" /> Jared Linder: October 2006 Archives

Main | November 2006 »

October 30, 2006

Throwing Bricks at the Famous

As we all know, ICS 640 requires us to do research on an historical figure in the industry. I got lucky and picked an individual of whom I had little knowledge: Walter Winchell.

I am a big fan of history (especially of the American flavor), and found myself captivated by the man and his influence on media--journalism, radio, and television. Wow, the triumvirate!

If you are so inclined, I have included my research on Mr. Winchell here. He was an interesting character in our industry, and it is a shame so many of us (myself included) sometimes don't know many of the players in this ongoing game. Sometimes research bears fantastic fruit. I hope all of you are experiencing the same. Good luck in your research!


Walter Winchell: Throwing Bricks at the Famous
Written by: Jared B. Linder, CICS Master's Candidate, Ball State University, 2006

Walter Winchell was born in New York City in 1897, the son of Russian immigrants. His family name was Winchel, with only one “l.” As was often the case with many immigrant families struggling at the turn of the century, his upbringing was full of poverty and urban misery, which included the separation of his parents while he was very young.

Winchell grew up in Harlem, where he had a job as early as seven years old selling newspapers in the neighborhood. This was the start of a truly independent young man making his way into the world of entertainment and media.

His next early profession would bring him to the stage. Winchell started as an usher in a vaudeville theater at the age of 11. He soon became involved in a singing act, and developed a love for the stage. By the age of 13, he had dropped out of school, and had joined a traveling troupe. His primary decision for dropping out and becoming an entertainer was he had been held back in school—the third time in his young life he had met with this academic disappointment. The troupe traveled around the country, delivering the unique comedy and song-and-dance routines that vaudeville was famous for early in the century.

It was in this environment that he developed his love for stories, jargon, and experiences. He learned showmanship, a trait he fostered and carried throughout his career. He also gained a second “l” to his last name: a mistake by a theater manager who posted his name in lights. But, rather than complain, Winchell liked the look of the new name, and immediately adopted it.

After his first jaunt as a traveling vaudeville performer, he returned to New York to find more employment, and while there met fellow performer Rita Greene. The two performed as a duo for about a year. But as World War I was in full swing, he enlisted in the Navy, where he was assigned to the New York customs house, and put their show on hold.

While in the Navy, an early Winchell story takes shape: he apparently burned his nose on a candle trying to lean in and eavesdrop on a conversation. When later asked about the truthfulness of the incident, Winchell replied, “Never spoil a good story by trying to verify it,” (Klurfeld, 1976, p. 18). This was the general perception of Winchell’s take on reporting.

After the war, Winchell left the Navy and married Rita, and they went back to performing shortly thereafter. It was after performing one night that brilliance struck: Winchell typed a one-page bulletin and posted it to the backstage bulletin board. He titled it Newsense, and it contained lighthearted material such as jokes and human interest stories. The piece was popular, so he continued to produce Newsense, including features such as stage romances and minor facts. This was the start of this writing career. This period was unfortunately also both the end of this vaudeville career and his marriage to Rita.

This proficiency for telling stories and reporting facts landed Winchell a job with the New York Vaudeville News in 1920. Tabloids were becoming popular in America at that time, and big names including William Randolph Hearst were producing a variety of publications of this sort. At the time the New York Vaudeville News had a circulation of almost four hundred thousand. This was a large audience for Winchell’s brand of writing, which mainly consisted of covering vaudeville items of interest. While there, Winchell developed his trademark style of using three dots to separate items. He would use this method of stringing items together throughout his career.

While on the job, and covering a story, Winchell met his future wife June Magee. Soon after, he was looking for new work. He landed employment with the publication the New York Evening Graphic, as both their Broadway columnist and in various editor capacities. It was here, with this article, that the gossip column was born:

Helen Edy Brooks, widow of William Rock, has been plunging in Miami real estate….It’s a girl at the Carter de Havens….Lenore Ulrich paid $7.00 income tax…Fannie Brice is betting on the horses as Belmont….S. Jay Kaufman sails on the 16th via the Berengaria to be hitched to a Hungarian….Reports have it that Lillian Lorraine has taken a husband again. (Klurfeld, 1976, p. 30)

America and American journalism would never be the same.

Winchell’s style immediately resonated with readers. Of course opinions ranged from delight to outrage; all the while he was gaining notoriety as a Broadway celebrity, reporting on the goings on of New York’s cultural elite. This attention even drew relationships with the underground scene, including New York crime boss Owen “Owney” Madden, who once gave Winchell a new car. As this was the middle of the prohibition era, mobsters were the talk of the town.

Winchell also managed to ignite a disagreement with the Shuberts, who owned many of the Broadway theaters. Winchell around this time stated, “The way to become famous is to throw a brick at someone who is famous,” (Klurfeld, 1976, p. 44). His negative comments about them in his columns resulted in his banishment from all of the theaters the Shuberts owned and the shows they produced. His banishment did eventually end when Al Jolson stepped in and demanded that Winchell be in attendance at the opening night of one of his newest shows. Jolson knew the benefits of a good Winchell review.

Winchell had become news himself, and no one knew this more than Winchell. Outwardly, he embodied the stereotypical physical appearance of a reporter: he wore a blue suit and gray felt hat cocked on his head almost everyday. He also pocketed a revolver in his suit coat, and suffered the occasional punch in the nose. He reportedly slept only in the daytime and spent most of his time away from home, given that most of the good gossip only came out at night. It was also well known that he was romantically acquainted with several women over the years, including actresses and showgirls. Winchell never traded in this look or this lifestyle; he was fully immersed in the world of the reporter.

This dedication to the trade strained many relationships. One source noted that Winchell’s, “integrity is such that his duty to his public almost always vanquished whatever impulses of sentimentality he may have toward a friend when what he calls a ‘good item’ is involved,” (McKelway, 1940, p. 26). Winchell’s drive to report breaking news, and to go to great lengths to get those stories, was well known. This kind of competition would later even cause a long-standing feud with Ed Sullivan, who would become one of Winchell’s rivals in the arena of gossip.

Notoriety creates great turmoil, and this definitely was true of Winchell. Due to fighting with his editors and his paper, in 1929 he left the Graphic to take a job with the Hearst-owned publication the Mirror. Hearst knew the draw that having Winchell provided, but privately stated that he appealed to “the whims of the younger degeneration,” (Klurfeld, 1976, p 51). But, even with these misgivings, Winchell would contribute to the Mirror until its collapse in 1963.

The late twenties saw great changes: Radio was starting to take hold, Winchell was the most influential person on Broadway, and then the stock market crashed in 1929. Surprisingly, this economic turmoil had little effect on Winchell, who made a great deal of money for the time, and had virtually no investments—as a matter of principal, and a way to control his finances, he kept all his money in banks. This financial stability allowed him to cavort in all the clubs and hot spots in New York; most prominently, the Stork Club, where he conducted business and held court for the next few decades.

Also in 1929, he was contacted by Al Capone to do an exclusive interview. This publicity skyrocketed Winchell’s fame. His column soon became nationally syndicated, exposing all of the country to his brand of journalism, and exposing Winchell to a new medium: radio.

“Good evening, Mr. and Mrs. America and all the ships at sea!” was his trademarked opening line, as his column took verbal form and his subject matter resonated throughout the country. Winchell used sound effects, most notably morse code and telegraph sound effects, to lend an authentic newsroom quality to the broadcasts. His pace of speech was significantly more rapid than normal conversation, lending seriousness and a sense of urgency to his program. His three-dot style of stringing headlines and topics together fit perfectly with the quick pace of his new format.

Radio also gave him the opportunity to obtain even more recognition. He was in the right place and the right time when an attempt was made on Roosevelt’s life. Winchell hustled to the jail where the assassin was being kept, and on account of his fame, was allowed to do an exclusive interview. The incident was international news and made Winchell an international name.

Everything changed at that point. Winchell went from covering gossip and Broadway to scooping politics and even global events. He was even one of the first journalists to publicly denounce Adolf Hitler. But even though the topics had changed, the same Winchell flair permeated his writing. He even published this column, purported to be a telegram from Hitler, “Cable. March 26, Berlin—to Walter Winchell, care of paramount Theatre, Brooklyn—What are you doing over the weekend? Would you like to spend it with me? I think you are cute—Adolf Hitler.” (Thomas, 1971, p. 100). However, even in jest, Winchell recognized the threat of Nazism, and was taking a stand on the side of all things American. This rabid pro-American slant, although honest and heart-felt, would eventually be his downfall.

Throughout his life, Winchell maintained relationships with several high-ranking government officials. The first of which was President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Winchell was a strong supporter of the Roosevelt administration, and publicly backed the president on many issues. Winchell was even instrumental in Roosevelt’s running for a third term in office.

Another tie Winchell had to the government was the FBI. Winchell maintained a personal relationship with J. Edgar Hoover for many years. Due to this relationship, he often received exclusive scoops on stories. And, out of respect for the FBI director, at times he even held up stories until it was deemed appropriate to print them, which was a courtesy he extended to few others.

By 1940, Winchell was making a reported $800,000 a year, making him the highest-salaried American at the time. But this financial freedom did not slow down his pace. And, as the world entered into war again, Winchell reported from many locations around the world on behalf of the Navy. His style and attack did not always bode well with his superior officers or with rival civilian critics and publishers, and he was eventually relieved of duty. Roosevelt’s death also at this time also shook Winchell, who would remain disillusioned with American politics and presidents for years to come.

During the 1950s, Winchell attached himself to two different causes: cancer research and McCarthyism. The first cause was the result of a friend and fellow author’s passing. Winchell established the Damon Runyon Fund and used his celebrity to attract money for research. At the time of Winchell’s death, he had raised more money for cancer research than any other individual.

Unfortunately, his attachment to McCarthyism was not so positive. Winchell, in the spirit of a die-hard American citizen, wanted to protect this country from evils of all types. And since one unforgettable crisis, in the form of WWII, had just passed, the threat of more potential undoing in the form of Communism was enough for Winchell to back a movement that promised to curb that threat. This was an unexpected shifting toward the right wing from a man who had so strongly backed the Democratic policies of Roosevelt. The fervency of his anti-communism backing would cause Winchell to lose popularity with many Americans.

Also during the 1950s, Winchell expanded into yet another medium: television. ABC signed him for life, with guaranteed payments if ever he should stop broadcasting. Winchell, however, in a typical tirade against an employer, furiously quit after four years on television, thereby abolishing his lifetime contract. ABC accepted his resignation due to lower than expected ratings for the show. He did find work on television again a few times after, but with little success. His style apparently did not translate as well to television as it had from print to radio before. The urgency and immediacy were lost on the screen when compared with his audio broadcast.

By now though, television had captured the minds of Americans, and as Winchell’s Broadway scene was dwindling, and his radio show was losing listeners, his subject matter was reaching an ever-shrinking audience. He also never found another political perspective that he could endorse. He would never regain the status and celebrity that he had enjoyed for two decades. Then in 1963, the Mirror suddenly stopped publication due to an industry strike, and fell out of existence. Even Winchell’s print outlets had all but dried up.

Winchell died in 1972, and only one person attended his funeral: his only living daughter. His obituary, however, ran to almost 10,000 words in the New York Times, and was front page news.

Winchell was a man of both great conviction, and many contradictions. He helped to create the gossip column, where stories needed little proof, yet he also believed that the journalist’s job—no, his duty—was to report the truth. It may seem illogical that one man could make this jump, from Broadway reporter to national news icon, but in both avenues he merely reported what he heard, and overturned every stone along the way. He excelled at getting the scoop.

He was credited with introducing several new phrases and coined words into the language, such as “Chicagorilla,” “debutramp,” “hehehehe (mocking laughter),” and even “making whoopee,” (Thomas, 1971, p. 48). His contribution to the language in both style and substance is visible and viable.

At the height of this career, Winchell was published in over 1,000 publications and read by over 50 million people. His radio audience was also substantial. And, although Winchell’s name is not necessarily a mainstream, household name for most of today’s generation of Americans, his presence is still felt through the offspring of his seemingly divergent journalistic ideals.

Also, maybe as his greatest legacy, the concept of the gossip column that Winchell helped to invent is as prevalent as ever, now having expanded into dozens of magazines, journals, and even entire television stations devoted to delivering the type of news that he helped create.

References
Klurfeld, Herman. (1976). Winchell: his life and times. New York: Praeger.
McKelway, St. Clair. (1940). Gossip: the life and times of Walter Winchell. New York: The Viking Press.
Thomas, Bob. (1971). Winchell. Garden City: Doubleday.

October 27, 2006

The Most Important Advice on Writing You Will Get From Me (today)

Learning to write well is one of the best things you can do for yourself. Not everyone has to have a college degree in composition in order to write well. And as most of us are seeing, writing well is important for both our success at the Center as well as in life.

Perfection in writing is difficult, if not impossible. Much of the English language is subjective; however, there are a few rules we should always follow. Here’s a guide to help you along the way.

The Elements of Style by William Strunk, Jr. and E. B. White is one of the most important books you can ever buy. Or, read online: http://www.bartleby.com/141/

I live by this book. One reason: it’s less than 100 pages long, has 6 well-placed chapters, and is easy to use. When we often think of guidebooks and manuals, we tend to think of hardback textbook size publications. This book bears no physical resemblance to a textbook: it is unimposing and petite—yet, it packs a significant amount of guidance into the narrow space between its covers. It’s only about as big as my checkbook.

I can't stress this enough.

I am not trying to sell this book. I am, however, trying to sell you on the concept that knowledge lives in many places, including small, unseemingly powerful English language style guides. Turn over even the smallest of stones; you will find great rewards.

Put this one in your pocket. Or bookmark the page. Your decision (the second one is free; the first is almost free at around $5).

Now, realize, this won’t help you format a paper into APA style (which I promise I won’t badmouth in this blog), but it will help you with the basics: how to use possessives, when to start a new paragraph, how to cut out the fluff.

And, if you go with the online version, or even just check out the website, please note that this book lives for free on the www.bartleby.com website, which is one of the best one-stop shopping websites for reference material. Everything from the American Heritage Dictionary, Roget’s Thesaurus, Bartlett’s Quotations, and the official Oxford Shakespeare (as if you have any time for that), all are accessible for free.

One plug into the American Heritage, and you’ll stop going to Dictionary.com, I promise you.

Keep writing. The only way to get better is to practice. And then you have to practice some more. And, along the way, if you need some help, go with the Strunk and White.

October 22, 2006

So I Googled Myself...

Immortality, huh? Everybody wants to live forever—as long as the going is good.

But be careful what you wish for. Although we are still looking for the elixir of physical longevity, it’s already becoming all too easy for your thoughts to find their way to the ether, where they float around—maybe forever—waiting to be retrieved by those who select the proper combination of search terms.

And what if you leave a terrible legacy? Or are branded as wicked due to a typo or a poorly indexed file that links to something awful.

And, what are they saying about me?

So I took the plunge. I Googled myself.

I never really cared before, but I was reading The Search, by John Battelle, and he noted that an estimated 40% of people have done what he terms a “vanity search,” (Battelle, 2005, p. 29). And since I’m a fan of siding with the underdog, I typed in my own name and joined this community of the vain minority.

Here is what I found:

I am the first hit.
Nice. Good start. The site is actually: http://www.bsu.edu/webapps2/directory/people/detail.asp?person_id=23778&person_type=facstaff, so I am assuming this is BSU’s power to achieve indexing that I could never achieve on my own. Doesn’t matter though, does it? I show up before all the other Jared Linders, which means I’ve got a greater chance of hocking my specific wares or spreading my general flavor to the masses. Don’t kid yourself, this is powerful stuff.

Next, and listed as the second hit, is me again. And once again, I owe the credit to BSU. This time, I’m baffled. This link is an archive of a class discussion I participated in back in 1997: http://www.bsu.edu/classes/newbold/210/ic219.html. Wow, I had no idea. I’ve since dug further into that series of discussions, and found more nuggets, such as my analysis of Toni Morrison’s Song of Solomon. I never guessed these conversations would be compiled in this manner and would still appear today. Hopefully my grade in that class will remain unsearchable.

This is proof that some people are keeping everything as records for the ages, even if you aren’t: just because you clean off your desk and go home at night, doesn’t mean you weren’t there all day.

Third on the list, and about the sixth site overall, is a notification page from the Project Management Institute (PMI) and the PMI Central Indiana Chapter, showing where I achieved Project Management Professional (PMP) certification: http://www.pmicic.org/certification/new_pmps.php.
Since it shows I achieved certification on June 26, 2006, and then shows two individuals whom I used to work for achieving certification themselves on the next day (as in after me), this is a piece of history I am ok with. And, yet again, not something I have control over. Somebody else thought you should know this fact about me.

The CICS World page shows up about page 4 of my search. Finally, the search has located me as represented in my own words. Or at least in words that I willingly and knowingly posted myself.

But, other than that, I don’t really seem to exist online. I dug through about 20 pages, and just got tired of trying to find myself. So much for my immortality achieved through the ether. Looks like I’ll have to go earn it the old fashioned way. There’s probably a place for my frozen head somewhere near Ted Williams and Walt Disney.

Of note, if you choose to perform a search of this nature, be forewarned: there is a wealth of other interesting information out there about people who are running around performing deeds you’ve never heard of, in places you’ve never been to, all the while using your name. Creepy thought really.

But, even creepier, do you think they’ve Googled themselves, and read all the stories about you?

October 21, 2006

Etymologist vs. Entomologist

My fiancée is a zookeeper. She is a scientist. But, she doesn’t think of herself as one, as she has no actual lab training with scientific experiments.

She has taken a specific interest over the last year in insects and other crawling things. Watching her gather data and material about all her pet bug projects has made me chuckle since she began this knowledge quest. She is getting pretty good at doing the research, and maybe that’s because she doesn’t consider it research, just “lookin’ stuff up about bugs.”

I could care less about bugs. But, I care about what she cares about, therefore I am becoming aware of more bug-related data than I have ever desired to know.

My interests go another direction: I have a soft spot in my heart for all things written down. I love the English language and its fantastic possibilities. The crafting, care, and decision making that are involved with the writing process border on obsession for me (for example, in the preceding sentence, I just changed the ending prepositional phrase “with me” to “for me,” yet again). I have at times been known to read single paragraphs hundreds of times over just so I can “see” the meaning living under the typewritten characters. Holding a pencil and drawing the first stroke of a letter is the closest I’ve come to meditation.

My fiancée doesn’t care about literature. But she cares about what I care about, and therefore can probably give you plotlines and character descriptions in On the Road or discuss themes present in Steinbeck stories.

Given my background in letters, I’ve never really thought of myself as a scientist. Yet, by the time I finish this program I will have two degrees under my belt:

Bachelor of Science in Sciences and Humanities, and
Master of Science in Information and Communication Sciences

The word science appears four times in the formal description of my education, and a couple of times it is even plural. Many sciences. I had no idea.

And, to think, that never once—until I entered this program—did I realize not only that I could be a scientist, but also that I already was. And, so is at least one other person I know. And, I'd share that with her if I could get her to take a break from lookin' stuff up about bugs.

October 17, 2006

Art, a la carte

In my life I make every attempt to embrace technology: the newest PC possible (even though mine’s a Mac), the coffee pot with a timer, long-life light bulbs. But as far as music goes, I just can’t get into the world of digital music.

Believe me, I’ve tried. But, it’s just not that enjoyable. It’s the Sanka of music.

Now, I’m also not going to sit here and tell you that it has anything to do with the way the music physically sounds. This is where the real audiophiles come from the woodwork and start bantering about analog receivers and vinyl platters. I can’t compete with that, and I don’t want to.

But it does have everything to do with owning, and possessing, an album: a small work of art.

My shelves overflow with CDs and tapes from that long-gone time—the 20th Century—and I can’t imagine it any other way.

I have stood in line for hours with hordes of other fellow music fiends, waiting for the stroke of midnight to be able to rush into a store and get our impatient hands on the newest release of our favorite bands.

Now you can just go online, enter an account number, and after eliminating tracks 5, 8, and 11, buy the remaining songs you want.

Great. Art, a la carte.

I remember the way the paper smelled on the first cassette I ever bought. And pulling out the paper insert and unfolding all the secrets that my $6 had brought me: liner notes, lyrics, songwriting credits, photos, publishing detail. Heck, Ozzy used to even include a couple of stick-on tattoos. And CDs continued this trend.

It was like being part of the club. I would immerse myself for hours listening to newly-purchased music and perusing the included printed material. I still do. And, if I didn’t like a song, I skipped it. But it was still part of the whole. It must have been on there for a reason. And it all meant something to me.

As much as I love technology, I can’t help but think this is one area that could use some rethinking. I love the portability that digital music provides. But, I can’t help but think this makes music even more of a commodity subject to transiency. What happens to all of these files? How do you give them to your children? I am not awaiting the day when I receive (or give, for that matter) a hard drive full of random singles as a gift.

The Library of Congress has spent decades identifying, sorting, and cataloguing stores of music: some of it merely novel, yet all of it worthy of note, and definitely worthy of our keeping. Hopefully, we are not eliminating vast chunks of our 21st Century artistic heritage by condemning it to spending its entire life in a database cage. Or, hopefully still, they don't decide also to exclude tracks 5, 8, and 11.

October 07, 2006

National Identity Crisis

I had the opportunity to attend the International Festival at BSU this weekend. It was enjoyable to see different countries represented through their native forms of music, dance, and attire right here in the heart of the Midwest (I apparently missed my favorite part—the food).

It makes me wonder what it would look like if this country were represented at such an event.

If I were in, say, India or Japan currently attending an institution of higher learning and was asked to physically represent the good old US of A, I am trying to imagine what I would do. How would I pull that off? How would I communicate to the international community my, or our, specific identity?

In jest, of course, I could eat cheeseburgers while flipping through channels on a television. Or maybe show off my traditional attire of business casual khakis and button-downs.

I am really curious if anyone out there has ever been outside of this country and seen an event of this nature where the USA is represented. I would appreciate any feedback on this. It would be enlightening to know how we can be summed up, how our collective entity can be described in a physical fashion.

Blues songs? Pop culture trivia? Cowboy boots? What makes us what we are? And more importantly, what are we, and how do we communicate that?

That's Some Catch

I often listen to the conversations of strangers. It is rather more out of curiosity of hearing what there is to be said, and not what specifically is taking place in the lives of the speakers.

This is a dangerous occupation.

However, I assure you, there is no malice on my part; merely curiosity. One never knows what one will hear. And often, I am amazed--no, frightened--at the interchange.
Just this week I overheard a discourse between two college-aged girls regarding college-aged things that I had little interest in. But, then it came, as if it knew I was listening: the misusage of one of my favorite concepts--the Catch 22. It went something like this:

G1: "Bobby's parents were out of town last week, so we had a party at their place. He just told me that they know all about it."
G2: "How did they find out?"
G1: "Who knows? But now, he's got to go home this weekend and do chores or something for his dad to make up for it. But if he goes home then he'll miss the party at [name removed to protect the innocent]'s on Saturday. So he's thinking about telling them 'No' because he's an adult, and yeah, he made a mistake, but I'm telling him he should just go and get it over with."
G2: "Yeah, that's a tough decision. A real Catch-22."
G1: "I know."

What?

Unfortunately, this is not the first time I've heard this misused. Well then, rather than criticize (as if that is not what this really is), I will educate.

The concept "Catch-22" was born from the Joseph Heller novel of the same name, published in 1961. The novel is largely about the absurdities of both war and life, played out through the lives of some of my favorite characters of 20th century literature.

The phrase sees its first usage in early in the book when the main character, Yossarian, is trying to convince the staff physician to relieve him of his duty of flying bombing missions, to no avail.

"There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr [another character] was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

"'That's some catch, that Catch-22,' he observed.

"'It's the best there is,' Doc Daneeka agreed."

--Joseph Heller, from Catch-22, 1961.

What we've witnessed here is birth of concept. Not that Heller invented the conundrum, but he did popularize a phrase that for over forty years has been giving apparent usage trouble to many--including two specific college-aged girls.