乔治 克鲁尼作品
1935年，艾德莫罗开始了他在CBS的职业生涯,二战爆发后,..他的声音通过他的系列广播“这里是伦敦”..将英国的战事呈现在我们面前.在电视业刚刚起步时,他同我们也就是今晚大多数来宾一道,..创建了新闻纪实节目“即时观察”.他敢于挑战权贵,种族歧视，剥削移民劳工,..南非种族隔离,埃德加.胡佛（只手遮天的FBI头子）.而最为称道的,是他同参议员麦卡锡的历史性较量,同时他也是广受欢迎的节目“面对面”的主持人.今晚欢聚一堂的还有他的儿子凯西,太太珍妮特,以及所有与他共事并受之启发,训诫,教导的朋友们
In 1935, Ed Murrow began his careerwith CBS.When World WarTwo broke out his voice brought the battle of Britain home to us through his "This Is London"radio series.He started with us all many of us here tonight,when television was in its infancy,with the news documentary show"See It Now".He threw stones at giants,segregation, exploitation of migrant workers,apartheid, J. Edgar Hoover,not the least of which, his historical fight with Senator McCarthy.He is the host of our enormously popular show "Person to Person".And tonight he is here with his son, Casey,wife, Janet, and all of you who he's worked with,inspired, lectured, and taught.
这恐怕对任何人都没好处,在这篇演说结束后一些人可能会责难这个记者自毁长城,并且主管机构会因对异端，甚至危险言论给予鼓励、支持而受到非难.
不过，广播网的精细结构,广告商和赞助商都不会被动摇或改变,或许并非我的职责，可出于我的愿望试图坦白地告知你们,广播和电视业正发生着什么,如果要为我所说的负责,那么我一人来承担责任.
我们的历史将由我们来构造,在未来的50或100年史学家们将找到三大电视网已保存的的一些记录画面,他们将会发现这黑白或彩色的画面折射出我们对现实世界的堕落、逃避以及置若罔闻.
现在的我们富有，臃肿安逸并且自满我们对令人不快或烦扰的事物具有一种固有的抵触,我们的大众传媒体现了这一点,可除非我们立刻从这种自满中警醒并认识到我们的电视业大体上正被用作来分化，蛊惑消遣和隔离我们,那么当等到电视业和其投资人观众以及从业人士看到截然不同的结果,就已经太晚了
This might just do nobody any good.At the end of this discourse a few people may accuse this reporter of fouling his own comfortable nest,and your organization may be accused of having given hospitality to heretical and even dangerous ideas.
But the elaborate structure of networks advertising agencies, and sponsors will not be shaken or altered.It is my desire, if not my duty,to try to talk to you journeymen with some candor about what is happening to radio and television.
And if what I say is responsible,I alone am responsible for the saying of it.
Our history will be what we make of it.And if there are any historians about 50 or 100 years from now,and there should be preserved the kinescopes of one week of all three networks,they will there find recorded in black and white, and in 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.We have a built-in allergy to unpleasant or disturbing information.Our mass media reflect this.But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude,amuse, and insulate us,then television and those who finance it,those who look at it and those who work at it may see a totally different picture too late.
数周前，报纸上发表了一些含糊的报道关于米洛 瑞杜维奇 一位现役美国空军中尉以及，关于空军规章35-62条款,规定任何与共产分子有紧密或持续接触或者被认做是同情共产主义者的,都将被视作为危险分子.瑞杜维奇中尉被要求在8月辞职,他拒绝了.一个委员会组建并开始调查,事情的结果是,虽然对于中尉的忠诚没有任何异议.可委员会仍旧建议将中尉驱逐出空军部队.力所能及地我们开始审视瑞杜维奇中尉的案件.请看记者乔 沃什 摄影师查理 麦克的报道
这里是密歇根州的德克斯特镇,人口1500.这座矗立在安阿伯街尽头的雕塑是由...
将军昨天和你说什么了？
- 是上校，两个上校
- 那就算一个将军
他们不是很高兴
你今年要接受考核了
不是我，是你 我告诉他们我不想做这档节目的
- 你总是黄色的（胆怯的）
- 总好过赤色的
这位是妹妹 玛格丽特 瑞杜维奇 菲舍曼,她既不辩解、也不说明她的政治活动.不管他们怎么想,我觉得我的活动,或者我的政治信仰都是我自己的事情.我的孩子们是不是
也被要求公开谴责我？那他们是不是也要因为他们父亲的定性而受到评判？他们是不是要向他们的朋友解释为什么他们的父亲是危险分子？
我觉得，这肯定会是连锁反应,如果事情到了这个地步,委员会给出了第一建议:那么我看到了事关所有人，任何人无休止的连锁反应
请允许我朗读下面的稿子"因为我想非常准确地表达出我要说的话,我们已经告知美国空军,我们愿意为他们针对米洛 瑞杜维奇案件的任何评论、反驳或者勘误提供平台,我们没有资格去评判,针对他父亲、他妹妹的指控.因为我们、你们、他们、律师们还有中尉本人，都不知道那信封里面的确切内容.
那么，所有的流言、蜚语道听、途说,或者难以探知的真相会因为可靠的证人而变得真实有力吗？
我们不得而知,但我们相信孩子不应为父亲而背负偏见,即使对父亲的指控成立,且在本案中并未如此.我们同时也坚信,本案也映射出一种迫切的需要,那就是相对于目前的作为国三军,应当更加充分沟通,在努力保护国家安全的同时,保护公民个人的权利.无论这起国家与个人的事件进展到什么地步,都是我们自己的事务,不能归咎于马林科夫（苏俄政治家）,或毛泽东甚至我们的盟友.并且，对于编者自己弗瑞德 弗莱德利和我本人,这也会是一个持续议论下去的话题.
祝您晚安，好运
Good evening.
A few weeks ago there occurred a few obscure notices in the newspapers about Milo Radulovich,a lieutenant in the Air Force Reserves.And, also, something aboutAir Force regulation 35-62,which states that a man may be regarded as a security risk if he has close and continuing association with Communists or people believed to have Communist sympathies.
Lieutenant Radulovich was asked to resign in August. He declined.
A board was called and heard his case.
At the end it was recommended that he be severed from the Air Force,although it was also stated that there was no question whatever as to the Lieutenant's loyalty.
We propose to examine,in so far as we can,the case of Lieutenant Radulovich.
Our reporter, Joe Wershba,cameraman, Charlie Mack.
This is the town of Dexter, Michigan.Population 1 500.
This statue is at the end of Ann Arbor Street erected by....
What did the General tell you yesterday?
- A Colonel. There were two of them.
- That makes a General.
They weren't too pleased.
You're gonna get audited this year.
Not me, you. I told them I didn't want to do the story.
- You always were yellow.
- Better than red.
This is the sister,Margaret Radulovich Fishman.
She neither defends nor explains her political activities.
I feel that my activities,be what they may,or my political beliefs are my own private affair.Are my children going to be asked to denounce me?Are they going to be judged on what their father was labeled?Are they going to have to explain to their friends, etc why their father is a security risk?I see, absolutely,that this is a chain reaction. If the thing is let stand as it,the first recommendation was sent out by the board.I see a chain reaction that has no end to anybody,for anybody.Perhaps you will permit me to read a few sentences because I would like to say rather precisely what I mean.
We have told the Air Force that we will provide facilities for any comments, criticisms,or corrections it may wish to make as to the case of Milo Radulovich.
We are unable to judge the charges against his father or sister because neither we, nor you,nor they, nor the lawyers,northe Lieutenant, knowwhatwas contained in that manila envelope.
Was it hearsay,rumor, gossip, slander,or hard ascertainable facts that could be backed by credible witnesses?
We do not know.
We believe the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father.
Even though that iniquity be proved and in this case it was not.
But we believe too that this case illustrates the urgent need for the Armed Forces to communicate more fully than they have so far done the procedures and regulations to be followed in attempting to protect the national security and the rights of the individual at the same time.
Whatever happens in this area of the relationship between the individual and the state,we will do it ourselves,it cannot be blamed on Malenkov or Mao Tse-Tung or even our allies.
And, it seems to us, Fred Friendly and myself,that this is a subject that should be argued about endlessly.
Good night, and good luck.
由于对参议员麦卡锡的节目富有争议,我们想确切的表达我们的意思.请允许我朗读下面的手稿,"以叙述莫罗和弗莱德利想要表达的内容,如果参议员认为我们的节目歪曲了他的讲话、形象并且他要为自己申辩,我们欢迎他上我们的节目."
我们今晚的主题来自于这段引语：“如果这场针对共产分子的斗争演变成美国最大的两个政党之间的斗争,美国民众清楚其中有一个政党将被摧毁,并且在一党制的情形下,共和党（麦卡锡所属）也不会坚持很久."
我们为这段声明喝彩,并且我们认为,参议员麦卡锡也应如此.17个月前在米尔沃基他这样说道“美国大众明白这不会演变成美国最伟大的两个政党之间的斗争，如果这场针对共产分子的斗争演变成美国最伟大的两个政党之间的斗争，美国人民清楚，其中之一将被摧毁，并且共和党在一党制情形下，也不会坚持太久“
而参议员不遗余力地作为一个单人的委员会，四处寻访，访谈很多人,恐吓部分人,控告过去任职的行政官员和军队领导阴谋要,将国家颠覆成共产主义.当我听说斯蒂文斯部长通知两位军官参与到掩盖..那些提升和纵容共产分子的事情,我非常震惊.当我读他的声明时,我想到了这样的话语“到底是何种肉喂给了我们的恺撒？”（莎士比亚 《恺撒传》）
问题是：..民权联盟有没有为你找律师？
- 他们确实为我找律师
- 你回答是？
是的
你认为这本书
造成了客观的损害吗？还有它的出版以及书中所表达的观点？
那本书的销量非常有限,很不成功.至于那本书的影响,你可以去问出版商,你会明白那是他所出版的最差劲的书.他还是为之感到遗憾,同样我也是.那么，我看倒是对美国大众民智的恭维,我这么说里德 哈里斯听证会显示出参议员（麦卡锡）的一个手段,两次他说道“美国民权联盟被列作是颠覆分子组织”,然而司法部并未，且从未.将民盟列作是颠覆组织FBI也没有,及任何其他政府机构都未如此.并且美国民权联盟手中握有他们的文件,也就是杜鲁门总统艾森豪威尔总统，麦克阿瑟将军的褒奖令.
早前，参议员问道，“到底是何种肉喂给了我们的恺撒”？如果他在莎士比亚的《恺撒传》里往上看三行,他便会找到这句台词总之不会不相称“亲爱的布鲁图斯（行刺恺撒者），这过错并非在于星辰，而是在于我们自己”.任何熟悉我们这个国家历史的人.都不能否认国会委员会的重要性,在立法之前进行调查是必要的,可调查与迫害之间的界线也是分明的.而这位来自威斯康星的下级参议员（麦卡锡）却再三地越过这条界线.
我们不可以将反对的声音视作背叛,我们必须时刻牢记,指控并不等于证据并且定罪必须基于铁证和适当的法律程序,我们不会从一类恐怖步入另一类如果仔细探究我们的历史和原则,并且铭记我们并非天生畏惧,畏惧写作、团结、说话和捍卫暂时不受肯定的事业,我们便不会被恐惧所驱使进一个无理性的时代.对于任何反对参议员麦卡锡或者赞同他的人而言,现在都不该保持沉默.我们或许可以否定我们的传统和历史,可终究逃脱不了这一切后果带来的责任.确实如我们所做的那样,无论在哪里,我们都将自己看作是自由的捍卫者.可我们不能在国外捍卫自由,却在自己的家园里弃之于不顾
这位来自威斯康星下级参议员的所作所为已经引起我们盟友的警觉和不安,且让我们的敌人感到快意.这是谁的错？不全是他的错.他并没有制造这恐怖的局势,他只不过是借机利用,且相当成功而已.卡西乌斯（刺杀恺撒者）是对的“亲爱的布鲁图斯，这过错并非在于星辰，而是在于我们自己”.
祝您晚安，好运
Because a report on Senator McCarthy is by definition controversial,we want to say exactly what we mean to say and request your permissionto read from a script whatever remarks Murrow and Friendly may make.
If the Senator feels that we have done violence to his words or pictures and desires to answer himself,an opportunity will be afforded him on this program.Our working thesis tonight is this quotation:.."If this fight against Communism has made a fight between America's two great political parties,theAmerican people know that one of these parties will be destroyed and the Republic cannot endure very long as a one-party system."
We applaud that statement and we think Senator McCarthy ought to.He said it 17 months ago in Milwaukee.TheAmerican people realize that this cannot be made a fight between America's two great political parties.
If this fight against Communism is made a fight againstAmerica's two great political parties,theAmerican people know that one
of those parties will be destroyed and the Republic can't endure very long as a one-party system.On one thing the Senator has been consistent.
Often operating as a one-man committee, he has traveled far,interviewed many,terrorized some,accused civilian and military leaders of the past administration of a great conspiracy to turn over the country to Communism.I was extremely shocked when I heard that Secretary Stevens told 2Army officers that they had to take part in the cover up of those who promoted
and coddled Communists.
As I read his statement, I thought of that quotation,"On what meat doth this our Caesar feed?".The questions is:did the Civil Liberties Union supply you with an attorney?
- They did supply an attorney.
- The answer is yes?
The answer is yes.
Do you think this book did considerable harm?
Its publication,by an expression of the views contained in it?
The sale of that book was so abysmally small,it was so unsuccessful,that the question of its influence you can go back to the publisher,you'll see it was one of the most unsuccessful books he ever put out.He's still sorry about it,just as I am.
Well, I thinkthat's a compliment toAmerican intelligence.I'll say that.The Reed Harris hearing demonstrates one of the Senator's techniques.
Twice he said,"The American Civil Liberties Union was listed as a subversive front."The Attorney General's list does not and never has listed theACLU as subversive,nor does the FBI,or any other federal government agency.And the American Civil Liberties Union holds in its files letters of commendation from President Truman,President Eisenhower,and General MacArthur.
Earlier, the Senator asked, "Upon what meat does this our Caesar feed?".Had he looked three lines earlier in Shakespeare's "Caesar"he would have found this line,which is not altogether inappropriate."The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves."
No one familiar with the history of this country can deny that Congressional committees are useful.It is necessary to investigate
before legislating,but the line between investigating and persecuting is a very fine one and the junior Senator from Wisconsin
has stepped over it repeatedly.We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.
We will not walk in fear,one of another.We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason if we dig deep in our history and doctrine,and remember that we are not descended from fearful men,not from men who feared to write,to associate, to speak,and to defend the causesthat were for the moment unpopular.
This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy's methods to keep silent,or for those who approve.We can deny our heritage and our history,but we cannot escape responsibility for the results.We proclaim ourselves,indeed as we are,the defenders of freedom wherever it continues to exist in the world,but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.
The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad and given considerable comfort to our enemies.And whose fault is that?Not really his.He didn't create this situation of fear,he merely exploited it,and rather successfully.
Cassius was right."The fault, dear Brutus, is notin our stars, but in ourselves."
Good night, and good luck.
爱德华.R.莫罗关于参议员约瑟夫.R.麦卡锡的电视节目令人激动，并是对此人此事挑战性的审视.这是具有高度责任感和勇气的新闻工作者的体现,在饱受胆怯和踯躅困扰的电视业.这期节目堪比具有公民启迪作用的里程碑,这期节目对于那些希望参议员的手段和效果所激起的事件不了了之并漠不关心的人来讲,不啻于一种控诉.这是莫罗先生和电视业的伟大的胜利
Edward R. Murrow's television program on Senator Joseph R. McCarthy was an exciting and provocative examination of the man and his methods.It was crusading journalism of high responsibility and courage.For TV so often plagued by timidity and hesitation,the program was a milestone that reflected enlightened citizenship.The program was no less an indictment of those who wish the problems posed by the Senator's tactics and theatrics would just go away and leave them alone.That was Mr. Murrow's and television's triumph.
上周，参议员麦卡锡参与到我们的节目以纠正他以为我们在3月9日的节目中可能出现过的一些错漏.由于对我们的节目,他没有举出任何证明因此我们的结论是,他没有找出任何错误.再一次地，他证明了任何揭露他，反对他对宪法赋予的人权进行蔑视和践踏的人士不是共产分子就是亲共分子.
我完全料想到了他的反应,参议员并将这位记者的名字,同一长串他已经指责过的共产主义个人和组织联系在一起.他的意图很简单,任何指责或者反对参议员麦卡锡议案的人肯定就是共产分子.若那是真实的,那美国的共产分子真是不计其数了.
其次，让我们来简要分析一下参议员的指控.他声称，可从未证明,我一直是世界产业工盟的成员,这是错误的.我从未加入过IWW,也从未申请加入过.参议员指责哈罗德 拉斯基教授,一位英国学者和政治家题献一本书给我过.这是真实的,他去世了,他是社会主义者，可我不是.他是一位谦逊有礼且从不会将自己的政治信仰作为交流和友好的前提而强加给别人的绅士.我并不赞同他的政治主张.拉斯基，正如他在他的序言里面写道的"并非出于政见相同
而是因为对我在战时广播贡献的高度赞扬"而将作品题献给我.这在致辞上可以读到.
20年来我始终坚信成熟理性的美国人,在任何地方与共产主义者的碰撞和交流中,都不会被污染或同化.我相信我们的信仰,我们的信念,我们的决心同他们（共产主义者）一样坚定.且不论是军事上还是思想上，我们都可以与他们竞争.我为CBS工作已经超过19个年头了,不论是作为一个正直有责任感的新闻工作者，还是一个忠诚的美国公民,CBS对此从不感到怀疑.至于共产主义的危险或恐怖,我不需要一个来自威斯康星州下级参议员的说教.探究过我的良心与我的经历,我不确定自己是否一直是正确或明智的,但我始终勤勉努力地探求真相,并报道真相.即便，在这个节目制作之前,我已经被事先劝告过,我将会引起参议员麦卡锡的注意.
希望我们下周的节目能专注到更重要的时事中去.
祝您晚安，好运
Last week, Senator McCarthy appeared on this program to correct any errors he might have thought we made in our report of March 9th.
Since he made no reference to any statements of fact that we made,we must conclude that he found no errors of fact.He proved again that anyone who exposes him,anyone who doesn't share his disregard for decency and human dignity and the rights guaranteed by the Constitution must be either a Communist or a fellow traveler.
I fully expected this treatment.The Senator added this reporter's name to a long list of individuals and institutions he has accused of serving the Communist cause.Anyone who criticizes or opposes Senator McCarthy's methods must be a Communist.
And if that be true, there are an awful lot of Communists in the USA.
For the record, let's consider briefly some of the Senator's charges.He claimed, but offered no proof,that I had been a member of the Industrial Workers of the World.That is false.I was never a member of the IWW,never applied for membership.
The Senator chargedthat Professor Harold Laski,a British scholar and politician,dedicated a book to me.That's true.He is dead.He was a socialist, I am not.He was a civilized individual who did not insist upon agreement with his political principles as a pre-condition for conversation or friendship.I do not agree with his political ideas.Laski, as he makes clear in the introduction,dedicated the book to me,not because of political agreement,but because he held my wartime broadcast from London in high regard.And the dedication so reads.
I believed 20 years ago and I believe today that mature Americans can engage in conversation and controversy,the clash of ideas, with Communists anywhere in the world without becoming contaminated or converted.I believe that our faith,our conviction,our determination are stronger than theirs and that we can successfully compete,not only in the area of bombs,but in the area of ideas.
I have worked with CBS for more than 19 years.The company has subscribed fully to my integrity and responsibility as a broadcaster and as a loyal American.I require no lectures from the junior Senator from Wisconsin as to the dangers or terrors of Communism.
Having searched my conscience and my files,I cannot contend that I have always been right or wise,but I have attempted to pursue the truth with diligence and to report it,even though, as in this case,I had been warned in advance that I would be subjected to the attentions of Senator McCarthy.We shall hope to deal with matters of more vital interest next week.
Good night, and good luck.
我们自豪，是因为自这个国家建立初期,人们可以仗义执言,不过他是谁，她是谁,他可以挺起胸膛去面对他的朋友和敌人,而他也不会因为得罪位居高位的权贵而被突然间投入监狱,并在那烂到没有指控和正义的援助.
我们有人身保护法案,并且我们尊重这一法案,开始，我提到我们的历史将由我们来构造,若我们继续这样下去,那么历史将会报复我们.而且这惩罚将迅速降临我们身上.偶尔地，让我们赞美一下思想与见闻的价值,让我们大胆梦想将通常由“苏利文秀”（著名娱乐节目）占据的周日晚间档,交给美国教育调查节目,然后一两周后,斯蒂夫 艾伦节目（娱乐节目）时间让给美国中东政策分析节目.公司在赞助商眼中的形象会受到伤害吗？公司股东会出离愤怒且抱怨吗？除了几百万人在可能决定这个国家乃至这个公司未来的主题上受到点点启，发其他的，皆有可能会发生吗？
对那些说道“观众不会看得他们不感兴趣,他们只要娱乐、且漠不关心彼此绝缘”的人们.我只能这样回答“在一位记者眼中,事实胜于雄辩”.可即使他们是对的,他们会失去什么？因为如果他们是对的,且电视媒体一无是处,只是娱乐、消遣和隔离我们的工具.那么光管在闪烁,我们也将看到,所有的努力都将付诸东流,电视可以教育公众,它能引导甚至是启发公众.可只有人们坚定了这样的目的去使用它,电视才能实现它的价值.否则，它只不过是罩在盒子里的电线和光管而已.
祝您晚安，好运
We are proud because from the beginning of this nation man can walk upright.No matter who he is or who she is.He can walk upright and meet his friend or his enemy.And he does not fear that because that enemy may be in a position of great power that he can be suddenly thrown in jail to rot there without charges and with no recourse to justice.
We have the Habeas CorpusAct and we respect it.I began by saying that our history will be what we make it.If we go on as we are,then history will take its revenge,and retribution will not limp in catching up with us.
Just once in a while, let us exalt the importance of ideas and information.Let us dream to the extent of saying that on a given Sunday night the time normally occupied by Ed Sullivan is given over to a clinical survey on the state of American education.And a weekor two later, the time normally used by Steve Allen is devoted to a thorough-going study of American policy in the Middle East.Would the corporate image of their respective sponsors be damaged?Would the shareholders rise up in their wrath and complain?Would anything happen other than a few million people would have received a little illumination on subjects that may well determine the future of this country and therefore the future of the corporations?
To those who say, "People wouldn't look, they wouldn't be interested,they're too complacent,indifferent and insulated".
.I can only reply: there is,in one reporter's opinion,considerable evidence against that contention.But even if they are right,what have they got to lose?Because if they are right,and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain,amuse and insulate,then the tube isflickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost.This instrument can teach.It can illuminate and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it towards those ends.
Otherwise, it is merely wires and lights in a box.
Good night, and good luck.
