CBS News says Don Hewitt, the newsman who invented “60 Minutes” and produced the popular newsmagazine for 36 years, has died. He was 86.
60 Minutes was one of the top-rated shows on television for God knows how many years. It was also, to my knowledge, the only network show that featured serious investigative journalism during that period. I still don’t know why that doesn’t prove that networks really can make money doing real journalism.
Cat Lady
Celebrities die in threes – Novak, Hewitt, ???
steve s
I have respect for very, very few ‘news’ shows on tv. But 60 Minutes is definitely one of them.
Eric U.
I used to love 60 minutes. I still feel that a real news channel that didn’t have tons of right wing blowhards and democratic sell-outs on constantly would make money. Just news, from around the world, reported in a straightforward manner. You can watch CNN and still be uniformed about world news.
Violet
RIP, Mr. Hewitt, and thanks for all the good work you did.
@Eric U.:
I’ve wondered if it would. I’d watch. But who knows if people really would. Those shouting matches are entertainment and the people want to be entertained. It’s as old as the Romans – bread and circuses.
Bruuuuce
There have been other shows that did investigative journalism during 60 Minutes’ run: Nightline at its best, for example. But none for as long, or, often, as seriously. (Then again, 60M has had its moments of flakitude, not even counting Andy Rooney.)
I lost my father and a friend to pancreatic cancer. It sucks rocks, and is high on my list of cancers I wish on nobody.
Chad N Freude
Should be obvious. Back in the day (back in the Minutes?), sponsors were willing to pay for real journalism. Today, not so much. Times have changed.
DecidedFenceSitter
Because back in the day there was a far more captive market. From what I understand from the business now (mostly from entertainment shows), executives would kill for a show that got ratings that 20 years ago wouldn’t have made it past the first half of the season. The market is just so very splintered, that there’s too little money to chase so many options for there to be the concentrated support for journalism.
Joel
That’s like saying; I still don’t know why the Royals can’t field a good baseball team.
There’s no talent, from the field right up to the Wal-Mart HQ. That’s why these clowns are floundering. The players in the current media environment are the Royals of the journalism world.
RolloTomasi
60 minutes is the rare program which informs and educates. More importantly the program is secure enough not to fall victim to idiotic notion that every issue has legitimate opposing viewpoints.
On a side note , I loved the movie The Insider.
Origuy
The thing about 60 Minutes is that once the networks found that they could make money with news, news had to make money. Before, it was a given that it would be a loss leader.
RolloTomasi
60 minutes is the rare program which informs and educates. More importantly the program is secure enough not to fall victim to the idiotic notion that every issue has legitimate opposing viewpoints.
On a side note , I loved the movie The Insider.
freelancer
From Bloomberg:
Played in the film by Philip Baker Hall, a chapter of Hewitt’s memoir is spent dealing with the fallout the movie caused. In the end, the decisions shown in the film were the ones Hewitt went with. However, a glaringly bad call shouldn’t outweigh a lifetime of talent and journalistic contribution.
He’s played as a naive corporate weasel in the movie, most famously in this scene:
youtube.com/watch?v=ZIjpP-XngKA
And as far as decent investigative reporting as it continues to exist, PBS’s Frontline has been doing a helluva job. Pacino played Lowell Bergman, who now reports for Frontline. This recent episode on International Bribery is fantastic.
pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/blackmoney/view/
Linkmeister
The quality of the show has fallen off, IMO, but in its heyday it was “must-see TV” long before whichever network created that promotional line.
The reason I say it’s been diminished is A) it’s concluded that it needs at least one celebrity profile each week and B) it’s taken to airing follow-ups of previously-aired stories a lot more often than it used to, and not just in the summer.
Ed in NJ
An aging population that grew up with 7 channels rotary dials is what kept 60 Minutes popular for all these years.
They are being replaced with younger viewers who never had less than 50-100 (now over 500) channels or a remote control. Short attention span and greater competition has led to the current state of tv news.
freelancer
To paraphrase Cheney:
I believe we’re in the last throes, if you will, of
the insurgencyWordPress completely fucking the site up.ericvsthem
It’s not that networks can’t make money on news programs like 60 Minutes. The problem is profit margins and an industry that is consumed with profit at all cost – particularly after all of the media consolidation occuring over the last 20 years.
goblue72
As mentioned above: PBS Frontline. In some ways, even better than 60 Minutes when it comes to serious, in-depth reportage of the muck and sludge our corporate overlords and their lackeys in government are raining down on us ona daily basis.
Whenever I watch Frontline, I always get re-pissed off at the amoral venality of those in power. Which is a good thing.
arguingwithsignposts
@Origuy:
Exactly. “60 Minutes” was part of what killed network news. See News Wars Part 3 – Network news then and now. It wasn’t the only thing (corporate consolidation and deregulation pushed the knife through), but it was a contributing factor.
Brachiator
Heck, I recall a couple of friends who would not leave the house, not go out for dinner or a movie, on Sunday evenings when 60 Minutes was on.
But even when the program was riding high, CBS cut back on long form investigative documentaries. They were too depressing (and so scared away viewers), as well as money losers.
And has been mentioned in other threads, it’s not just that news divisions are afraid of losing money, it’s also that the corporate owners don’t want the news divisions of the media companies they own making any trouble.
On a recent Fresh Air public radio interview, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Alex Jones talked about his book, Losing the News, and the crisis facing impartial reporting. He mentioned in passing how the corporate owners directed that Bill O’Reilly and Keith Olbermann end their on-air “feuding” not because it was alienating viewers, but because it was hurting the corporate brand of the companies which owned and broadcast their programs.
You can listen to the interview here:
npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=111985662&ps=cprs
Ed in NJ – They are being replaced with younger viewers who never had less than 50-100 (now over 500) channels or a remote control. Short attention span and greater competition has led to the current state of tv news.
I don’t think this quite answers it. Aside from Frontline, there is little competition by other networks doing investigative journalism. And viewers will spend hours watching nature and history shows.
Zifnab
@Chad N Freude:
Bullshit. Sponsors pay for eyeballs. At some point some sponsors figured out they could turn news shows into giant political/industrial ad campaigns. But cable news sellouts are regularly pounded in ratings and you don’t sell tires and cheeseburgers by putting on ads no one is looking at.
The Grand Panjandrum
RIP.
Hewitt put together a hell of a string of reporters over the years. And of all of them I think I miss Ed Bradley the most. His piece on the Vietnam Memorial was powerful.
KG
there’s nothing wrong with broadcasters trying to increase their profit margins. there is likely a problem with media consolidation, but then I’m one of those crazy libertarians who things things like anti-trust laws are a good thing. but I think the ultimate problem is that the heads of these companies don’t quite understand that you can have products that don’t turn a profit but at the end of the day still improves your bottom line. In short, I blame the business schools.
Bad Horse's Filly
60 Minutes as the fountain of youth – Hewitt 86, Wallace 90, Rooney 89.
That’s some impressive ages to still be working. RIP Don
Chad N Freude
@Zifnab: OK, have it your way.
Back in the day (back in the Minutes?), enough viewers were interested in journalism for sponsors to be willing to pay for real journalism. Today, not so much. Times have changed.
Trollhattan
Hewitt and team demonstrated time and again that “real” journalism can be presented to adults, by adults on the teevee, and for that I’ll forever hold him in high regard. That “60 Minutes” changed vastly over the decades says far more about the industry than it does of the folks doing the show itself.
I will await the first wingnut comment pointing out that we should treat Novak’s and Hewitt’s passing exactly the same.
cleek
all the networks have tried to duplicate it. 20/20, and Dateline, for example.
Brachiator
@Cat Lady:
No. They don’t. People cherry-pick among notable names to find the one that “proves” the rule.
But among the many notable recent deaths, here is one, with a dash of irony:
Rose Friedman, a free-market economist whose extraordinary collaboration with her husband, Milton, proved essential to his Nobel-prize-winning career, died Tuesday at her home in Davis, Calif. Her birth records have been lost, but her family said she was probably 98.
NYT obit here:
nytimes.com/2009/08/19/business/19friedman.html?_r=1&ref=obituaries
T. O'Hara
Is someone going to mention RaTHergate? Or doesn’t that fit the narrative?
Chad N Freude
@Zifnab:
TV sponsorship has always been about ad campaigns, certainly for products and product lines, even the seriously antisocial, like tobacco.
Fox News, the ultimate uber-sellout doesn’t seem to be getting pounded much. If by sellout you mean individuals like Glen Beck, well he doesn’t seem to be getting pounded yet.
Chad N Freude
@T. O’Hara: What narrative are you referring to? The one where Mike Wallace practiced decades of serious journalism? Or the narrative where
on August 17, 2009, at newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2009/08/17/60-minutes-chief-dan-rather-s-work-not-even-close-standa….
Zifnab
@Chad N Freude: Compared to what? The NYT sold out for the Iraq War. The WaPo has been completely infested with wingnuts. ABC regularly spams anti-Clinton / anti-Obama screeds. Since Dan Rather left CBS and Katie “Daytime TV” Couric has cutsied up the airwaves the station’s news has tanked.
MSNBC has developed a growing following. But let’s face it, they’re marginally ahead of E! and ESPN when it comes to real news coverage versus superficial fluff. Where are people even supposed to go anymore for real news?
I consider the rise of the blog’o’sphere proof positive that we have large numbers of people interested in fact-based reporting, because blogs seem to be the last bastion left in the modern media where you can get legitimate, speedy, serious reporting.
gypsy howell
20/20, and Dateline
Haven’t they become “all pedophiles, all the time” now? I admit I stopped watching both quite a while ago, but it seems like every time I flip past, there’s that creepy, smarmy host with the Vincent Price voice bringing hidden cameras into some kitchen and confronting a would-be child molester.
EthylEster
@Zifnab: I consider the rise of the blog’o’sphere proof positive that we have large numbers of people interested in fact-based reporting, because blogs seem to be the last bastion left in the modern media where you can get legitimate, speedy, serious reporting.
Obviously you have a much higher opinion of the blogosphere than I have.
IMO the blogosphere is also proof positive that large numbers of people are interested is whatever BS is being currently circulated.
And some blogs are also where you get illegitimate and speedy total BS.
Sometimes when the reporting is speedy, the result is NOT serious. Speed seems to be considered a virtue in itself. I think these days speed often undermines serious debate.
Sometimes ya have to stop and think about things for a while….
srv
@T. O’Hara:
As much as I think Frontline and Independent Lens are 10X better than 60 minutes, my memory is the original crew did not want the other franchise that brought Dan Rather back called “60 minutes II (or Wed).” I don’t think Hewitt had any oversight on Dan or Mapes.
Brachiator
@Zifnab:
Huh? There is this worrisome counter-trend:
The full story here:
guardian.co.uk/media/2007/jan/05/pressandpublishing.newmedia
I think at best the InterTubes has seen some first rate criticism of new stories, and some good analytic pieces, but original reporting and investigative journalism is not yet a strong point of online resources.
Bob K
Just a little factoid… 60 Minutes is the only TV program without a theme song.
Chad N Freude
@srv:
See my neurotically detailed post @Chad N Freude.
KXB
20/20 has turned into simply a crime of the week show. Occasionally, they will let John Stossel do one of his enjoyable, libertarian-themed shows. Aside from that, the image of a lovely Elizabeth Vargas, there is no other reason to watch it.
Mike G
Occasionally, they will let John Stossel do one of his enjoyable, libertarian-themed shows.
That are completely full of shit.
Stossel had lots of admirers among the libertarian crowd I used to run with. Then he came to town to do a show about pedicabs and local government regulation and produced a story so grossly inaccurate and filled with falsehoods that they turned off him completely.
He’s a corporate jester telling simple libertarian tales to an audience seeking such, not to be confused with the messy, ambiguous world of reporting facts.
Jager
60 Minutes still gets numbers, #2 last week, usually in the top 5 week in and week out.
Wile E. Quixote
@T. O’Hara
Sure, we can bring up Rathergate. Can we also bring up the fact that most Republicans, including the former president and vice president are chickenshit douchebags who talk tough about the military but who do everything they can to keep from having to join it? Can we bring up Dubya’s score of 25 on the pilot’s aptitude test? Can we bring up Dick Cheney’s five draft deferments, and two drunk driving arrests? Can we bring up the fact that if given the choice between serving his country and sucking ten miles of cock Cheney would have eagerly fallen to his knees with his mouth open? Can we also bring up the fact that George W. Bush is a sniveling little punk who requested a transfer from a squadron where he flew fighter jets (a manly pursuit) to an Air National Guard postal unit, that’s right, a postal unit. Can we bring up the fact that anyone who willingly requests a transfer from flying fighter jets to being in a REMF postal unit is obviously a fuck-up and a coward, and that anyone who votes for someone who would make such a choice is obviously severely genetically deficient as well?
Hey, while we’re at it can we bring up the fact that there isn’t a single prominent conservative commentator who has served his country in the military? Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Michael Medved, Ann Coulter, Jonah Goldberg, William Kristol, not a single one of these luminaries was motivated to join the military, put on a uniform and serve America. In fact you’d be hard pressed to find any Republicans under the age of 70 who have served their country in uniform.
Let’s bring up Rathergate, I’m always in favor of beating up on Dan Rather, I mean the bastard still hasn’t told us what the frequency is. But let’s also bring up the fact that if the Greatest Generation had been as averse to military service as modern conservatives are that we’d all be speaking German today and that Hawaii would be a Japanese colony.
grimc
@gypsy howell:
Dateline stopped the “To Catch A Predator” stuff after a Texas ADA shot himself in the head while Chris Hansen waited on his lawn.
David Crisp
This is from memory, so beware, but my recollection is that the success of “60 Minutes” took a long while to develop and caught everybody (except maybe Hewitt) pretty much by surprise. It was started, as I recall, as one of those public service programs that networks felt obligated to do back when the FCC insisted on such things. It took off in part because of quality work and in part because it became the perfect capper to the Sunday success of NFL football. Neither circumstance is likely to be repeated, unfortunately, and I haven’t watched the show in years, but it used to be required viewing in my house.