Newton Minow Television And Public Interests Summary

On May 9, 1961, Newton Minow delivered a compelling speech during the National Association of Broadcasters in Washington DC. He argued that television was more than just a source of entertainment and served a different purpose in American culture. Minow’s speech, “Television and the Public Interest,” is still highly debated today. Some individual’s claim that the purpose of television is to entertain while others believe that it is a medium for educational purposes to portray cultural and political messages. However, people think that television is a vehicle for both of these purposes. As the chairman of the FCC, Minow had the power to regulate television content to assure that is was appropriate to air, specifically educational programs.

Continually, Minow argues that the National Association of Broadcasting failed to live up to its responsibility to use television to portray messages such as education and creativity, specifically to children. Minow states that one of his main goals is to “strive to set them free”, those with the imagination to improve national broadcasting in order for the expansion of choice. He suggests that governmental control of programming is dangerous, and the National Broadcasting Company needs to act. His other main goal was to challenge these broadcasters to improve the state of the medium through diversity of television programming. Newsworthy or controversial issues were frowned upon and therefore not reported, in which Minow wanted to change. This speech was crafted to meet each of these goals.
Minow characterized himself as a watchdog of human needs and wants.

Being recently elected into the FCC, he wanted to create himself as a leader so that his audience would identify and trust him. This was in order to not harm the nation, but instead make it prosperous. They aren’t concerned about peoples best interest. He also uses argument from definition, redefining the meaning of public interest as service of national needs such as educational programs. These new programs were therefore going to benefit the public to strive in their bright futures. In Minow’s 1961 speech to the National Association of Broadcasters, (each analysis point I make, relate it back to thesis and argument) he characterized the broadcasters as profiteers. In order to show how television was failing the public isn’t living up to its

potential.
The 1960s was the age of youth, as 70 million children from the post-war baby boom matured into teenagers and young adults. These children had strong opinion with respect to American policies, in which their opinions should be considered and heard. Most importantly, they had a thirst for information, the thirst that Minow wanted to quench with accurate and newsworthy information for these children. This time period was among the growth of network news divisions in industrial as well as in cultural prominence. Public affairs programming was becoming of more importance in promotion and scheduling of networks. There was a rise in documentaries that went into depth about social and cultural issues. These documentaries of this era attempted to build a consensus around Cold War politics and America’s foreign policy against their enemy, the Soviet Union. As well, the FCC, regulated most of television during the early 1960s, making it a guardian of the public interest as well as controlling the private control of the airwaves. This was beneficial because it allowed for Minow to shape television the way he wanted it to be seen. Recently appointed into the FCC by President Kennedy, Kennedy said, “to tell our people of the perils and challenges and the opportunities that we can face” in order to win the Cold War. Kennedy used television to teach, inform, and enlarge the capacities of what individuals were viewing before their own eyes. In Kennedy’s opinion, Newton Minow was the one individual that could help in reaching all of these goals during a very controversial time in history. During the 1960s, television news was the one trusted source for national and public information. For example, the assassination of President Kennedy was one of the most televised programs in the early 1960s, in which broadcasters illuminated emotional connection.
The major exigency that this famous speech was in response to was American turning into a “vast wasteland.” In reaching his goals to ensure that television changed for the better, this needed to be addressed urgently. He characterized television as “When television is good, nothing-not the theatre, not magazines or newspapers- nothing is better.” He also stated “But when television is bad, nothing is worse.” Through out this landmark speech, after watching consecutive hours of television, he made the statement that is was “a vast wasteland of junk.” Repeatedly, he says that there will be only a few things that one will enjoy, and that’s why there is a need for change. Fifty years after this speech was given, Minow states that television is vaster certainly, but with a wider range or choice which was one of his main goals in his speech given in 1961. Since the cultural climate during the 1960s was during the Civil Rights Movement and the Reformist Movement, it was difficult to regulate television. As well, network executives were a constraint because they were the ones not budging in making television a more diverse and educational atmosphere. The executives were the individuals at the end of the day that regulated what actually was visually seen on the television. Minow wanted to make people aware of what are going on in the world by upholding and protecting public interest. This would only happen if network executives chose to be on board with this new approach.
Newton Minow uses characterization in order to accomplish his goals. Throughout his remarkable speech, he characterizes the National Association of Broadcasters as failing to live up to their responsibilities to deliver and capture information to educate the public. As well, he characterizes them as being failures of the public interest and only caring in their own success. In Minow’s view, this was a breach of the public trust. Minow recognized that the broadcasting business was an “honorable profession.” “When you work in broadcasting you volunteer for public service, public pressure, and public regulation.” Therefore, broadcasters are held to a higher moral standard and objected to more scrutiny. The profession of broadcasting is “the most powerful voice in America” and “cannot continue to live by numbers” as it had been in the past. In the mind of Minow, this industry should be about making individuals aware of the world instead of being concerned with high ratings, which was a failure in his opinion. Minow said ratings don’t “reveal the depth of the penetration, or the intensity of reaction, and it never reveals what the acceptance would have if what you gave them had been better.” He felt that if imagination and creativity were unleashed, television viewers would have gained much more knowledge. As well, he is disgusted by the lack of taste and the notion that ratings determined the importance of television at this time in age. He stressed in the powerful tone that all the broadcasters only cared about was making money through their viewers. He addresses the questions of “what about your responsibilities? Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs deepening their understanding of children in other lands?” Minow recognizes that the broadcasters only want to be successful in their own career paths, but they are failing as teachers to our children by not representing the beneficiaries of television. These network broadcasters need to face these issues together in order to provide for the future.
The second rhetorical strategy used in this prominent speech is argument through definition. In order to effectively change the television content, he didn’t define public interest as what people thought as “public interest was merely what interested the public.” The FCC embraced the definition of having listeners and viewers define their own best interests, in which was a profit-driven system which maximized interests by rewarding popular programming. This increased the advertising revenue. Instead, he altered the definition to one that fit John F. Kennedy’s agenda as well as his own. Public interest must be made up of various interests and not just what the ratings indicated. What the public wanted was not necessarily in the public interest. Minow constantly said that television broadcasters required to serve as the nation’s needs not so much their wants. He used negation to clearly define what his main goal of public interest was going to serve his audience. He claimed to “help broadcasting, not to harm it; to strength it, not weaken it; to reward it; not to punish it; to encourage it, not threaten it; and to stimulate it, not censor it.” He wanted to portray himself as the problem solver in order to protect the public interest and it lead it down a more influential path. He constantly used repetition in order to emphasize public interest is all about the people’s needs and wants, not the broadcasters. Minow is speaking on behalf of those who don’t have a voice for themselves, and constantly reminded his audience and listeners how important their lives are. This speech functions in a way that makes it clear he wants to better the public for the sake of their education and their future.
The third rhetorical strategy Minow used in his speech is strengthening his ethos in order for his audience to identify with him. Therefore, individuals could act immediately and make a change for the better. Although he had a powerful role in regulating television, he wanted to identity with his audience in order for them to believe in him and show that he was a loyal leader that will help them in the long run. In the case of the speech, Minow had one of the most powerful quotes that made the audience really think to themselves, how can I change television for the better? He stated, “I intend to do more. I intend to find out whether the people care. I intend to find out whether the community which each broadcast serves believes he has been serving the public interest.” He wants the audience to believe they can make a change in what interests the public. He challenges the audience’s leadership to open their minds and hearts for the limitless ways that television can be benefits
Minow’s speech was delivered in a declarative tone, arguing that some people might argue with his statements, but it was in their best interest to take his words into consideration.

He wanted listeners to express their opinions in order to give them a wider range of choice with more diverse alternatives. By creating credibility of his work, Minow also identified with children and parents. He said, “I am the chairman of the FCC. But I am also a television viewer and the husband and father of other television viewers.” Minow is arguing that he is just an ordinary individual with the goal to change television broadcasting for the whole. If he could act on this problem, then you and I can also. No one can argue against bettering

society.
This speech resonated with the public audience in a very appealing and effective way. It was estimated that Minow generated more column-inches of news coverage during the time than any member of the Kennedy administration since Jack’s inaugural address. Before Minow gave this speech, there were fewer television sets in America than after this speech was given. This speech was given during the height of the Kennedy administration, in which Minow quoted “Ask not what America can do for you; ask what you can do for America.” Minow was borrowing on Kennedy’s own words and his call to action. He is identifying with a famous speech in order to resonate with his mainstream audience. As people here this famous quote, they will remember that a call to action to change society is of important. The effects of the speech were instantaneous and widespread, in which 10,000 delighted television viewers sent in telegrams and letters of congratulations to Minow. Through characterizing the broadcasters as “profiteers” and failures to uphold their job, using argument through definition to clearly define the need for public interest, and his ethos of a selfless leader to get his audience to act, he made his point, powerfully. Minow constantly emphasized how poorly the content on television was how he was going to make a change in society. He made it clear that change was important for children in order for them to be educationally fulfilled. During this time period, what was on television currently was uneventful and uninteresting. The speech, “Television and the Public Interest” demanded accountability from the audience and insisted that broadcasters had an obligation to inform as well as educate its viewers. Newton Minow gave his whole heart and soul to provide for the need of the American people, in which he was very successful in the long-run. The power in his voice is one of comfort, making this speech very understandable to change broadcasting for the better.