Transcripts For CSPAN2 Book TV 20150124 : vimarsana.com

Exoplanet. Exoplanet, you ask . Its an extra solar planet resolving around a sunlike star buttoned the solar system beyond earth reside solar system. And i had that in there as a potential sixth chapter because during 1995, the first confirmed discovery of an exoplanet in the con sell addition of constellation of pegasus was confirmed and it, i thought was a small but important steppingstone in the search for alien life, and now thousands of exoplanets have been discovered many by the space telescope that has i think broke down the year before last but nonetheless discovered and identified many other potential prospective exoplanets revolving around sun can like stars and some revolve around stars that are kind of like the sun and kind of at a distance as earth is from its sun. So are these planets that have punned not exist in what astronomers call the goldilocks zone. Not too hot, not too cold and might be candidates for finding life outside of earth, and that would be one hell of a big story. That would be a watershed moment for sure. But the thinking was that it was maybe not all that welldeveloped, needing a full chapter to discuss. So i had that discussion and its found in the introduction of the book rather than a sixth chapter. The observation about the react to the o. J. Verdict, it was pretty striking. And did seem to reflect racial divisions in america and a lot of people were remarking about that. A lot of newman commentators remarking, saying this shows we live in two societies and so forth. But the same time, very interesting and often overlooked. At the same time in 1995 late summer early fall, colin powell was being identified and seen as a prospective president ial candidate in 1996. On the republican ticket. And clinton was really preoccupied by the prospective candidacy of colin powell and powell was on the book tour circuit, out with a memoir that was wellreceived and was attracting huge crowds and lots of people were lining up to get Colin Powells book, get it autographed and so forth. This is exactly at the same time as the o. J. Simpson trial was reaching its culmination in los angeles, so its often overlooked can the popularity of colin powell and how to square his popularity with the reactions to the simpson verdict and they are both out there. Books vying for attention at the same time but moet people did focus on the reaction to the simpson verdicts. Host were nearly at our time but im happy to take questions. One right there . Go ahead. I just wanted your book points out how the media got it wrong on the internet and the oklahoma bombing and your dim view of the modern media exist in the era of buzz feed guest im sorry. Do you still have a dim view of the modern media today . Host a dim view of the modern media. Guest very interesting questions in some respects thats the case and remains. Some of the flaws that we saw with the news media in 1995, the media performance remain flaws in media performance to this day. Not on the same exact issues, of course but one real point of comparison and commonality is the reaction to the Oklahoma City bombing and the Quick Response of the u. S. News media to print and broadcast to identify suspected middle east terrorism, pretty pointedly identifying this act as one of middle east terrorism. And it was a knee jerk almost reaction by in the news media to the Oklahoma City bombing, and we see this kind of Quick Reaction inaccurate reaction in other calamities, other evented of more recent vintage the shoot little at newtown connecticut are an example how the news media in the first hours after this event could get it sadly wrong, and i think some of the themes the subtexts, if you will about the media in 1995 the book is not about the media but nonetheless it is a subset and we see some recurrent of these themes and issues and problems in the media then and now. Very good question. Go ahead. Thank you. I also want to applaud you on choosing this particular year as so watershed year. Guest thank you. My question was that was actually the year i first came to d. C. As a news intern with the Washington Center for politics and journalism, and i remember some of my colleagues asserted the o. J. Trial actually distracted several people from covering policy and other important things that were happening at that moment. Do you feel that is true . Guest i dont believe that it was a zero sum game. Although the nut Media Attention was intense, it was unrelenting and it was inescapable and so i could see how news budgets as they were, very flusher back in 1995 than today but i can see how some of that was diverted to covering the o. J. Trial, and then the preliminaries, too. The six months before 1995 began, the six months after the killings, and then the start of the nile january trial in january 1995 were tense time inside which the National Inquirer in late 1994 was breaking all kinds of developments related to the simpson case and the New York Times was actually following and giving credit to the National Inquirer for some of it breaking stories the simpson case and loot theres a lot of controversy about the time and giving credit for giving credit to the National Inquirer so the case tipped the hierarchy of american journalism right overright on its head. So im sure that was one of many effects. There was a newspaper in georgia, i believe a small newspaper, that said, you know, were going to been all news about o. J. Simpson. This is during the trial. So announced it would stop reporting about the simpson case. That was another dramatic and extreme reaction to the case. But one of many. The resources deployed to los angeles to cover the trial and its runup were enormous. So its possible but it didnt detect any kind of shift in coverage that led to a distortion in how the news media were covering things. There will other big events of 1995. Oklahoma city bombing. For once it knocked it was the event that knocked o. J. Off the front page. Thank you. Guest thank you. Host a question. Thank you. You spent a lot of time researching 1995. Im wondering, in 20 years from now, what year will we look back recently and think that was a watershed year much like 1995. Guest i think 1995 still i think well have a second edition more recently. Guest really good question. Obviously as john mentioned at the outset, 2001 will be remembered and continues to be remembered as a watershed year in many ways. What other possible years would there be . 2012 . 2008 . Was the election of barack obama. That might be seen at a watershed moment. It takes a fair amount of what historians call critical distance to begin to appraise and analyze and assess the significance of a particular 12month period, which i grant is somewhat arbitrary to begin with. Not everything in 1995 is as important, and that year began in 1995. The simpson case is an example of that. We do need some critical distance. We need the passage of time, perhaps 20 years to be able to say, yeah that was a decisive moment but there are moments which we know right away that going to be memorable, and 2001 probably is one of those. 2008 probably is another. I agree. Thank you. Host time for one last question. I want to remind folks that joe will be signing copies of his book right outside the studio. If you have follow you questions hell be happy to answer them. Hello professor. You talked about critical distance changing the way we look at hoyt and you mention Monica Lewinski hat written a saint fair article. Do you think what she wrote changed the narrative of the clintonlewinski affair. Guest it might. Im not sure that piece youre referring to in vanity fair in may but a lot of to the readers of the article came airplane thinking Monica Lewinski is a fairly bright person, and she was really tarred as someone who was not very bright back during the scandal of the late 1990s, and i think some readers would come away thinking this is a perceptive and thoughtful and informed young woman and new age woman, and the article was she is is in her early 40s now. Host careful. Guest i know. Treading on some really seems well anyway its pretty clear that she has she wrote that article very well. Im told without a ghost writer or anything. Host i have one last question. Any major lessons to be learned from 1995 . Any lasting lessons. Guest i think there are many. The importance of understanding how dynamic history is and how important recent history can be. A lot of people who engage in Historical Research tend to think, well, the recent past is one that we should avoid because we dont have that amount of critical distance and we dont have enough archival information, not enough insight and i think thats probably not the case. If anything people working in recent history, the 1990s almost overwhelmed with the amount of information that is available. Also i think its time in i make this call towards the close of the book that its time for a reappraisal of the 1990s. Some people think of 1990s as a holiday from history. Charles krauthammer used the term many times mostly to criticize bill clinton and his presidency bit wasnt the holiday from history. It really is was far more significant than that. So i think time has come to take a look at the 1990s, and another school of think about the 90s great time of prosperity, and mostly peace, and we had things were really clicking back then. Thats a little distorted as well. There were dents in the american armor in the 1990s as well so a critical reappraisal of the 1990s is in order and in 1995 might be the spur for that kind of reassessment. Host the book is 995 the year the future began. I want to thank joe campbell for joining today on inside media. [applause] thank you for inviting me here today. Good evening. I am pleased and honored to be able to present to you tonight speaker. A longtime friend and one of the Remarkable Group of people that i 1st met about 30 years ago as a young graduate student at the university of arizona which is the parttime home of the jazz with astronomers of the vatican observatory