no mention of the campaign of torture and murder. 60 min was, deliberately, single-person oriented journalism and avoided any actual analysis of issues. As entertainment it works well (good ratings, it evokes compassion in the viewer while managing to actually help the viewer avoid introspection and any realization of his complicity) but as journalism it’s pretty lite weight stuff.

Report this
Samson's avatar

By Samson, April 10, 2012 at 9:06 am Link to this comment

The problem with the media isn’t at the level of the
reporters.  Its at the level of the owners.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 10, 2012 at 3:22 am Link to this comment

I think we need more than “a few”.  I don’t want people with ethics presented as a novelty.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 9, 2012 at 6:04 pm Link to this comment

No.  What you need is a few folks with ethics and courage to overthrow the perverse system.

Any cub reporter can report that afterwards.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 9, 2012 at 5:25 pm Link to this comment

We need a hundred more like him.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook