Had this slander been made by one political candidate about another, it would have been dismissed by most commentators as a partisan attack. But this attack emanated from the privileged sanctuary of a network studio and therefore had the apparent dignity of an objective statement. The American people would rightly not tolerate this concentration of power in Government. Is it not fair and relevant to question its concentration in the hands of a tiny, enclosed fraternity of privileged men elected by no one and enjoying a monopoly sanctioned and licensed by Government?

The views of the majority of this fraternity do not -- and I repeat, not -- represent the views of America. That is why such a great gulf existed between how the nation received the President’s address and how the networks reviewed it. Not only did the country receive the President’s speech more warmly than the networks, but so also did the Congress of the United States.

Yesterday, the President was notified that 300 individual Congressmen and 50 Senators of both parties had endorsed his efforts for peace. As with other American institutions, perhaps it is time that the networks were made more responsive to the views of the nation and more responsible to the people they serve.

Now I want to make myself perfectly clear. I’m not asking for Government censorship or any other kind of censorship. I am asking whether a form of censorship already exists when the news that 40 million Americans receive each night is determined by a handful of men responsible only to their corporate employers and is filtered through a handful of commentators who admit to their own set of biases.

【美国经典英文演讲100篇:＂Television News Coverage＂】相关文章：

★ 美国经典英文演讲100篇:＂Chappaquiddick＂

★ 双语阅读：日本新首相野田自喻“泥鳅”

★ 美国经典英文演讲100篇:1992 DNC Address

★ 美国经典英文演讲100篇:＂Black Power＂

★ 美国经典英文演讲100篇:1980 DNC Address

★ Facebook 创始人：挑战无处不在

★ 演讲好比考试

★ 美国经典英文演讲100篇:＂Religious Belief and Public Morality＂

★ 美国经典英文演讲100篇:On Vietnam and Not Seeking Re-Election

★ 美国新任驻华大使骆家辉宣誓就职仪式（视频）