Several years ago when I commemorated the passing of Steve Jobs and his career that helped change the world, I contemplated my grandmother's life and many of the changes she experienced during the first nine decades of the twentieth century.
I focused on the earth-shattering innovations she witnessed, perhaps the most obvious being the fact that she was alive when the Wright Brothers made their first flight in 1903, but wouldn't have known about it for at least four years when mention of it finally was published in the newspapers. Sixty years later, she was still very much alive when we watched together as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the moon, live on TV.
Now consider this: when my grandmother was born, much of the world was still under the dominion of a handful of imperial powers. In the year of her birth, Spain and Great Britain could both legitimately claim the sun never set upon their empires. It just so happened in that very year, 1898, Spain would lose its claim as the last remnants of its once vast empire, the Philippines and Cuba would be lost to them forever. 1898 continues to be a year of infamy to many Spaniards. In fact, "well it's not so bad, at least you didn't lose Cuba" is still a popular message of consolation in Spain.
After two world wars, the two-thousand-year-old world order of imperial domination would come to an end and national self-determination, or at least the desire for it, would take its place. We have a globe at home that was manufactured when my grandmother was in her forties. The names of regions printed on that globe, unrecognizable to those today with little concept of history attest to that fact, as does the omission of familiar place names such as Nigeria, Kenya, Pakistan, Iraq, Russia, and of course, Israel.
I think it's fair to say the world my grandmother left in the 1980s was unrecognizable from the world she entered in the 1898.
The world didn't change as drastically for me, although things are considerably different since I came on the scene in 1958.
I was reminded of this after watching a program called "Thank You Mr. President" which features excerpts from some of the sixty-five presidential news conferences conducted during the John F. Kennedy administration.
That number alone attests to the changing times as Kennedy, in his nearly three years as president, participated in an average of 22.9 news conferences per year while the current president Joe Biden's number is less than half that, 11.3. Only Richard Nixon's and Ronald Reagan's number of annual press conferences, 7 and 5.8 respectively are lower for all the presidents since Calvin Coolidge.
The "modern" news conference where a president meets in a formal setting with members of the press which is broadcast to the public live on television, began during the administration of Kennedy's predecessor, Dwight D. Eisenhower. But I think it's fair to say that Kennedy raised the event to an art form with his charm and quick wit, his wealth of historic and cultural knowledge, and his ability to think on his feet.
However, Kennedy's job was made easier compared to that of his successors by the tacit limits placed upon the reporters. There is no question that the public's attitude toward the office of President of the United States, and especially to the person who holds that job has changed drastically in the past sixty years. Like all presidents, JFK had his detractors, but in his time, there was enough respect for the office to mean that certain questions were off limits.
Today, after his tragic demise, Kennedy in some circles is best remembered for the many indiscretions in his personal life. These were not unknown by members of the press during his presidency, but publicly disclosing them would have meant professional suicide as the public did not have the voracious appetite we have today for salacious information on the private lives of public figures. More importantly, an indiscreet journalist would lose his or her most valuable asset, access to the president.
That was no longer the case some thirty years later when at a presidential news conference, a CNN reporter asked then President George H.W. Bush flat out if he ever had an extramarital affair. By then, after the public disillusionment and cynicism surrounding the government's handling of the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair and numerous other issues, nothing was considered off limits anymore. Bush's indignant response to the question only fueled suspicions which may have played a part in his losing re-election in 1992 to Bill Clinton, himself no stranger to personal indiscretions.
Attitudes about the office of POTUS barely scratch the surface of the differences between then and now as illustrated by the Kennedy news conferences.
As one of the first prominent women journalists on the national scene including her stint as a World War II correspondent, May Craig was a true pioneer in the struggle for equal rights for women. You can read about Miss Craig here:
In a time when the cause for women's rights was a back burner issue at best, Craig often found herself at odds with the most powerful men in the country including presidents, who while respecting her credentials, did their best to downplay her concerns.
If you go to YouTube and type in "the wit of JFK", you will find dozens of videos featuring humorous responses from the 35th president during his 65 news conferences. Inevitably in each video there will be at least one appearance by May Craig addressing her concerns about women's issues, among others in the midst of a barrage of questions from male reporters about other "pressing" issues of the day such as nuclear weapons, the economy, the Cold War, segregation and Civil Rights.
Here's one of Miss Craig's questions verbatim, one that could easily be asked today:
The platform of the Democratic Party in which you ran promised to work for equal rights for women including equal pay to wipe out job opportunity discriminations. Now, you have made efforts on behalf of others, what have you done for the women according to the promises of the platform?
To which the president responded without missing a beat:
"Well, I'm sure we haven't done enough and uh..."
That drew a roar of laughter from the predominantly male press corps. When the guffaws subsided, Kennedy assured Miss Craig that he was completely in favor of equal pay for equal work and that we ought to do better, adding sardonically: "..."and I'm glad you reminded me of it Miss Craig."
Which drew another round of laughter.
Imagine a male politician today with the exception of one, so blithely dismissing the rights of one half of the population.
As I said, times have changed, and not all for the worse.
Public officials in a democracy should be held accountable and taken to task by a vigilant press asking at times, difficult questions.
Up to a point that is.
No comments:
Post a Comment