One of the best pieces of writing advice I ever heard was "Let your first draft be bad." It meant simply to relax and get a first draft done, and tied into that writer's second bit of advice: "There is no good writing; there is only good rewriting." I know many writers who use that advice well, which is to say, readers don't see their first drafts. They get a first draft done, then fix its inevitable problems before submitting it to an editor.
But as former Washington Post publisher Phil Graham said, "Journalism is the first draft of history," and that first draft does get out, with mistakes that often outlive their corrections. An evening in Havana and an afternoon in Dallas are good examples.
Still, the stars wait for no one, so Kossascopes get only a first draft. That's the Janitor Professor of Astrology's excuse, and he's sticking to it, whatever his mistakes.
More below the fold....
Bad First Drafts
If Phil Graham is right and "Journalism is the first draft of history," it's a first draft that comes riddled with errors. Most are inevitable; it's difficult to sift fact from fiction in early reports, especially when reporters', witnesses', and official accounts differ widely. Next add newsroom or expert speculation on those early reports, needed or at least demanded to fill space or time, with the inherent unreliability plaguing any speculation. Garnish with emotional appeal, sometimes well-intentioned and sometimes not, and you have a recipe for mistakes.
That's not an indictment of journalism. Some of those conflicting reports will turn out to be facts, and some of the speculation will match up with the results of in-depth investigations later. Sometimes even when the story is wildly wrong, the emotional appeals are still worthwhile. Much of what we heard in the 48 hours after Hurricane Katrina's landfall was false, but appeals for donations to relief agencies were still well-founded. Like any first draft, the better story is usually in there somewhere.
But so are the mistakes, and their consequences can be profound. Take a February evening in Havana, for example.
February 15, 1898 - Havana, Cuba
Three weeks after her dispatch to Havana amidst rising civic unrest, an explosion tore through the U.S.S. Maine at 9.40pm. Most of the crew were asleep or resting in their quarters, enlisted men forward and officers aft, when the forward powder magazines ignited. The explosion destroyed the forward third of the ship and killed 266 of the crew almost immediately; eight more died later of their injuries.
The earliest news reports contained most of the facts that have held up in later inquiries. But those early reports also contained speculation that has never been proved. The mainstream press speculated that the Maine's sinking was caused by the detonation of a Spanish mine. A minority in the U.S. press, and more in Spain and Cuba, speculated it was a false-flag incident. Some cautious reporters even speculated that the explosion was a tragic accident, which modern examinations suggest was more likely.
Three official inquiries, the latest in 1976, have not conclusively resolved the question of what triggered the explosion. But "Remember the Maine/To hell with Spain!" was the rallying cry and public casus belli for the Spanish-American War that spring and summer, and we still live some of that war's consequences over a century later.
As a child in the 1960s, I learned "Remember the Maine" - though not the second half of the rhyme - in school. Right or wrong, history's first draft has endured. Just as it has for an afternoon in Dallas.
November 22, 1963 - Dallas, Texas
Perhaps no murder in history has been studied more than that of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. But the History Channel recently aired a new documentary that, for me at least, shed a very different light on that tragic day, JFK: 3 Shots that Changed America. The program is most notable for what is absent: any modern commentary on the events. Instead, the producers pieced together contemporary news accounts of the days preceding and immediately following the assassination, and let the story be told entirely through the eyes of reporting and newsroom commentary at that time.
What I found remarkable is that, again, almost everything we know or think we know about the JFK assassination emerged in the first 48 hours of news coverage. From eyewitness testimony and speculation that it was the work of a lone gunman to conspiracy theories involving Cuba, Russia, the Mafia, right-wing fanatics, or our own government, all were raised in the earliest reporting. A well known journalist of the time - I recognized his face in the program but can't place his name - less than two hours of the shooting spoke of his hope that it would turn out to be a crazy, lone assassin, because the alternative "might tear our nation apart." The 'single bullet theory' was not created by young Arlen Specter during the Warren Commission inquiry, but was first offered the day after the shooting ... by the surgeon who treated Texas Governor John Connally.
Recent forensic examinations have all but closed the case. An Australian documentary team, using full-size reconstructions and laser ballistic tracking, developed compelling evidence that the two shots that struck President Kennedy and Governor Connally came from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building. Whether Lee Harvey Oswald pulled the trigger may never be known, but there is no longer serious scientific dispute as to the sniper's location. Ironically, much of the better information we have now owes to the Oliver Stone's highly speculative film JFK. Despite its many mistakes, the film spurred Congress to release reams of documents that had been sealed, and those documents clarified facts that had been misinterpreted for decades.
Yet a 2003 ABC News poll showed 70% of Americans still believed there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. The confused and contradictory "first draft of history," as told in the first 48 hours after the shooting, still endures.
Tomorrow we'll explore more how we as progressives should be more willing to participate in shaping a better "first draft of history."
+++++
In the meantime, your Kossascope will soon be history ... or not....
Scorpio - It's finally your turn at the top of the heap, but scents usually rise from heaps.
Sagittarius - Everyone you meet forms a first impression of you. Must be a gift or something.
Capricorn - Your first drafts of experience are wild and crazy. So are your rewrites.
Aquarius - You make good first impressions. Then people get to know you better.
Pisces - The plural of speculate is not speculum. Sorry.
Aries - You sift through facts to find reasons. But the reasons are clumpy.
Taurus - Your patient, cautious analysis ... oh wait, that's someone else.
Gemini - Jumping to conclusions does not burn off the calories in that pie.
Cancer - You needn't worry about first impressions. No one pays attention.
Leo - You make indelible first impressions. Some of them are even good.
Virgo - A first draft of an outline is not, quite, an outline of a first draft.
Libra - You get a whole year to work on your next first draft. Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite.
+++++
Happy Friday!