As they began to move, i brought crossfire. Badly. Ung boy was hit they needed help getting him out. I helped. It doesnt take much imagination to know what i was thinking. I will give you a hand. I see this young man come younger than i, cut down. You say to yourself, this is someones son, someones brother, someones husband. When youre there, you let your and you out for second will not be able to do what you need to do. Dan rather, cbs news. Lifetimeew people in a get to see this as an observer. Inside the main pagoda. A tank is around the corner. 30 yards. Show him and tell him the best you can what it is like, what it is really like. Someone is firing on the tank. As opposed to someone imagines it is like or is telling them it is like. A lot of people believe what soldiers fear in combat is death. They do fear death, but that is not the big fear. The biggest fear is that they will somehow let their comrade down. No soldier worthy of the name will leave even a dead comrade on the field of battle and abandon him. This outfit was rained on yesterday. Rained on this morning. They will stay out here until they find the body of nunez. To be like brothers. The best friend you could ever have. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome dr. Don carlton, executive director of the Briscoe Center for American History at the university of texas at austin. [applause] dr. Carlton the Briscoe Center is delighted to sponsor this session this afternoon entitled the war and the for the and the Fourth Estate. Houses a valuable archive of papers and photographs documenting the history of the American News media, including Walter Cronkite and morley safer. The Photographic Center has produced an exhibit of documentary material selected from these and other collections relating to the aspects of the vietnam war. This exhibit is entitled. Itnam evidence of war is on display of the third floor of the lbj library. I invite all of you attending the summit to come and visit our exhibit while you are here. Those panelists are peter arnett, a Pulitzer Prize and Emmy Awardwinning correspondent who has spent nearly a lifetime covering wars and International Crises for major American News organizations. The vietnam work for the Associated Press for 13 years. From the buildup of u. S. Military advisers in the early 1960s to the fall of saigon in 1975. Arnett wrote more than 2000 news stories from vietnam for the Associated Press. He has written several books, including his autobiography live from the battlefield. In his memoir on the vietnam war called the fall of saigon. Dan rather. My friend dan rather has been a fixture in broadcast news for over six decades, during which he has won every major journalism award. Dan has interviewed every president since eisenhower. And hes covered almost every important dateline of the last 60 years. He served as the anchor of the cbs evening news. He is founder, president and ceo of news and guts, an independent Production Company specializing in nonfiction content. Andrew sherry,s Vice President of communications at the knight foundation, the leader of media innovation. As journalist, sherry was based in hong kong and paris, first for afp news agency, and then dow jones, where he became a regional editor of the far Eastern Economic review. One of his most memorable assignments included covering the opening of the vietnam. Please join me in welcoming our panel today. [applause] thanks for that intro. It is great to be here. We are fortunate to be here with two reporters whose long and storied careers personified the healthy tension between a free press and government. Just a word on format. I want to spend the first half of the panel asking questions to two of them so we can bring out the range of their insights, we can go from experiences in vietnam to the evolution of the relationship between the press and military. To look forward at that defragmentation of the media at that fragmentation of the media landscape and what its implications are. Peter, you were in vietnam since 1962, before the u. S. Military buildup. 1975o not leave until after the fall of saigon. Peter yeah, basically. Host why dont you set the scene for us . Peter i was here through the conference all yesterday and heard through Henry Kissingers presentation. Overnight i made a few notes. [laughter] that is a long time ago. I think its clear from the that thecussions important policies of president kennedy involving vietnam were carefully concealed from the American Public. To maintain what i call the dissension, the media policies of all 3 president s attempted heavyhanded news manipulation and intimidation of reporters in the field as their superiors back on. The objective was to proceed with actions in the economic that in vietnam, that is publicly debated, word meet wrist would meet resistance at home. Our leaders endeavored to compel a news industry to bend to the whims of policymakers making questionable judgments on issues important to the American Public. Judgments often made far from the battlefields. An earlier significant american wars, the government took upon itself to burden the deciding what news was fit to print, what information gathered by reporters might harm security and military operations, or what my cannot, to keep on message in terms in terms of achieving the overall objectives and keeping the support of the public at large. But not for the war in vietnam. An enterprise deemed too sensitive politically le tme say that again. The war in vietnam, an enterprise deemed too sensitive to justify censorship. From the beginning, as early as june 1962, when i arrived in the saigon, there were the beginnings of the credibility gap plaguing media and military relations that only worsened as the years went by. In the course of our discussions this afternoon, i know we will track this evolved situation that continues to plague American Media relations. These initialude remarks by quoting a letter sent to president candidate on june president kennedy on june, 1963 by the president of the American Society of newspapers, then editor of the hartford current, which he refers to an incident during a buddhist protest in saigon. Was beaten up by Plainclothes Police and later arrested with my a. P. Colleague and held on assault charges. His letter in part said in recent weeks, as you are aware, mr. President , there have been charges that the enemies secret police that vietnamese secret smash, knockdown and reporters camera. It is not certain that all possible efforts are being to meet further deliberate obstacles to free reporting. Whatever the difficulties, we urge you to bear in mind the need for the American People to have the fullest possible factual information from south vietnam, no matter what anyone may think is right or wrong about the situation there. This letter not only represented the full support of the Mainstream Media, but open reporting vietnam at that time. It remains the views of editors and tv producers at home who supported the work of journalists in the field for the entirety of the war. Hope people in the audience have been taking notes as well because we will open it up for comments at the end. Dan, you went back and forth between vietnam and new york. Im interested in hearing, how different was it the first time you arrived . What type of reception did you get for your reporting, and how much did your Network Support you in telling what you felt was the complete story . 1965, it hader been the better part of a year. When i went to vietnam it was clear to me, and it remained clear throughout the time i was there, that i had the complete unmitigated support of not just cbs news as a division of cbs, inc. , but the full support of the corporate entity theat owned cbs news. There never was any question whatsoever about having support of the breast back home. Of the brass back home. That was a long cbs news tradition. There wasnt a doubt about it. When it watched the first time, i was unprepared to cover the war. Perhaps could be said of most correspondence. I had covered war before. War in theakistan summer of 1965. But it was the first time i had been privileged to Cover American men and women. At the time it was mostly men in combat. To say i was unprepared was understated. I remember the first time, three days after i arrived. I quickly went north and covered an operation near donkey that was the first time i had seen in person by witness to war. Real blood, real screams of the wounded, moans of the dying. When i saw the first wounded american that i had ever seen in combat, i first threw up, and then i wept. Host what was the impact that your reporting was having back in the United States . Peter, you were writing for the Associated Press. What kind of feedback were you getting on the impact of your storytelling . Peter the first three months but i was there, in 1962, we were getting messages from a washington bureau, saying how come their coverage of washington of the white house was 180 degrees different than ours on that was happening in vietnam . Possibly those of us in vietnam were not concerned to much about our reporting buddies in washington. We were really concerned about what we were seeing in the field. When i was assigned to vietnam, the ap president said, peter, report the truth, report what you see. Well support you all the way. , davidarrived, of course halberstam came in for the new york times. Malcolm brown was a great photographer. All of us were reporting what we were fighting. What were we finding . American advisers would come to saigon, would come to the field, who would start complaining about the reluctance of the south vietnamese military to listen to their advice. There was an incident in the first few days of 1963 where several American Helicopters were shot down. Americans were killed on the ground. The helicopter pilots called us to tell us about it. The reuters guy flew in on a helicopter. Miles south of saigon with a texan that happens to be working for the stars and stripes at the time. We got our information from the americans on the ground. The information we were getting thetically was that american role in vietnam wasnt working. In december, 1962, the speaker of the senate, mike mansfield, visited vietnam with a team. He asked to meet us at the caravelle hotel. We thought he wanted us to brief him. He brief us on what he thought he felt was the negatives about the information he had picked up all week during his visit. He criticized the american embassy. He went back and briefed president kennedy on his version of the work, which was very similar to our version. This did not stop the pressure. Soon after that, president kennedy called the managing editor of the new york times. Raises an important point. You asked when i first got to vietnam. From the first moments i was in vietnam, the difference between the reality on the ground, what you bore witness to, and what was being spoken in washington all over the country was at such variance, it was a shock. The longer you were in vietnam, the more you had to say to yourself, what i am seeing is politicianshat the were saying. The weight of this gap grew. Ill give you a quick anecdote. When i came out of vietnam after my first year, three shortly i was made the White House Correspondent for cbs news. They said, perhaps you would like to come to the Briefing Room downstairs. We can give you a briefing on what is going on. I found it somewhat curious that they would give me everything of what was going on by people that had never been there, [laughter] or had only been there for a short time at any rate, this never left my mind. It underscores what peter referred to. I get to the situation room. Good and decent americans, intellectual gentlemen. They gave a everything on the battle situation. He pointed with his pointer to one particular place on the came beauty and on the cambodian border. He was describing the success of our armor there. Im saying to myself, one of two things is evident. Either hes lying through his teeth, or he is vastly misinformed. Just before i had left saigon, i had been in a very area, which is swampy. Believed you me, nobody takes armor in there. [laughter] just as an anecdote, i think that encapsulates it. I think he actually believed it. From that moment on, when i went back to vietnam, i always had that in mind. Right there was the nut of the problem, if you will. People that had been there, people like peter arnett le t me pause and say, there has never been a braver correspondent than peter. Andkind of thing that Peter Malcolm brown and others were reporting was in such variance, if you had any decency as a journalist, you would have to say ive been there, i spent almost a year there, and what i saw it does not match this briefing that im getting. If thats the briefing that the president got, then we can see how the problem grew over the years. Host so what do you think it is that made the relationship between the press and military so different in vietnam than korea or world war ii . It seems like some of the military assumed it was a problem with society or the press. They argued that the nature of the conflict was fundamentally different, so it led people to behave differently. Which do you think . Peter censorship was the difference. I was talking to wander Walter Cronkite about censorship in world war ii. He said, i did have access to the whole war. On aew over normandy glider over dday. He said, at least we can know all about it. Introducedwas not until vietnam. Felt thattalked to the Political Climate in america would not produce that kind of onerous censorship. Okay, without censorship then, we were free to go and report stories where we could find them. What is not understood is that each American Division that landed in vietnam came from a hometown. From fort bragg or fort polk or fort hood. The pineapple division from hawaii. Those soldiers wanted the folks back home to know what they were doing in vietnam. The Information Officers from these units would come to saigon and lobby for the attention of the media. Im sure dad was invited. The marines had a very Successful Operation to invite journalists. All of the units wanted our appearance. I wrote over 2000 stories while in vietnam. Many were written with these soldiers in the field. I kept getting invited back. In terms of the intended to some between the military and the media, it didnt exist in vietnam. Did you feel that . Dan no, quite the contrary. This is a strong point. You have to have the pictures. Journalist, wea had an ideal situation. I think the military thought they had an ideal situation. The military wanted you to be upfront. They wanted you to be in the middle of combat. They wanted you to film it. We could go anywhere in vietnam that we wanted to go. We were in the hitchhiking business. Most of my helicopters, my plane, once in a while, or ground convoy. As a consequence, we could report individually. From the south to everything in between. During the vietnam war, the military was eager for correspondence to see the wra as it was see the war as it was and to have that transmitted back to the states. On the question of censorship, i agree that in world war ii and the korean war, it was censorship. Most censorship during the vietnam war. I think the American People deserve much better by the circumstances in vietnam than th ey ever had been. But that is my own opinion. Here is the point its frequently said what led to inctions on the press the first gulf war, the militarys whole mindset had changed. They did not want correspondence to see combat. They successfully prevented coverage of what the average soldier is going through. They did not want the public to see. It was a sea change, to use the cliche. The military thought they had learned a lesson. Their lesson was, keep the press out. Dont let the press see what the work is. What the war is. Thing the, one administration did not want you to see was the effects of war on civilians. Anybody that has seen war no this truth. War is idiotic. Its ghastly, its savage for everybody involved. But those that suffer the most are women, children, and old people. The military never wanted you to see the civilian casualties. They never wanted to emphasize that. , g forward to world war i host a couple points quickly to make. Morley safer did a piece in 1965 that was shown on cbs. President johnson watched it and picked up the phone and the early hours of the morning and called the president of cbs. He called dr. Frank stanton in corporate. Frank, your boy this morning shat on the flag because of the nature of this report. Ill just give you a few other things. The Johnson Administration people are trying to limit the coverage. The a. P. Was a prime target has beenports that dan talking about, riot gas experiments in the military operations, equipment failures, weapons shortages. It so angered washington that president johnson ordered the fbi at one point to rife through my life, looking for something to silence me. A. P. Headquarters was aware of the generalities of the criticism, but only much later did we learn the extent of white house unhappiness. The press secretary revealed memo that the coverage of cbs correspondent morley safer and me, peter ar and, was irresponsible procedures and prejudiced, and because we were foreignborn, we did not have the best american interests at heart. [laughter] we promised to tighten things up, and the president scrolled good across the message. Some of my schoolmates were in the kiwi forces in vietnam, in combat along u. S. Soldier