TRUE TO HER WORD
CAROL MARIN SPEAKS ABOUT JOURNALISM, INTEGRITY, AND STANDING BY HER IDEALS
"I don't believe any subject should sit in the dark. And if it makes people uncomfortable or makes them angry or upset, so did the reporting on The Vietnam War in the beginning. But it was only through that reporting, the reporting of Watergate for that matter. Those stories, the difficult, hard to look at, impossible to imagine circumstances educated us and taught us that what we need to know is sometimes what we don't want to ask to see. But we must see it. So I believe that real journalism is telling an uncomfortable story to an unwilling public because it's the right thing to do. Not the marketable thing to do." -; Carol Marin
Since starting this series, "Eye On The Media," back in October of last year, I have had the pleasure and good fortune of meeting and spending time with some of Chicago's ( and the nation's ) leading personalities in the fields of TV broadcast journalism, anchoring, print and radio.
Undoubtedly one of the most memorable and fascinating interviews I've done was March 8, when I found myself on my way to the CBS Studios on McClurg Court to interview yet another legend in the rich history of Chicago journalism, Carol Marin. Perhaps one of the nation's most respected journalists, Marin has been critically acclaimed for her relentless pursuit of the toughest stories and her recalcitrance to engage in the "happy news" format. She has amassed a body of journalistic work that bespeaks of excellence and represents years of dedication.
Marin has endured more than her share of controversy pursuing her practice of journalism in its purist form. In 1997, in an unprecedented move that made national headlines, Marin quit her highly visible co-anchor post of 12 years on NBC 5 Chicago's nightly news broadcast opposite Ron Magers when she discovered that the station management had engaged controversial talkshow host Jerry Springer to do "commentaries." Magers soon followed her lead and although Marin enjoyed tremendous support from much of the populace, especially her dedicated viewership, some criticized her for grandstanding and employing "prima donna" tactics.
Undaunted, Marin cut her losses, took both the kudos and the hits off the cuff, and soon carved out a new position for herself in 1997 at WBBM-TV Channel 2, the CBS-owned station in Chicago. By late 1999, Marin was persuaded to take yet another major career risk. Called "an experiment in news" by CBS brass, the launching of a totally new 10 p.m. nightly newscast was planned with Marin as the sole anchor.
The concept seemed simple enough. A no-nonsense, almost purely journalistic effort which would rely on more in-depth news stories, abbreviated weather forecasts and the elimination of special segment features, celebrity profiles and consumer report-type spots. Marin believed in the idea since it paralleled her hard-hitting approach to the art of journalism and anchoring. Yet doubts plagued her as she prepared for her highly anticipated debut broadcast in February 2000.
Though she was buoyed by the support of veterans in her field, including Mike Parker, Mike Flannery, Pam Zekman, Steve Baskerville ( on weather ) , John Davis and Tim Wiegel among others, Marin was concerned about the salability of the concept to the viewing audience. Were viewers really ready for this? Equally troublesome was the lingering reality that Carol's News Director Joel Cheatwood was actively partnering with PR purveyors such as VH1 and Marketwatch. So Carol held her breath and gave the new venture everything she had.
Eight months later, on Oct 30, 2000, when Marin announced on the 10 p.m. newscast that it was to be her last, it was with disappointment and a belief that she could have converted many more viewers if she had just had more time. In typical fashion, the redoubtable Chicago native moved beyond the failed format and was named a full-time correspondent for CBS News by Andrew Heywood, President of CBS News.
Soon after her last 10 p.m. solo nightly news broadcast, many ney-sayers did not hesitate to say, "I told you so," in print, radio and even TV. Carol was once again at the center of a media blitz on a national level. But Carol's role as a national player escalated as the pundits took their pot shots. Marin will now contribute both to CBS' 60 Minutes II ( with which she has been affiliated since Dec 1998 ) , and will also contribute regularly to the nationally acclaimed original 60 Minutes.
Marin began her career in broadcasting in 1972 with station WBIR-TV in Knoxville, Tenn., where she was the host of a morning talkshow ( 1972-'74 ) , a general assignment reporter and later the assistant news director. Marin then moved to Nashville and station WSM-TV where she worked as both general assignment reporter and nightly news anchor. It was here that Marin's reputation for ferreting out the tough stories began. She won awards for her insightful investigative report which disclosed a connection between the then Governor of Tennessee and a convicted double murderer.
But Chicagoans best know Marin for her long and fruitful tenure with NBC 5 WMAQ-TV, where she served as co-anchor for the 6 p.m. newscast from 1988-'97 and co-anchor of the 10 p.m. newscast with her long-time friend and colleague Ron Magers 1985-'97. Marin has been the recipient of 15 regional Emmy awards and won a national Emmy award both in 1989 and in 1999. The University of Champaign-Urbana alumnus also earned two Peabody awards in both 1998 and 1999 and an Alfred I. DuPont-Columbia award in 1986.
David Guarino: Carol, I feel that there are a lot more people than you would ever believe who realize that shows like Jerry Springer, while they may have a certain type of commercial appeal—I think many of us are disenfranchised by what I would almost call an exploitation of people and it's sad. I thought it was so refreshing to see someone like yourself finally stand up and say, "I can't do this. I can't be a part of this."
CM: You see, the difference was, those shows have a First Amendment right to exist. It wasn't about them as much as it was about the news in which Ron ( Magers ) and I had invested our own sense of what news is. When suddenly the news was going to be cross-pollinated with that it's like saying, you know it sends our viewers a double message that we don't know who we are and what we stand for. We don't know the difference. There is no difference anymore. And that's where it was really for us about what is a newscast. And if America wants to watch whatever America wants to watch, we won't be performers on those stages. And so it's more about our view of news than our view of those shows like Sally Jessy, and Jerry and all of them.
DG: When I think of a legend in Chicago journalism, you are certainly a person that immediately comes to mind. So if I'm a bit in awe….
CM: ( Carol laughs ) Well, thank you. But, please no awe! ( We both laugh )
DG: How does it make you feel to be considered a legend in Chicago journalism, Carol? Or in journalism in general?
CM: I'm grateful for the kindness of others, but I don't see that at all. I'm a reporter. And that's sort of the beginning and the end of the sentence. The late Paul Hogan, who was a dear friend of mine, used to make fun of people who called themselves journalists from Chicago. You know, we're reporters. And so, you know, I do a job that I love. I think it's a privilege and so for that privilege you don't view yourself in those terms. You know, you just work everyday. And believe in the work and are lucky to have it.
DG: Can you take us back to that time when you first learned from the NBC brass that the Jerry Springer spot was coming on your newscast?
CM: We sort of knew it had been in the wind and had fought against it quietly. It was April of 1997, I remember it clearly. The important thing about it is that it's an event that I don't view in isolation. For the two years prior, Ron and I had been concerned and had fought against lots of other initiatives that we thought were changing the tone, the direction, the intent of the news. And so in a lot of ways, that decision ( Springer ) was sort of the last one, but in some ways the least. You know we had fought advertiser deals where you pretend it was a news story about medicine but it was really a commercial with a hospital, and we refused to do those things. So we ( Ron and I ) had done some serious battle behind the scenes on lots of initiatives that we felt dumbed down the news or cheapened it in some way. And so, we had heard that the Springer thing was in the wind, and we had privately gone to our bosses months earlier and said, "Don't do it. Chicago won't forgive you. It's a terrible mistake." And when they finally decided that they were going to do it anyway, for me and for Ron it was time to go. We really believed that we lost sort of any ability any longer to, you know, hold the forces at bay. Having said all of that, it was a clear decision. When it came right down to the moment of making it, I didn't have difficulty making that decision.
DG: It's one thing to talk about how you feel, to verbally express your displeasure to a proposal; it's quite another to act on it regardless of whatever fallout would result from that decision.
CM: Well, we didn't know. The truth is I didn't know if some people would think that it was some kind of prima donna stunt or some sort of tantrum, but it wasn't. There are times in our life, you know I got a lot of credit for this thing, because I exist in a high-profile world. The truth is, lots of people do this all the time, but they don't get the credit or the support that I got. After it had happened, I encountered a butcher at the grocery store who was talking about it and said he lost his job because he refused to short weigh meat. You know, I got letters, I got a letter from a real estate broker who lost big accounts because he wouldn't pad real estate assessments. The wife of a DCFS worker whose husband's job was in jeopardy because he wouldn't place kids in these sort of "foster way station homes" that kids can be in for 30 days because some of them were unsafe environments. Those are really the acts of courage because they get no attention, they get no support. And so I think it happens. People end up meeting these kinds of situations and making these kinds of decisions all the time. We underestimate them all the time.
DG: What was the overall atmosphere like at NBC when you announced your decision to leave?
CM: I got support from many of my colleagues. Not everyone agreed with me, and I understood that. And that's okay. You know, because as I explained to friends in the newsroom, I wasn't the news police, I was acting out of what I felt I needed to do. There was a lot of support, you know, a lot of reporters with not very much tenure there cosigned a letter to the head of GE ( who owns NBC ) saying, "please don't do this." There were a lot of individual acts in real defense of news. So, the truth about it is, I had wonderful years at NBC. The last couple were pretty tough. If not tough, at least more difficult. But I have great memories of Channel 5, and still have great friends there. And reporters that I respect. And editors, shooters and all of it, so you know, it isn't black and white along those lines at all. You know my overwhelming memories of my time at NBC are good ones, not bad ones.
DG: How long were you at NBC, Carol?
CM: Nineteen years.
DG: Did you at any time feel that you were letting your colleagues down?
CM: I didn't. I felt that they understood. You know, they knew I had to go, and I understood that we all make these decisions at different points in our lives. There was no missionary zeal on my part. There was none of that because this was an individual's decision based on individual beliefs and knowing that I couldn't, in conscience, do an introduction on a set to that kind of segment ( Springer's commentary ) . And so, I didn't. But that's all it was. No grander plan than that.
DG: What was the tenor of the feedback you got from your viewers when you were in the process of leaving? Do you feel that they backed you?
CM: I did. Chicago was, I mean, wonderful to me. It isn't that every single person in the city saw it the way I did, but I had overwhelming support. I truly did. And more than I would have imagined. I knew that this would be a story for a small amount of time in Chicago, because I'd worked here for so long. I didn't expect the kind of support that I got even outside of Chicago. And Ron got too. That was fairly amazing to me.
DG: If you had it to do all over again, would you make the same decision?
CM: Yes.
DG: Probably as one of Chicago's most prominent and serious broadcast journalists, what was the most difficult decision you have ever had to make?
CM: Gee, I don't know. There are many of them along the way, and they fall in different categories. Maybe the most difficult was deciding to go back and anchor again. Because I didn't think I would. I thought that that was a part of my journalistic life that had ended.
DG: In connection to that thought, what in retrospect, would you have done differently with regard to that 10 p.m. nightly solo newscast on Channel 2?
CM: If I was going to do anything differently, David, I would have made sure contractually that they ( Channel 2 brass ) had sworn to give it the time that it needed. Because I still think that you can't, it's like, you know it's like turning around an aircraft carrier in 20 minutes. You can't do that. I think those of us who were aboard that aircraft carrier, we were proud to be there. We talked about news. Every day, all day long. Three meetings. We didn't talk about what's the programming ahead of us, what's our lead-in? You know, the disease of the week, the movie of the week. We didn't do that stuff. We loved it. Was it perfect? It wasn't. Did it have problems? It did. Are newscasts life forms? They are, and they change. But you know, we're not sorry about what we did. And I'm only sorry that I couldn't have figured out some way to keep it alive longer. But we're not sorry about its content, its execution. Would we have liked more money to do it? Yes. Would we have liked more promotion? Yeah. A longer-term commitment? Absolutely. But having said all of that, it may be one of the most wonderful experiences in my entire career in terms of doing THE news.
DG: Really?
CM: Um-hum. Honest.
DG: Tell me this, Carol. What is the biggest misconception about you?
CM: Oh gosh. Maybe that I'm not at all lighthearted. That I'm all serious news. I do love serious news; I'm not your classic feature reporter. Not that there shouldn't be features, I just shouldn't be doing them. I am much better with organized crime, corruption, the bribery of public officials, street gangs, that sort of thing. And those kinds of stories convey a level of seriousness which is true to what I believe is news. But it isn't that I spend every waking moment of every day in a deeply serious mode.
DG: Can you describe for us the working relationship you shared on Channel 5 with your colleague Ron Magers?
CM: It was great! You know, anchoring the news, when it's good, it's like a great marriage. And one of the finest moments, if you look across that desk, if once in your career this happens, it's stupendous. When Mark Giangreco was still at Channel 5 and Jim Tillman was still at Channel 5 and it was Ron and I; when that foursome came into place, it was magical. Every one of us liked and respected the other, we were all different.
You know Giangreco and I had this, what ended up being our on-air relationship was absolutely authentic. He was like the irritating brother ( we both laugh ) that you had, and I was like the irritating sister. We had more laughs, more fun, more support, and more appreciation on that desk than maybe at any other time in my career where we all meshed. Ron and I shared the same values; we didn't always agree on every single point, but you know there was a real feeling. TV, I believe, strips away lies. You can be a fraud on TV only for a certain amount of time. You know, at one point or another the veneer drops, and people see the real person. What people saw, and it was genuinely true, was the fact that the four of us felt a sense of togetherness, belonging and respect. And that was stupendous. It was a great experience. ( Carol's voice softens ) Ron was also a better anchor than I was, and I was always more devoted to the reporting than he was. You know that one of us would be more comfortable in the street and one of us was more comfortable on the desk. And we were more together than we were individually. I learned more about anchoring and playing through a live situation because I sat next to Ron. And my part of that duet was, you know, to bring some of the reporting in. And so, we complimented each other and by doing that each one of us ended up being more effective in the partnership.
DG: Carol, as journalists, what can we do to help prevent another Columbine tragedy, or more recently the violence at Santana High School in Santee? Do we have a responsibility we're not living up to in this regard?
CM: Sometimes what we have to do is tell the difficult truth whether it's politic or not. You know a piece of mine reran on 60 Minutes II on Tuesday. We had covered, a year and a half ago, this was right before Littleton, there was a school shooting in Bethel, Alaska, which was the one nobody covered. And we went, and sort of did an anatomy of that school shooting. And that story now has run for the third time. Because it is, really the anatomy of every one of these things. You know, it is a kid who is picked on, who was disenfranchised, who had family realities that cast him to sea early in his youth, it was students who knew but didn't tell, it was bullyings, all those things. We need to understand what happened in the head of that child, we need to know what happened in the life of that child to know how to not have another child create so much sorrow because he takes a gun and goes to school or anyplace else. The whole package needs to be examined. It's not just a matter of more metal detectors and more television monitors and cameras. It's really about knowing what is happening to our children.
DG: I recall you doing a series, in fact a number of series on the KKK and various right-wing groups, and it seemed to be a subject that you were very passionate about and interested in. Can you elaborate a little on your aggressive pursuit of these stories involving skinheads, punks, etc., and was your life ever threatened by any of these fanatical types?
CM: No, not on those. Every reporter who does serious news is occasionally threatened. I've had a few threats or a few communications I've had to pay pretty close attention to. I'm not casual about it, I mean I don't take ridiculous risks. But I also think and it's along exactly the same lines we were discussing, that there are really important things to know about the world and some of those important things are fringe groups. Fringe groups may be small but they should all be exposed to the light of day simply because of things like what happened to The Federal Building, what happened with Arian Nation, Covenant Sword, Arm of the Lord and all those groups. So I am interested in the subterranean societies. I'm interested in street gangs. I'm interested in organized crime. I'm interested in all those places where organizations and people don't want reporters to be. That included, for a long time, The First Ward. ( Carol and I laugh ) So I end up being pulled to the stories where reporters are most unwelcome.
DG: Do gays and lesbians have a long way to go before we receive fair and adequate coverage in the media, Carol? Are we treated fairly now?
CM: I think both. I think like in any other community you can't generalize about what the gay and lesbian community believes anymore than the straight community or any other. This is my experience with that, when Dr. Laura's program was scheduled to be on Channel 2, I got some of the most vitriolic e-mail I have ever gotten, some of it from the gay and lesbian community, saying, "you need to quit your job because this is coming to CBS." Some of these letters were just astonishing in their level of vitriol. I would write back and say, "You know I've never argued in all the years I was at MAQ that Jerry Springer's show should be taken off the air. Didn't like it and didn't watch it. It was what they were going to put in the newscast that I thought compromised the newscast." And the same thing applies to Dr. Laura. You know, I'm not a fan. But I'm a broad plane of what's on television. People get to pick and choose. That's the First Amendment. But the dilemma of every group is to somehow argue for and demand fair coverage and not cross the line and say, "and don't say anything I don't like." I mean, I still remember covering Reverend Hiram Crawford in City Council when he stood up and said, "It wasn't Adam and Steve it was Adam and Eve." And he fought against any sort of fair housing based on gender or sexual preference. And I remember covering that demonstration. Crawford stood up and said what he said and gay and lesbian organizations said what they said about the inequity and unfairness and injustice. This is America. People have a right to hate and express their hatred as long as it's not violent. That's the struggle we have as a free people and in doing journalism. Sometimes what we believe but what we want to see are different.
And one last thing on that, and I say this to everyone. It is absolutely possible and sometimes the case that there are biased reporters. But there are also biased viewers. And so we don't, sometimes, see the same thing in a given news report. And that's life too in this world of democracy.
DG: What activity do you enjoy the most that is not work related?
CM: Reading fiction and jumping horses. I came to the latter late in the game; I didn't start riding really until about 12 years ago. Riding lifts my heart and transports my soul, it's stupendous.
DG: What are you most passionate about, Carol?
CM: ( Pauses ) Well, the news. I mean, I love this thing I do, I love it. And I believe in it. And I've been lucky enough to be allowed to do it.
DG: It's been said that you're rather a hard-core journalist who doesn't readily lend your face to causes.
CM: I don't.
DG: Do journalistic ethics have a lot to do with that?
CM: Everyone has a different take on this, and I respect the difference. But I take the most conservative line on this. Because for years I've investigated charities. I investigated Mike Ditka's, which was shut down. I investigated Michael Jordan's, which was shut down. I believe that it's a conflict of interest. If I tell someone to give money to something, and I decided this very early on when I was a reporter in Nashville; somebody approached me and asked me if I would host a fundraiser. And I said yes and sort of guardedly. And it turned out that the executive director was indicted and we reported on it. My job as a news reporter is to belong to nothing. So I take the most conservative view. I sign no petitions. I've campaigned for no causes; I do no fundraising. I give charitable contributions either anonymously or in a family member's name. And it isn't that I don't believe in charity, but I find a way to do it that is private, quiet and so that it doesn't spark a conflict of interest.
Every journalist finds a different path in this, and some are more comfortable doing some of the things that I'm not. And I don't think that's unethical. I just think that we each draw the line of our conduct that conforms best to what we think we want to do.
_____
Needless to say, it was indeed an interesting and enlightening morning I spent with Carol. Though she will no longer be reporting locally here in the Chicago market, she will be doing national stories for both 60 Minutes II and the original 60 Minutes show, both on CBS.
Carol Marin is definitely a journalist's journalist. A dedicated and hard working reporter/anchor who has remained true to her craft; to the serious practice of journalism which has made her a household name for many. She continues to deliver the world as she sees it to an audience that has come to expect her indefatigable integrity and uncompromising professionalism. More importantly, Carol has remained true to her principles often at great professional and personal cost. It is, perhaps, because she broke rank to make the choice to honor her beliefs that earns her our respect, whether we agree with her or not. It is easy to believe that when all is said and done, Marin's legacy of journalistic excellence will speak for itself.
E-mail: DavdRonald@aol.com
