We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
AS VIEWED BY OUR WASHINGTON NEWS BUREAU
October S, 196ii
Networks may be on slippery footing in the matter of their planned color coverage of the Presidential Inauguration in January, as a result of the Warren Report, All news media is worried about the final repercussions of the report's criticism of the crowding of newsmen at the Dallas jail during the bizarre aftennath of the tragic assassination of President Kennedy.
Media committees, various reports, studies and meetings are under way to test out means of pooling news coverage on major events — particularly as they involve the President. The Warren Commission suggested that some "code" of behavior be worked out to forestall any possibility of a repeat situation like that of the Ruby killing of Lee Harvey Oswald,.
In the renewed emotional shock produced by the Warren report, broadcasters see a danger of curtailment of the very kind of news coverage for which they were so warmly praised during the terrible November events. The democratic processes are admittedly cumbersome and awkward — they are no less so when hundreds of news gatherers and cameramen crowd in to record the history of this particular democracy.
This danger was pointed out by NAB's Vincent Wasilewski when he was asked for the broadcaster association stand on pooled coverage and reduced. news personnel. Wasilewski pointed out that this one set of very particular events should not "becloud the fact that free reporting is essential in a free society." He said NAB is already getting expert opinion on the matter, and broadcasters will, of course, cooperate.
Networks have not (as of this column's deadline) come out with any comment on the matter of drawing straws and pooling coverage of major national events, when and if some official "code" requires it. Newspapers — with far less of a problem in reporting than the electronic media — have looked on the idea of pooled units slightly more favorably. Press and broadcasters will get together to discuss the angles.
No one, at this time, would care to come out roundly and say that risks and inconveniences of increasing news coverage are part of the democratic processes. Yet no one takes risks more recklessly than Lyndon B. Johnson. The President will fling open the White House gates to a crowd of tourists, or dive into a milling mass of thousands in a parade — leaving the FBI, the Secret Service and the news and cameramen equally frustrated by waves of yelling, hand-grabbing humanity — any one of whom could be lethal.
Still, Wasilewski is not quite alone in warning of the danger of cutback in news and cameramen. AP's editorial association chief, Sam Ragan, said responsibility for "orderly coverage" lies with the authorities in charge, in the last analysis.
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
Octob«r 5, 1964 13