The Powers That Be

I was enthralled by this book that looks at journalism's most powerful institutions during the mid-20th century. CBS has fallen from its stance as the king TV News. The book also delves into how influential the L.A. Times was in making Richard Nixon a political force. The story of the Washington Post--best known for its eventual Watergate triumph--is perhaps the most astonishing story. A newspaper bought at a bankruptcy auction that Kay Phil and Kay Graham would eventually lead to greatness even after personal tragedy. This is a wonderful look at both the newsroom and corporate side of media empires. Interesting style. Rather than having one section on the Post, another on Time, etc..., the book was a chronological history, and shifted from each media out. Halberstam has few comparables. But, it would be great to see a new version with the titans of today, that would include the inside story of new media titans, i.e. HuffPo, Breitbart, Roger Ailes's Fox News, etc...

I've read a couple of other books by David Halbsterstam and have enjoyed his depth of research and writing style. So I figured this should be an interesting book. I'm about 1/2 way through, and it's great. Amazing stories and details about the beginnings of CBS and Time. Remember, radio, TV and national weekly magazines are products of the 20th century. So how did they get off the ground? What hurdles did they face? What about the men who started them, and then, what happened when things really got going in the post WW II era.

Same with newspapers, except there were dozens of daily newspapers around. That how people got their news before radio and TV took over. So what about the LA Times and Washington Post. How did they become the powers they are. It's all great reading by a great author. Written back in the 1970's, it gives the insights before media were corrupted by the onset of cable and polarized by politics. I'm loving it.

I am almost always a fan of David Halberstam. He is usually very insightful, keeps his facts straight, and while he can be long winded, no one will ever accuse him of skipping important details. He is usually capable of examining history from all sides, and capturing the interaction of various factors that make up a story.

=== The Good Stuff ===

* The beginning and ends of the book are excellent. It is a shame the book was written in the '70s, because so much of the history Halberstam covers is directly applicable to modern politics. For example, the author discusses how FDR used the "fireside chat" and the medium of radio to appeal directly to voters and bypass the typical political machines. Twenty years later, JFK does the same thing with television. So in 2008, when Barrack Obama was credited with developing a totally new election strategy by appealing to social media, he was in fact going down a well worn path-but just with a different technology.

* Halberstam also does a decent job at capturing the way the press operated in prior decades. While we seem to think of today's press as being overly polarized and incapable of presenting logical arguments instead of 10-second sound bites, we find that this charge has been hurled at the press since at least FDR, and I wouldn't be surprised if Caesar felt the same way.

* I believe Halberstam was at his finest in describing Watergate, and specifically how the team of Bernstein and Woodward cracked the case. It was amazing how the biggest scandal in American politics was almost buried several times for any number of reasons. You can't help but wonder how many other scandals were missed because the reporters involved were also covering the St. Patrick's day parade.

=== The Not-So-Good Stuff ===

* While Halberstam writes in an easy-to-read style, there were some sentences that had to be read a few times to get the meaning. Also, the book is long, and I had trouble reading more than a chapter or so at a time, which is unusual for me. While the book at times seemed overly detailed, there wasn't really much that I could point to as being superfluous. Rather, the stories were complicated, had many characters, and were all affected by many events. In this case, better too long than too short.

* My biggest criticism though was I felt that midway through the book, Halberstam lost his creativity. A fair chunk of the book is about the press coverage of Vietnam, a topic that the author was personally involved with. The problem is that Halberstam lets his personal involvement intrude into the narrative-at one point going so far as to write in the 1st person. He also either sets the record straight- or has an ax to grind- depending on your viewpoint. At any rate, it clouded the rest of the book as it was tough to tell if his own opinions were clouding the narrative.

=== Summary ===

I enjoyed the book, and found it to be one of my favorite types of history books- one that kicks off some independent thought on what could have happened, or what might happen next. While the book has no events more recent than 1975, I found that it was directly applicable to modern journalism and history and the interface between them. It was amazing how many of today's unique challenges and problems are merely rehashes of things that were struggled with previously-and probably will be struggled with again.

Fantastic history very comprehensive & well written. I highly recommend it.

Great service, exact product description, faster than quoted delivery time.

Thank you.

Perhaps not Halberstams best written book due to redundancies, but a solid, intriguing history of contemporary media in America focusing on Time, the NYT, Washington Post, LAT, and CBS with their strengths and warts. Explores the forces that shape the news and its processing. Too bad the book was written before the cynical and malevolent machinations of the Fox News empire could be revealed.

Great book to read, complete with plot and characters. This book really looks at the good and the bad in our society.we can learn from it should we choose to do so.

In the book we find the brilliance of Halberstam as he identified the true background of issues and their importance to the reader. We also see him terribly verbose with an amazingly large cast of characters. It is well to remember that this work was published in 1979-so the main issues are still Vietnam and Watergate. I suspect that Halberstam intended this book to be a major paean to the world of media. One can only wonder what he would have written about

out the media of the 21st century with it 's incessant bias and streaming propaganda.

Very nice