The marketing team behind Good Night, and Good Luck (2005), a biopic of Edward R. Murrow set largely amid the public duel between the broadcast pioneer and the mildly outspoken anti-communist Senator Joseph McCarthy, decided to go with a poignant, anachronistically sincere Murrow quotation for its movie posters: “We will not walk in fear of one another.” Not bad, but if I had written the tagline, it would have gone something like, “If you think what passes for TV news these days sucks, you’ll love this movie.”
Good Night did fine without me, earning six Oscar nominations and a healthy take at the box office. But now that Clooney’s sophomore directorial outing has aged half a decade, I’ll take a late-breaking opportunity to promote it: TV news in 2011 is largely comprised of the flash and pandering hated by one of its most revered patrons, and that’s why Good Night, and Good Luck matters. In fact, it’s obvious throughout the film that the state of modern television news was a major motivator behind telling Murrow’s story in the first place.
The film is shot in black and white amid cigarette smoke and flannel suits, but it’s a unique kind of period piece: one that eschews nostalgia for the Great Man and his bygone era. Instead, Clooney takes the more ambitious route, working on one level to celebrate Murrow’s career while working on another to evoke the threats that would eventually consume the then-nascent medium of TV journalism, leaving us with the infotainment morass we’re stuck in today.
The film begins with Murrow, played with quiet gravitas by David Strathairn, warning colleagues at an industry convention that they were well on the path to irrelevance. The scene is in fact a reenactment of a famous speech that Murrow gave at the Radio and Television News Directors Association convention in 1958, and the book that was put out as a companion to “Good Night” summarized the speech well, calling it Murrow’s description of “the untenable position of the journalist broadcasting on instruments whose development had been shaped by—and would continue to grow as—an impossible combination of news, show business, and advertising.”
The convention hall is packed with colleagues and industry executives, but Murrow doesn’t censor his views.
“Our history will be what we make of it. And if there are any historians about fifty or a hundred years from now, and there should be preserved the Kinescopes for one week of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or color, evidence of decadence, escapism, and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live. We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable, and complacent television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse and insulate us ”
From Murrow’s speech we jump back to the CBS newsroom in 1953, and the film’s main storyline begins. But it’s impossible to understand the full import of Murrow’s fight against McCarthy—not to mention the earnestness of his plea to his colleagues—without some knowledge of where television was as a medium in the 1950s.
As Murrow notes in his speech, there were only three television networks in 1958. His words predicted the fleshpots of cable news, but that era was still a long way off. According to research cited by media scholar Thomas Doherty, between 1949 and 1959, the number of American households that owned a television increased from one in every ten to nine in every ten. In other words, TV was a brand new genre, but one that became rapidly dominant.

What a great idea!
This film more than deserves any revived interest your superb piece might provide. And you really nailed its essence.
It may recount a familiar history in a nuanced way, but as you note, it is the quiet, agonizing atmosphere of fear and loathing, all the whispering and betrayal, that GNGL really nails.
I'd also add that it is an invaluable teaching tool in the undergrad classroom.
#1 Posted by Steve Gorelick, CJR on Fri 26 Aug 2011 at 03:36 AM
Brilliant review, of a brilliant movie. One of my top 10 of all time, and an inspiration for work I do. Some scenes in that movie give me tingles.
#2 Posted by Solomon Kleinsmith, CJR on Fri 26 Aug 2011 at 04:08 AM
Why do supposedly sophisticated people need easy heroes and villains? 'Good Night and Good Luck' is predictable entertainment-industry mythology. You would never know by the film that McCarthy had been under continous attack for a few years. TIME, run by stalwart Republican Henry Luce, had run a cover story on 'Demogogue McCarthy' in 1951. An editor in Milwaukee (which had a Socialist mayor all through the 'terror' of the McCarthy era) was conducting a 'Joe Must Go' campaign.
Murrow was a very hard-core Democrat who used his platform to pursue his party's interests - helping to establish the antipathy between the mainstream media and the Republican half of the country that exists today. He was friendly with Franklin Roosevelt, so one gets the usual distortion of context that one comes to expect from the pro-Democratic media: a country that hadn't turned a hair when FDR imprisoned 110,000 people for having Japanese ancestry just a decade before was hardly going to get its knickers in a twist over a campaign to expose some pink government officials.
#3 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Fri 26 Aug 2011 at 12:55 PM