When John Callaway was a young boy, he vividly remembers his father, Charles Ernest Callaway, beginning many a sentence with, "The thing of it is…" As Callaway celebrates 43 years in broadcasting he reflects on a fascinating career that has seen him transformed from a lad who came to Chicago in 1956 with 71 cents in his pocket to an internationally known and highly respected journalist, TV host, commentator, author, singer, actor and passionate observer of life. Born in Spencer, West Virginia Aug. 22, 1936, Callaway is proud of his roots, his struggles and his triumphs.
Callaway is an intriguing repository of talent that has found expression in markedly divergent areas of endeavor. His reputation as Chicago's foremost on-air interviewer for PBS and, in particular, for WTTW Channel 11 remains unchallenged. His reflections on the Windy City and what he terms, "The Problem Society," have been the object of controversy, debate and immense continuing interest. Yet after 19 years on the PBS playing field, Callaway still poses the questions that fascinate, teach and challenge the viewer and listener to truly think about and examine the issues presented. In this sense, Callaway is as much teacher as celebrity.
Callaway's standards are admittedly exceptionally high, and history illustrates that he is his own toughest critic. As a former editorial director at WBBM radio in the early 1960s, John labeled his commentaries as "the worst ever broadcast on American radio." In 1968, Callaway was a guiding force in helping lead WBBM radio to switch to an "all-news" format. Throughout his long careerm Callaway has delivered innumerable essays, facilitated countless debates and led special forums with his characteristic and fascinating mix of humor, childlike curiosity, and an unrelenting standard for accuracy and fairness. Perhaps that is why he has been the recipient of more than 100 awards for broadcast journalism.
A nine-time Emmy Award recipient, Callaway has also won the coveted Peabody Award and the Gold Medal of the New York International Film Festival. Callaway is also an inductee into the Chicago Journalism Hall of Fame, and has received the Harry A. Kalven Freedom of Expression Award from The Illinois American Civil Liberties Union, the 1999 Excellence in Journalism and Commentary Award from the City Club of Chicago, the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Silver Circle Award and the Distinguished Journalism Award from the Better Government Association of Chicago.
John's many years at PBS are highlighted by 10 years of moderating Chicago Tonight with John Callaway, which ran from 1984 to 1999. John hosted that program from its inception until June 1999. Notably, in August of 1974, Callaway scooped the competition by conducting the first live public affairs special in light of the Watergate scandal and ex-President Nixon's subsequent resignation. What few people realize is that this groundbreaking forum involving some 18 guests was conducted in a studio registering 100 degrees...the air conditioning broke down on that very warm and tumultuous day.
The famed alumnus of the City News Bureau, where he was employed as a 19-year-old police reporter, has spent 19 years in the PBS system.
Callaway's talents as a writer are deftly illustrated by his immensely popular "Callaway" column, which ran for a decade in WTTW's Eleven Magazine. Additionally, Callaway edited the book, Campaigning on Cue, and is the author of The Thing of It Is, his revealing and fascinating volume of essays published in 1994. John's insightful essay on the year 1968 found its way into the recently published, 20th Century Chicago. Callaway also co-authored Action In The Streets, ( a book about juvenile delinquency in Chicago ) with Hans Mattick and Frank Carney.
Some of Callaway's specials were showcased to a national audience, one of the most memorable being the series, John Callaway Interviews. He profiled some of the world's most famous people, including Helen Hayes, Jonas Salk, Leontyne Price, Mike Wallace and Howard Cosell, among many others.
The founding father of The William Benton Fellowships Program in Broadcast Journalism at the University of Chicago, Callaway is himself a 1956 dropout from Ohio Wesleyan University. He is nonetheless the recipient of seven honorary doctorate degrees and has reported on 12 national political conventions, the administrations of both Mayor Daleys of Chicago, the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the rise and fall of the Soviet Union, and Nelson Mandela's prison ordeal and the resulting political revolution in South Africa.
Unflinchingly honest and direct, Callaway describes himself as "sleep deprived 50% of the time," "codependent," "20 pounds overweight," and will readily point out that he has one of the largest private collections of The New Yorker Magazine, which he has collected since 1958.
Currently Callaway serves as host and senior editor of the WTTW documentary series, Chicago Stories, which has garnered him newfound acclaim and a still wider audience of loyal followers.
But the layers of John Callaway's talent have revealed yet another dimension as John recently wrote and starred in the one-man show, John Callaway Tonight, which made its world debut at Chicago's Pegasus Player's Theater in March. Callaway's daughters, the lovely Ann Hampton Callaway and the vivacious Liz Callaway, are both internationally known recording artists and cabaret stars who have graced such venues as the Broadway Stage and Carnegie Hall. John Callaway has leant his resonant voice to benefit performances for Chicago's Lyric Opera and the Women's Board of the Chicago Symphony.
Callaway resides on Chicago's North Side with his wife Sandy.
DAVID GUARINO: In reading your book, The Thing Of It Is, and from watching Chicago Tonight, I have learned many things. What was the main trait that you possess that took you from 71 cents in your pocket to where you are today?
Callaway: Curiosity. Genuine curiosity. About how the world works, who works it, how it's put together and what makes it hum. And what makes it not hum.
DG: It would seem ... that you have quite a sense of humor …
Callaway: ( John laughs loudly and shouts ) I deny that! My attorneys will be in touch with your attorneys! I've been charged with that before! I'm sick and tired of being … ( At this point a waiter comes to our table in the empty restaurant room where we are conducting the interview. John engages the waiter ) "Get this man out of here, he's just charged me with having a sense of humor! I hate that!" ( to me, indicating the waiter ) This guy waits on me all the time. He can tell you that I'm a total, humorless bore!
( The waiter says, "I've never said that!" John and I are convulsed in laughter )
Callaway: ( to the retreating waiter ) There! Thank you! ( To me ) You see? DO I MAKE MY POINT, DAVID?
DG: Yes, John, you've made your point. So much for your sense of humor.
Callaway: ( John smiles ) All right then.
DG: In The Thing of It Is, you talk about many things. You label some of the opinions you made while Editorial Director of WBBM Radio "some of the worst ever broadcast on American radio." Can you elaborate?
Callaway: I was writing opinions for the management ( of WBBM ) . I was the first editorial writer for the first radio editorials ever broadcast in this city. Whatever the year was 1960, '61. The general manager was a man named E. H. ( Ernie ) Shomo, and I had to write these things for him. He read them on the air, though he was essentially a salesperson. He was a wonderful station manager. The only reason he was doing it was because CBS in New York promulgated this policy that the CBS-owned stations, not the affiliated ones, but the owned stations ( Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Boston, etc. ) would begin to do station editorials. And so I was elected to be the writer of the first editorials. So anyway, that's the factual basis. No, it's not that the opinions were bad ... . My mistake was that I was so ensconced with content and complexity, as I still am to this day, that I wanted to get all the nuances in. And there wasn't any standard by which to ( I couldn't say, "Well you know the way they did editorials in Arizona was that they did them in two minutes; crisp commentaries ) compare what I was doing. No stations had done editorials...we were on our own. So my criticism of myself was that the scripts that I gave, these commentaries that I gave the general manager were much too long.
The opinions themselves, they were fine. The interesting thing is that later when radio people like Rush Limbaugh would go for 30 minutes without interruption, I suppose one could say I was a pioneer in long form. It's just that the general manager was not a public speaker and it was unfair to ask him to wade through all that copy.
DG: What was your reaction to the idea of editorials on radio at that time?
Callaway: I never did like the idea of station editorials because who is the station? Well, the general manager was a guy who was interested in sales and in running a good, crisp station. He's not walking around with a great editorial agenda. Well, who is walking around with a great editorial agenda? Well, the young reporter, writer, and documentarian Callaway is. But why should he represent CBS at the age of 26 or whatever the hell it was? Now later on they developed editorial boards and they became much more like, say the Tribune or the Sun-Times. ... But when I started, it was little Johnny Callaway and Ernie Shomo, and we were pioneers. As a broadcast pioneer, I started several things ... and that was one of them. On-air editorials by management.
DG: You were responsible for the conversion of WBBM AM radio to an all-news format as well?
Callaway: Correct. That came from on high. That was William Paley, chairman of CBS, saying, "I want my own stations to be something special. And at that time there were no other "all-news" stations; there had been one other attempt at "all-news" stations. But generally speaking, the nation was without "all news" stations. And in 1967, Paley started "all news" at WCBS in New York. And then in 1968 there was a rumor that WIND ( Westinghouse ) was going to go "all news" because they had gone "all news" in New York with WINS. WINS, I think, beat WCBS to the punch in New York and whoever gets there first establishes a real important beach head in that format. So Paley, hearing that WIND ( which was the Westinghouse station then in Chicago ) was going all news, called us into an emergency meeting. And I think in two months, Bill O'Donnell, who was the new general manager at WBBM, and I ( who was the news director ) , put together an all-new staff and an "all news" format. And that ( 1968 ) was an extraordinary news year. There was the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., followed by the assassination of Robert Kennedy in June, followed by the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Followed a few days later by the Democratic convention in Chicago, where the turmoil was huge. I remember management telling us that "all news" formats were expensive, so if we could "hold our losses ( in 1968 ) to x number of thousands of dollars, you'll be considered heroes by Paley and the money boys back in New York."
DG: In your book you describe your collection of New Yorker magazines as being your "Elvis," and you contend that we all have an "Elvis."
Callaway: My other "Elvises" are my other magazines. But let me comment on The New Yorker Magazine, because it's a very interesting story. I began collecting The New Yorker out of "journalistic self-defense" and necessity. I would be writing a magazine article, or doing the research for a magazine article, and I would go through The Readers' Guide To Periodical Literature at the library and I would see that The New Yorker Magazine issue of, say, Aug. 4, 1941 had the article that I was looking for on such and such a topic. Over and over I found that when I went to the clerk to request a particular issue of The New Yorker ( or similar magazines ) , I would wait in a long line and then they wouldn't have that issue. Remember, this is pre-Internet by 40 years. So out of self-defense and journalistic self-preservation, I began to save a whole bunch of magazines. But The New Yorker I took care to collect each year in and year out. If you were in my den today, you would see Time, Newsweek, New York Times Sunday Magazine, New York Times Book Review, Consumer Reports, Chicago Magazine, The Economist, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair; you will see about 27 magazines. All of which have collections of about a year or longer, and then you will see many original collectors' items such as the great little magazine Big Table. One of my partisan reviews from the 1930s has Saul Bellow's first short story in it. So I have a wonderful collection of magazines as well as books. I've got my New Yorkers from 1957 on.
DG: Didn't you edit a magazine called Chicago Scene?
Callaway: One of the great little magazines of Chicago history was Chicago Scene Magazine in the 1960s. And I was managing editor of that for a few months. And we had people like ( Mike ) Royko writing for us, and other people who went on to great journalistic careers. The problem was, they never sold 28 cents worth of advertising. But there's some great original reporting and writing in there. That's one of the little things I'm proud of, even though the magazine "failed." But it was a wonderful time in my life.
DG: What is an example of something you've said and lived to regret?
Callaway: ( with a deadpan expression ) I do. I've been married three times and the greatest regrets of my life are my two failed marriages.
DG: want to ask you a question about our community. We've all heard about the progress that the gay/lesbian community has made in the last decade. What do you think we could be doing better or more efficiently?
Callaway: I gave a speech to a gay and lesbian awards banquet a few years ago, and I think the thrust of what I said that night ( and this might have been eight or nine years ago ) , was that I worry about something like the Gay Pride Parade; how long is that going to go on at the level that it goes on? How is that used by people who aren't gay or lesbian to make it appear that because they march in the parade they are truly "friends" of that community? And I worry about a movement that is as necessarily complex as this movement is with this reality; let's separate out-there's movement, and then there's non-movement reality of gays and lesbians. If you're not in the movement, yet you're gay or lesbian, then there's that reality. I wonder about, and my gut is this is again a matter of progress and a matter of deficiency...of so much of the gay plight being seen through the lens of AIDS. I think that because of AIDS, there is a political organization and social organizations and a spiritual presence that otherwise would not be there. In other words, I think this entire movement, and this entire community, move forward in crisis. That's the good news. It's almost an unintended blessing consequence of what otherwise is a horrible tragedy. It's like bravery; insight, political organization, spiritual growth, etc., accompany this tragedy. So that's good. But if I were to arrange a conference, I would ask if there are people who care about the essential issues of fairness and authentic expression by gays and lesbians in a pluralistic society, and that's the simple thing we're trying to talk about in all its complexity. How does seeing it through the lens of the AIDS crisis skew it? Where are we otherwise and where would we be otherwise without the issue? What if I am willing to donate my time, my money, and my energies to helping find a cure for AIDS, but I'm a homophobic underneath it all and I'm helping because "I'm a good guy" and "it's the right thing to do?" Do you get my point?
DG: Absolutely. … Whatever gave you the idea to write and perform in a one-man show? That's a pretty far reach for a commentator, host and journalist.
Callaway: I've given hundreds of speeches over the last 40 years. Hundreds around town. And usually they're public policy; they'll be economic or political analysis. But then you get into the question and answer period, and people will start asking you personal questions. And I started telling stories. And I found that people enjoyed the stories as much if not more than the speeches! And I became comfortable with those stories. So I thought, "when I step back from Chicago Tonight, I want to do some serious writing, and I think I want to do a one-person show out of the tradition, not of theater, but of storytelling." That's an old Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde Road show tradition of this world. And I knew I was good at it. I thought that when I do public speaking, it's a performance. ( John lowered his voice to a whisper ) And I'm not an actor. But I am a performer. There's no false modesty that's useful there. Arlene Crewdsen at Pegasus has wanted me to do something for Pegasus for years. She actually, in seeing my final Chicago Tonight broadcast, had a role for me in a production. And I said, "No, no, no, I'm not an actor. I'm not interested in that. I'll tell you what I am interested in, Arlene." I told her about it ( the one-man-show ) and she immediately said, "Bang, I want it." It took another 18 months to get it on the stage.
DG: Could you describe for us a "nightmare" broadcast of Chicago Tonight?
Callaway: I would say that the show that was the most humiliating, my most abject failure, was the first time Bruce DuMont ( my political correspondent ) and I sat down for our first, on-air live interview with Richard M. Daley. And this is when Rich was running for Mayor for the first time in 1989. And it was a very important interview. And the expectations for it were great. The phone was ringing all week long from African Americans who were wondering if he had the right stuff for the job, remember his father had been labeled a racist. Let me put it to you this way: if it ( the interview ) had been a football game, the final score would have been Daley-59, DuMont and Callaway-nothing. I mean he ( Daley ) came on and just kind of whacked us away the way you'd brush a fly off your cheek. He took over. He challenged the premise of our questions. At one point he said, "You know, I could have you guys indicted." What he was saying was, "I have power as State's Attorney." He was very intimidating, ran roughshod over us, and I remember walking over to the newsroom "bullpen area" of the Chicago Tonight offices, and as Bruce and I were walking up the stairs we encountered the producers who looked at us as if to say "What happened?" Because they viewed us as championship interviewers. And we are and were. I mean Daley wiped us out. ( John smiles sardonically ) It was a wonderful experience. The viewers were enraged, they thought our performance was terrible. They thought he ( Daley ) got away with murder.
DG: What character trait that you possess are you the least proud of, John?
Callaway: ... My dismal performance in human intimacy in ongoing family life. Whatever those factors are, they represent the character deficiency and psychological wounds that I'm least happy about; that I am most apologetic about in terms of the unhappiness and/or sorrow I have visited upon those who have encountered me in attempts at long-term family life. So that today I find myself in a third marriage, and my wife, Sandy, has been married twice before also. So when we're asked about that, we say that we work on it day-by-day. And that's about all I'll offer given my humble track record. ( John and I laugh )
DG: What is the most difficult part about being John Callaway?
Callaway: I think that one of the issues ( and I'm going back to family intimacy ) is trying to keep a feeling of equality in a relationship. For instance, when Sandy and I are out in public, people will often come over to me and they won't, perhaps, pay their respects to her. And I try to take care to introduce her to them at every instance, but I think that it's not easy to be married to me or to be around me when I'm treated that way by the public. When your public comes over and relates to you; I won't say as an object, but as a media person; the people who do that have a sincere and long-term affection. Or even if they express hostility towards me, because I've been in their lives for these many years. But it's hard sometimes to have a private public life with your family when your audience approaches you. And so, one of the benefits that I thought might arise from my stepping back from Chicago Tonight would be to lower that phenomenon a bit. Unfortunately, it hasn't succeeded so far. There are too many memories, etc. Now having said that, I'm grateful for the genuine connection that I have with viewers. I really mean that. But it's not always easy for those people around. It's almost as if they're victims of your publicity.
DG: What is the most important lesson you learn from your viewing public?
Callaway: I really am interested in the work. And I'm interested in the public response essentially as a tool; if I need to call somebody and my name can get me in to get the information, that's the kind of power ( if you have the benefit of halfway decent press over the years ) that is really a useful thing. But otherwise, in terms of ego, I have ego needs but I don't need a lot of that. But I have to tell you overall, David, I feel that I really balance life in that respect. If those around me feel discomfort when I get some of that street "hugging" and so on and so forth, they should spend a day with a real celebrity. And they'd know that my life was a wonderfully moderate life in that respect, it really is.
John Callaway is the host of Chicago Stories, which airs on WTTW Channel 11 on Mondays at 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m.
E-mail- DavdRonald@aol.com
