SUMMARY An Air Force pilot, Milo Radulovich, had been drummed out of the service

due to McCarthy's charges that he was a Communist agent. However, Radulovich had been

dismissed without a formal hearing of the charges, and he protested that he was innocent of any

wrongdoing. Murrow decided to do a story on Radulovich's case questioning the legitimacy of

his dismissal, which was seen by McCarthy and his supporters as an open challenge to his

campaign. McCarthy responded by accusing Murrow of being a Communist, leading to a

legendary installment of See It Now in which both Murrow and McCarthy presented their sides

of the story, which was seen by many as the first step toward McCarthy's downfall. Meanwhile,

Murrow had to deal with CBS head William Paley, who was supportive of Murrow but extremely

wary of his controversial positions

INTRO The movie provides distinct examples of communication ethics where competing

goods play out in the historical moment. The film illustrates issues of post-modernity and offers

specific examples of conflicts involving dialogic ethics, interpersonal, business ethics, and public

discourse ethics.

HISTORICAL MOMENT Good Night, and Good Luck (2005) is constructed to highlight

a conflict tied in tightly to a specific period in time. The historical moment captured in the

movie was affected by the geo-politics of the Cold War and the rise and fear of communism.

Added to this was the fact that, in1953, television and television news was in its infancy as both

a new communication tool and as a business. Public civility and communication protocol during

this time differed markedly from current norms; the movie was set in the Golden Age, a time

when manners and expectations of comportment were formally defined and followed. The

ground impacts the issues, dialog and the temporal outcomes in the film.
 POST MODERNITY Post modernity is a condition where there is no universal right or

wrong, where multiple perspectives instead abound; in this era, differing points of view can find

temporal agreements only through communication. Issues of democracy vs. television business

interests, the definition of government and of truth, all are impacted by a variety of contexts and

viewpoints in this film. The resolution/solution explored in Good Night, and Good Luck (2005)

is time bound, it “works” in the 1950’s but would present and play out very differently in 2010.

In post modernity, the challenge of communication ethics is not to lead to absolute answers and

truths/goods, but rather to a process of dialog, listening, learnings and in-the-moment agreements

on good.

DIALOGIC ETHICS Dialogic ethics, where meaning emerges from discourse with other

people, plays out in Good Night, and Good Luck. Murrow fought to create a dialog with

Radulovich case. Murrow aired the story of Milo Radulovich’s firing from the military without a

hearing, where evidence was sealed and not available to the accused. Murrow allowed

Radulovich’s narrative to be told on his program, and invited the military to respond - they

declined, hoping that without dialog the issue would simply go away. Murrow continued to

reference the story, bringing up the bigger value issues that ultimately made this story take off.

With Murrow’s credibility and pursuit of the story, the power equity, as described by Friere,

shifted and equalized so that dialog finally occurred. The military had to respond, and McCarthy

was drawn in and challenged to a stilted dialogic exchange.

INTERPERSONAL Interpersonal communications ethics are focused on the importance

of the relationship. Different permutations of relationship are shown in the film, however, I will

concentrate and use illustrative examples of Shirley and Joe Wershba, and Fred Friendly and
Murrow. Both of these interpersonal relationships operate with different levels of distance -

Friendly and Murrow are business associates with a close working relationship and a respectful

place with distance for their friendship; Joe and Shirley are married, yet pretending to put create

more distance between them in front of others in order to seem not to violate Company rules

which forbid marriage between co-workers. A key question for interpersonal communication

ethics asks, “do given persons work to honor a relationship, regardless of the

consequences?” (Arnett et. al., p. 131). Joe and Shirley have to face this very question when

layoffs are in the offing and their secret relationship is exposed - they end up honoring their

relationship by putting it above their individual jobs. Friendly and Murrow have very different

personalities and styles, yet that is not what matters in their honoring of their relationship and in

working through conflicts in business - they find ways to continue respecting each other and

work together to find compromise in the difficult moments.

BUSINESS ETHICS Business ethics were also highlighted in this movie. Organizations

need direction, yet must change and adapt to goods of survival and competition in order to last

(Arnett, et. al. , 2009). Television stations in the 1950’s were new components of broadcast

business organizations. CBS, the television station Murrow worked for, was looking to succeed

and thrive in the new age of television. As Arnett et. al. (2009) detailed, a given direction has a

limited lifespan, things need to be examined, assessed, and change made as necessary to insure

the good of business survival. William Paley was the head of CBS in the 1950’s, and was

working with his Board on shepherding the business in the new and changing dimensions.

PUBLIC DISCOURSE The public arena is a place that protects and promotes

discernment among ideas, it can be defined as a marketplace of ideas that contend for status.
Listening, attending to the ground of self, other and the historical moment, dialogic negotiating,

and learning can emerge from the “between” and lead to temporary answers (Arnett, et. al.,

2009). It is in this context that issues of personal freedom are addressed in Good Night, and

Good Luck (2005). Murrow felt a need to take a stand and to air competing ideas in the

McCarthy anti-communist era. He fought to do the piece on Milo Radulovich, to address in

some way the fear and terror perpetrated by Senator McCarthy. Murrow felt a responsibility to

defend freedom, a value driven into him through his wartime broadcasts in England, and to not

convict people because of rumor or innuendo. Murrow wanted to give a voice to those who did

not have one, what Arnett et. al, (2009) describe as discourse justice - defending the unprotected

and giving them a chance to be heard. Murrow looked to engage in the issues and used his

television program “See It Now’ as a forum for dialog, conversation, airing of points of view, and

ultimately to give citizens a field that could springboard learnings. The public arena had been

predominantly one-sided until Murrow took a stand and broadcast Milo’s story.

CONCLUSION - This is a movie rich in communication issues - I have concentrated on

communication ethics, but suggest that this can be viewed as a catalyst for discussions on the

media, television, the future of news. I had seen this movie prior to enrolling in this program,

and having watched it again with different eyes, I was able to see it from several other directions.