Shock and Awe

The movie Shock and Awe takes a subtle, more grounded approach to a story that could easily have been told to a person who has no idea about any wars. Instead of focusing on the battlefield, it turns its attention to the newsroom, following a group of journalists trying to make sense of the claims that led the United States into the Iraq War. It’s less about explosions and more about how and where did those explosions come from.

 The movie is based around a team of reporters led by Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel. Their work revolves around investigating the government’s details about weapons of mass destruction. As the movie goes on, the film shows how difficult it can be to challenge an official storyline, especially when most major outlets seem to be moving in the same direction, or seem to be bought out.

What stands out is how laidback and serious the movie feels. It doesn’t try to bring drama in every moment or turn the journalists into heroes. Instead, it leans into the slow, often frustrating process of reporting, making calls, chasing sources and getting a bunch of No's. That approach may not appeal to everyone, but it does give the story a sense of real. There’s a feeling that this is what the work actually looks like behind the scenes.

At the same time, the movie doesn’t ignore the main idea. It covers how media coverage can shape public thinking, especially during moments of national conflicts. The reporters in Shock and Awe are not just gathering facts, they’re working against media that seems to favor speed and quickness over caution. That tension becomes one of the film’s central themes: what happens when the demand for answers outweighs the time you can get those answers out?

That said, the film isn’t without its limitations. At times, it can feel a bit repetitive, sticking closely to its message without exploring opposing viewpoints in depth. Viewers who are already familiar with the events surrounding the Iraq War may not find much that feels new. However, they might have a new point of view because of the fat that it focuses on how they were able to get familiarize with the wars in Iraq.

In the end, Shock and Awe is less about delivering a dramatic movie and more about asking viewers to think critically. It was also a warning as to where media is heading and how that road may not look so good. 

The Man, Myth and Legend... Bryant Gumbel Inspired Millions

Bryant Gumbel and his impact on broadcast journalism is one of the biggest impacts a person has ever had on a proffesion. 

He’s one of the most important figures in television news, especially when it comes to morning shows and representation in the media. A lot of what we see today in shows like The Today Show or other morning programs was an example of his impact.

Bryant Gumbel was born in 1948 in New Orleans. After he graduated college, he actually struggled a bit to find his path and worked a few different jobs before getting an opportunity in television. 

He got his opportunity when his older brother, Greg Gumbel, who was already working in broadcasting, helped him get a position in sports media. From there, Bryant started working behind the scenes and eventually moved on camera. He took an intersting route to News because usually News anchors and reporters at that time didn't start out in sports.

It turned out to be one of his best strengths because it gave him a different kind of on-air presence. It taught him to be more conversational but still professional. He worked for NBC Sports early in his career, where he was able to build likleness and credibility on Live TV.

In 1982, Gumbel became co-anchor of the Today Show, which was a huge moment in not only his career, but media in general. He replaced Tom Brokaw and worked with Jane Pauley and later Katie Couric. He stayed on the show for about 15 years, due to his likiness by veiwers. During this time, he helped shape the format of morning news into what we recognize today.

One of the biggest reasons Bryant Gumbel is important is because he broke racial barriers in television. He was the first Black anchor of a major network morning show. Since then, we have seen more and more Black anchors and reporters on-air. He even worked with Alison Davis, a co-founder of the National Assiociation of Black Journalist.

Gumbel was known for being serious and focused on real journalism, even in a morning show format. While some morning shows leaned more toward entertainment, he made sure important issues and hard news were still covered.

During his time on Today, the show became number one in the ratings. That’s important because it proved that audiences actually wanted a mix of serious journalism and not just people laughing and joking at 6:00 in the morning.

After leaving Today, Gumbel didn’t slow down. He went to CBS News and later hosted Real Sports with Bryant Gumbelon HBO. Which focused on the business side of sports including the corruption, politics and unfairness. This earned him numeruos Emmys and Peabody awards proving that his impact had no age limit.

EOTO

It was not until the later decades into the twentieth century that we had any form of systematic polling to determine how many people would likely vote for which candidate. Before that time, the only method that newspaper and magazine editors could use was the informal poll, commonly referred to as the straw poll. In the late 1800s and the early 1900s, the editors of many newspapers began to conduct informal polls by asking groups of people (usually ranging from 25 to 100) their opinion of a candidate. For example, if a newspaperhad a number of 300,000, there would typically be no more than 100 people polled in its informal poll. The editors then used the results of these polls to predict who would win the election. Because of this method, there was very little, if any, formal or informal discussion or campaigning among the candidates, since they could assume that with the number of people who supported their candidacy, they would likely win the election.

As time went by, the development of more organized and systematic polling changed the methods used to determine how many votes a candidate would receive. This started with The Literary Digest poll which began in 1916 and quickly became widely accepted as a reliable method to predict the winner of presidential elections. In following years, it had accurately predicted many presidential elections, thus further reinforcing the belief of the general public that polling was a reliable tool to determine who may win the election. However, there was a serious flaw in the methodology of this type of polling.

As a result of this keg failing by The Literary Digest, George Gallup introduced a scientific method of polling that included sampling, quality of respondents, along with quantity. Gallup realised that rather than getting millions of responses by randomly sampling everyone in the country, he should focus on a small group of respondents that represented the country based upon age, income, gender and geographical location. 

In addition, through this

method, Gallup demonstrated that having a well defined sample can properly predict election outcomes and can accurately reflect the opinions of the voters. Due to the development of this method by Gallup, this approach quickly became the benchmark of current political polling. The transition from early straw polls to the scientific polling methods used today, has become the standard of both politics and the media.