how to fight back by stirewalt. chris, thank you so much i thank you everyone for watching. for c-span, i am matt welch at booktv.org or consult your program guide. ..

>> marvin kalb. we're pleased to accept questions from those tuning in today. i will ask as many as time permits to submit a question, please e-mail headliners@press.org. for 27 years now, i've had the privilege and pleasure of working with and introducing this gentleman for 101 kalb report programs here at the national press club, and the introduction is always the same. meese welcome the last correspondent hired by edward r. murrow and the goal standard of broadcast journalism, my friend and colleague, marvin kalb. >> thank you. that's the kindest intro. please do it again and again. >> for his 17th book published by brookings press, marvin presents the second installment of his autobiography entitled, assignment russia, becoming a

foreign correspondent in the crucible of the cold war. marvin has described the book as a long letter home after an unforgettable personal adventure. covers the period of his life from his arrival at cbs in 1957 through this years as moscow correspondent from 1960 to 1963. it is a personal and professional coming of age story, one that has deep roots in family history and a love of the country that welcomed oppressed people from around the world with open arms and opportunity. marvin, once again, welcome back to national press club. >> guest: thank you, mike. it's pleasure for me to be here. i thank the press club and you especially for not only being a gracious introducer but also the guy who opened so many doors. >> host: marvin he called you professor. you called him sir. and he described you to colleagues as our kind of guy. i'm speaking of course of edward

r. murrow, mennor to you and icon to the rest of us. talk about the beginning of your career at cbs, which is where the book begins. >> guest: the book begins with the book what may strike people as an odd chapter, but if you have ever ban journalist and ever arrived at that first moment when you know that you have become professionally a journalist, what is it like? and i can tell you that for me, in june, late june of 1957, it was certainly not what i had expected. i had expected of cbs news a huge newsroom, lots of people screaming, reporters trying to get their copy in as quickly as possible. editors scream can for copy. producers getting upset, ap

wires, upi wires, everybody screaming, news, news, news. i walked in at midnight on a midnight to 8:00 a.m. shift, of cbs, 5,052nd street and madison avenue, and there wasn't a soul there. nobody. i walked into an empty newsroom and there is nothing more empty in life for a journalist than an empty newsroom. i was going off my page at harvard in russian history. i knew i thought had a right a ph.d dissertation but no one when they hired me no one ever said, marvin, you're going to have to write a three-minute and 55 second radio broadcast. no one told me how to do it.

i had not a clue. walked in. there was nobody there and i was sort of terrified. and i kept walking around from one ticker tape to another, looking at news, but the ticker tapes were miraculously silent that night. no one was helping me. and i began to go into a panic at 3:00 in the morning. when suddenly bells went off at the reuters ticker, which is what happened in those days. bells indicated a bulletin. i picked myself up, ran over to reuters, ripped the copy off it and read, 27 people died when the boat they were in capsized in the ganges river in india, and my first reaction i'm ashamed to say was, thank god.

and thank god because i had a news story. i had something to write about. and i finally did rite something and i gave it to the editor, who came in at: 30 -- 4:00 'oin the morning, bouncy guy with a yankee baseball hat, carries his lunch win him in a small bag, he says you must be kalb. i said, yes. who are you? he said i'm your editor. do you have your copy? i said, yes, sir. i gave it to him. he sat down and look at it and my heart dropped because i was hoping there would be a smile on his face, something to indicate satisfaction. but at five minutes to 5:00, he threw my copy aside, put in fresh paper into this type writer, and batted out a

ferocious speed the whole broadcast. did it himself in a minute to five a man came in, picked its up, went into studio nine, read it, and now ear it sounds like my earlier vision of cbs. it was so well done. but of course i didn't do it. al did it and when the broadcast was over, he came over to me and he said -- it was a -- said, marvin, you're a really good writer but you don't know how to write a radio newscast. and he explained what it was like, and he became one of my great teachers. i loved hal. >> host: there often is a moment in time, marvin, when you can merge what you bring to the mix with what you learn on the job, and was there -- was it

evolutionary for you? was there a particular moment when you felt, i got this? i really can do this? >> mike. >> this may come as a surprise but to this day i never feel that i've got it. i always feel i'm doing the best i can to convey information to the public. as honestly as i can and straightforwardly as i can but i can tell you right now, that satisfaction with my own work is never something i have felt. i always have a sense that it could be a lot better and that i ought to try harder, but i can say to you that when i was in moscow for the first time as a reporter, which was in may of

1960, i did feel a coming together of the knowledge that i had accumulated about russia, the language and the history, the culture, economic, all of that stuff, i had been picking up in college and in graduate school, and working at the u.s. embassy in moscow in 1956-'7, and the requirements of taking that knowledge and putting it into a minute radio spot, a minute and a half television spot, and somehow or another despite the compression, still to convey the reality, the substance, honestly, to the american people, as best i could. so, in a sense, the two did come together but never to my total satisfaction. >> host: i'd like to read you something and get your view of it. our wonderful mutual friend and

colleague offered the following description of ed murrow he said even now many years later i october of jed muir re in sure per lative, tenacious reporter and brave man, fine human being, as a boss murrow laid down no rules, made no suggestions as to style or content. he demand only a clear and where appropriate colorful presentation of fact. he was scrupulously fair and his colleagues accepted his choices won't complaint. he led by example, not command. murrow's usually furrowed brow expressed a pessimistic side perhaps to guard against endodging a nationwide audience that wanted good news, yet when he smiled it was like sunrise. he knew his own worth but was not arrogant or overbaring. he had a sense of theater, as in histories on this is london as well as churchill union seniorot

that's marked his speech. his physical bravery was matched by the moral courage. her sometime was serious, long experience at the microphone did not make him casual. he saw his broadcast as a service to the american people. and accurate depiction, marvin? >> guest: absolutely. that is so beautifully stated. only by somebody who worked with murrow for a lock time, which is certainly what dick did. he started with muirow in 1944 in london. he was a young eager propertier who spoke german . we were at wore with germany, and he warted very much to persuade murrow, who was the bureau chief of cbs london, to hire him. and murrow had a doubt about his broadcasting capability, but he

eliminated that immediately because he said to a friend, he knows what the story is. he knew the story. , myke, i can tell you'll the first time i met murrow was in may of 1957. i have written an article for "the new york times" magazine, about soviet youth. i was in whiter library on monday morning and the librarian came over to me and said, marvin, there's a guy on the phone named ed murrow. and he would like to talk to you. and i turned to the librarian and one of the stupidest sequences in my life, and said, ed murrow is not calling me. forget about it. it's obviously some quack. just hang up on him. i don't know whether she actually jung hung up on him but

late that afternoon she came back to me said, marvin, it's that same man and he still calls himself ed murrow and maybe you ought to pick up the phone and talk to him. and so i didn't believe he was calling me but when i heard his a total jackass i had been.e, how could i not pick up the phone the first time? and i apologized to him repeatedly, and he said, don't worry about that. can you come and see me tomorrow morning in new york in my office at 9:00? i said, yes, sir. i'll be there. and he answered, professor, i'll see you. and that established that professor, sir, relationship that we had with each other. i was there the following morning, his secretary said to

me as i walked in mr. murrow is very busy. he only has a half hour. i said, absolutely. final -- fine with me. we spoke for three hours. murrow asked me question after question about the soviet union. soviet youth, their religion, their education, when they got married, did hey have an apartment? what was it like we in-laws. wanted to know everything but the soviet union which was our principles a sir vary in the -- adversary in the midst of the cold war, and after we spoke for three hours he put his arm on my shoulder as we walked out and said, oh, bill the way, how you like to work for cbs in took me all of three seconds i think that long to say, yes, sir, and

that is the way he hired me, and dick's description of him is so perfect because he did often look as if he carried the weight of the world on his shoulders and probably felt that way, too. but he also felt that he had an obligation to convey reality no matter how tough it might be to hear. convey reality to the american people, and they will decide what it is that has to be done. your job as the reporter is to provide them with the information. they can then use the information as they chose. murrow felt that very seriously. >> host: you mentioned that dick spoke german, you speak russian, and are a scholar in russian studies. as is your wife, madelyn.

tell us about the underminimummings of your interest in russian studies and your desire to be in moscow. >> that's a long story and i'll try to cut it in half. my mother and father were both products of the czarist empire some stretched into poland, ukraine, a very large empire. my father came here in 1914 just before the outbreak of world war i. my mother in 1913. and this country opened -- welcomed, opened its doors and welcomed these two people who had suffered different forms of religious persecution, they welcomed them to the united states and they provided them

with the opportunity -- nothing it guaranteed but they provided them with the opportunity for personal freedom, for religious observance as they chose, and for economic chance, opportunity. you can pull it off, great. but you don't necessarily pull it off, and i felt right then and there as a reporter, i wanted to pay back -- that's an expression that is very special to me. the idea is, you pay back this country for what this country has done for you. it had done wonderful things for my mother and father, and then for us as their offspring. and this was an opportunity in this book to describe them, to

describe my brother and my sister, in a way that gives a reader an opportunity for understanding payback. thank you, america, for what it is that you did for my parents and then for us and murrow was somebody who understood that immediately, and i wouldn't talk to him about this then because i didn't know enough about payback, but i do now. feel very strongly that it is important that everybody have an opportunity to pay back the country that gives them the opportunity for religious freedom, political freedom, and economic opportunity. >> host: let's stay in moscow now. and we have a series of questions about your time spent

there, your prep for it, and the execution of your duties there. from form are national press club president, gil cline, you were in moscow during the cuban missile crisis. democrat you think war was imminent in what were the signs you were seeing? >> guest: let me point out also i didn't quite complete my earlier thought. you asked me about getting into moscow. my brother, bernie, who has always been extremely influencal in my life, he scared me the n direction of theside of russia, the study of the russian lange and i did a great deal of work in the army when i was in the army, army intelligence and that gave me a clearance that allowed me then to work at the u.s. embassy in moscow. murrow offers me the job ask

sends me -- his the one more than anything else who made it clear i was to go to moscow. and that was in may of 1960. cub ban missile crisis is october of of 62. by that times want as andensed moscow correspondent. i sort of felt i knew what's would the russians were trying to say to the americans as well as to their own people. and the question about whether i thought we would have war, yes, that possibility certainly ran through my mind, but i did not feel ever through the cuban missile crisis we were going into war. felt this was an effort by nikita khrushchev to solve the berlin crisis, which he described as a bone in my throat, and he wanted to end

that crisis by frightening the united states into striking a deal that would lead to russian control over all of berlin and the united states withdrawal from berlin, western berlin. so i saw this as diplomacy, very dangerous diplomacy but diplomacy and not a step toward war, and of course that made it easy for me, but my boss in new york, a well man named blair clark, asked me whether i wanted to send maybe my wife off to shopping in scandanavia to get her out of moscow because he feared there could be an attack. i did not agree. didn't think there would be an

take. >> host: a question from our friend sam, member of the national press club. during the cold war americans tended to think of an ordinary russian as a kind of mysterious other about whom they knew little. could you share some stories of russians you met and how they impressed you. >> guest: sam, let me tell you that russians come in many different shapes and sizes. they are not of a standard form. there are russian intellectuals with whom any harvard professor could feel very comfortable spending an entire day, week, month or year with. first rate scholarship, wonderful people, and also people like putin who run the country, and there are many bureaucrats in between, and through russian history there

has been truly a sense that the russian people require a strong leader, somebody who will tell them what to do and they do it. and for many, many years that was indeed the case. but what struck me as fascinating was in that first time is was there with nikita khrushchev, khrushchev as the leader of the soviet union wanted to initiate a program, policy of reform throughout the entire country. he did some of that but he got into trouble doing that with a lot of conservatives, who said this far and no further. in fact get back. and so in 1956 he delivered an historic speech denouncing stalin and saying in effect, threat open the door to a little bit of activity, little bit of

motion. but the door was shut. and that happened after khrushchev, with brezhnev, the whole country stopped, and then gorbachev arrived and he opened the doors once again, and there was a possibility that democracy under his successor, yeltsin, could happen in modern day russian, and people would be able to travel, talk, open up, do things that are exciting, and at this particular time we are in an earlier period now with putin cracking down, and where we are unfortunately is at a moment when the doors are being shut on russian talent -- think back to the russian writers, the musicians, the composers, my god, you can't be at a concert

without bumping into a russian -- a piece of russian music. their all over the place. so it's there, it's there. but there's a heave hand of oppression sitting on it. >> host: there's a followup from sam about something you just mentioned. hough is the russian concept of democracy different from the west? america in particular. >> guest: well, first of all, they don't know they can ever get it really. what they have in mind is something that is not quite a western style of democracy. i think they have an exaggerated sense of democracy. they n much the same way -- i go back now a little bit -- when people like my father came to this country in 1914, he felt before he got here, felt this country was in english

transthreated, golden paradise, there would be money and baskets on every street corner for people just to dip into. he had totally hyped exaggeration of freedom and democracy, and i think the russian people today have essentially that same idea. putin and his people are trying to paint the west and american democracy, as bad stuff. poisonous. that democracy is them. we are separate. we are great. and he is trying to draw a distinction between us and them, and i have to quickly add a distinction that many american politicians, who call themselves extreme conservatives, trump followers, try to say essentially the same thing. that it is we against them, the

bad guys them russians are saying essentially the same thing. >> host: a question from bill mccarran, executive director of the national press club. can you discuss the process you used to meet with russian sources? did any of these come into danger because of contact with you? how you feel about that. >> guest: well, i was talking to somebody yesterday and trying to explain -- they asked me, how -- what it would be like for an american journalist working in russia today as opposed to when you were there? and one of the points i was trying to make was, in my time, things were so tight in the middle of the cold war, communism in its heyday, if i went over and talked to a russian citizen on the street, asked him a question, where is

red square? it is likely, not certain but likely that some kgb person, some police person, would go over to that russian citizen and begin to question him about what is it that foreigner wanted from you? in other words, in asking the simplest question of a russian, then, you could get that russian into a lot of trouble. and if i got information from a russian source, and i have to be very clear about this. they didn't come dangling like fruit from a tree in springtime. they were very rare indeed because everybody lived in a frightening environment, tight environment, but those that it

did know and those who did talk to me, they took huge risks and i took a risk, too, in possibly opening them to a kgb crackdown on them and their family. so it was always on your mind as a reporter -- it should have been -- that you could get these people in terrible trouble so be careful. >> host: an interesting followup from bill mccarran, did the russians ever try to recruit you when you were there, and what was that like if so and did you report it? >> guest: i'm sorry to disappoint you but to the best of my knowledge -- maybe they tried it by want aware of it. about to the best money knowledge number ever tried to recruit me as such. you did get into conversations with russians. you would have to. in which they would try to persuade you there's this government was really better

than yours -- their system of government was better than yours. maybe that was an effort to win me over to their point of view but if it was it failed and i'm not aware of any serious professional effort to hook me into their system. >> host: from what you shared in your first autobiographical book the year i was peter the great and what you share in assignment russia, we learn more about nikita khrushchev and your most interesting relationship with him and his relationship with you from beginning with the title of the your first book. talk about that relationship with nikita khrushchev. >> guest: we'll,ry dollar in two stories the first story is

july 4-1956, at the u.s. embassy -- actually the ambassador's residence, and nikita khrushchev arrived arrived with a the entire pollitt bureau and wants to be friends. at that time only four people who spoke russian, an ambassador two senior officers and me, and i was the kid on the block. believe me, i had no authority, nothing of any real importance. was a translator, an interpreter, kind of junior press officer . but ambassador bowlen said i was to look after the defense minister, and he loved to drink, i did not, and i was there while he socked back eight vodkas, and when the party was over, he kind

of sidled up to khrushchev and said i was drinking by way water instead of vodka and he said to khrushchev i finally found an american who can drink like a russian. khrushchev laughed and said how tall are you, i said i'm three centimeters shorter than peter the great. loved that line i haven't a clue how the thought entered my brain but it did and i said it and he then always associated me with peter the great. and second story, on my first big story, which was in paris, may, 1960, there was a summit meeting -- never happened --

supposedly devoted to berlin under the vision of berlin and the danger of berlin, and two weeks before that summit, our u to 2 supply plain was shot -- u2 spy plain was shout done and so when we arrived in paris because of the submit it and was my first big story. my responsibility was to cover khrushchev. so i knew him from this experience -- several experiences similar to that in 1956, in my peter the great mode, and so my foreign editor asked, what marvin are you going to do covering khrushchev. and i said i know that he normally goes out in the morning for a walk, a brief walk. let me have a crew at 6:00 a.m.,

be in front of the russian embassy. if he comes out, maybe i can get an interview with him. he was reluctant but said, okay. the following day i was there 6come, cbs crew sets up. it's absolutely quiet as can be. and 6:30 comes around and the cameraman says, marvin are you sure cruise kev -- i said i'm not sure of anything. but he often comes out . at 7:00, large iron doors to the embassy open up, khrushchev emerges with two body guards. i looked at him, i was thrilled, and we, the crew and i, pushed toward him, and he looked at me and he said, well, he says, here comes peter the great. and i said -- and he said -- then turned -- by the way, his

two bodyguards immediately reached into their jackets to pull out what i assume was a weapon, and khrushchev said, no, no, no he's okay. he's peter the great. we then walked down a block and there was a french bakery, 7:00 in me morning, producing the most magnificent croissant. the arome in filled the air and i looked at him and he looked at me and he said, have you ever had those? i said, oh, yeah, they're wonderful. he said do you thick would like it? i said i'm sure you would. he said i would like it. and i ran into the bakery, bought a whole bunch of croissants. gave him to him and his crew and he mint i saw his face after he ate it, it just erupted into slavic heaven.

he loved it. oh, delicious, he loved it. and then i knew i had a terrific exclusive and then i went -- asked him questions about berlin, would he show up to the summit? would he insist on certain things that president eisenhower could or do not deliver. it was terrific interview, it was exclusive and cbs had it. that night their evening news program and that was my opening to being a foreign correspondent and it was exciting. it was terrific. >> host: more questions have come in. covering the soviet government has been described as reading signs by who appear in the lineup of leaders atop lynnin's tomb during official events. is that what you found and how hard was it to get any kind of contacts wind the government?

>> guest: extremely difficult to get contact within the government unless it was set up in advance by somebody the government who wanted eher to win you over, to make your more sympathetic, to go back earlier to bill's question, maybe to make an effort to win you over completely, but it was always their decision to try to reach out to you and to get you so you would have then an opportunity of talking to people in the government. but that was rare. that was pretty well set up in advance. very difficult for you to meet a government official on your own. no. that didn't happen that way. when thailand up on the lenin mausoleum, at a very major, may 1st holiday, for example, the person who stood in front of the microphones to speak, you knew

was the single most important person in the soviet union, and in my time in the '50s and '60 sit was nikita khrushchev and brezhnev and then went wow went down from him in picture and looking at nikita csu chef, lenin mausoleum, in front of a microphone, to his right you knew was the second most important person in the soviet union, and that was called kremlinology. you read signs and pictures in newspapers, who was covered, who was not, who was given positive coverage, who was ignored. that was kremlinology and it was exciting. it was fun. it really was. it was an interesting challenge that you had to meet if you were

to be a successful journalist in russia. >> host: how challenging was it to get your reports out of russia when you were filing for -- whether the world news roundup on radio or cbs evening news on television? did you ever have to write in some code in order to ensure that your messages in your stories would be received and understood? >> guest: yes. until april of 1961 there was direct censorship of all copy from foreign correspondents. so you would have to find a way of saying something that would convey reality and somehow get the words through the censor and i can give you one illustration that was very funny to me. he russians at one opinion wanted to prove to the rest of the world that they were

interested in disarmament, and they wanted to show that the red army was being disarmed. and they took a group of reporters, me included, to a base outside of minsk and when we arrived there, there was one small detachment of russia soldiers who raised their rifles in the air and threw them down on the ground and shouted, to peace. and then the flack, the guy from the government who was -- what was happening, he said you see we are interested in peace and we are giving up our weapons. my broadcast that evening was 20 -- no -- a group of western correspondents were taken for a ride today. this time to minsk where they were told they were watching the

disarmament of the read army. -- the red army. was saying what happened. didn't put any fancy words but that praise, taken for a ride, the american ear would pick up and know instantly what was going on. but the censor in russia didn't know that phrase. so i was able to get away with it. and that was the test, the battle that you had with the censor every time you wanted to get something across. it was always, what kind of phrase could you use that the american audience would understand but the russian censor would not? that was our daily challenge. it was great fun, too. >> host: thank you. another question, tell us about your contacts with the

disdepths, particularly the jewish refuse knick. did you have a special affinity for them? how did you cover that issue. >> guest: i would have had a percentage affinity for them but they war not a story when i was there they became a story later in he 1970s, i was there in the '50s and '60s. returned many times to the soviet union but briefly, maybe for two or three days for a store -- story and then i was out. did not have an opportunity to cover other dissidents, people who were by the 1970s fed up with this stultifying, oppressive, communist system, and had the guts to stand up and join others and actually express their discontent and disapproval

of their political system and they were called dissidents and refuseniks and a number of them who were jewish wanted to go to israel, tried very hard to get out of the soviet union. most of the time they failed but when the russians wanted to make a point, they sent thousands of russian jews to israel to make a diplomatic point. not certainly being nice to jews. it was making a diplomatic point so they in a sense got rid of those people they didn't like anyway. >> host: a couple of then and now questions that have come. in due jo see the current russian misinformation campaign as an extension of the propaganda you saw there, or something entirely new? there's some followups, was the audience different in your day? it was to make the rest of the

world doubt america, now it seems to be designed to pit us against ourselves. >> guest: it's a very good question, and the first part of the answer is that the russians have been engaged in this kind of -- what is called straight outpropaganda for many, many, many decades. they're very good at taking ideas and twisting them and then putting it out into circulation. what they are doing now is using this old technique, pinning it to moderna -- modern technology and then aiming it at a target, this time the american system. what is amazing to me how could so many people in this country

raised in an atmosphere of redom where you're supposed to be aware of truth and know the difference between truth and a lie, how could it be that tens of millions of american citizens bought into the russian propaganda system, that is astounding to me; to this day i don't quite understand how this could be but there's no doubt that it is. tens of millions of americans are prepared to accept a russian version of reality than they are to accept an american version. that's astounding. >> host: it's interesting because it brings us back to journalism with that, and of course, within our country, we have spent the better part of the last five years or so with journalists being called the enemy of the people by former

president donald trump, the title of a book that you had published during the trump administration, and it seems that the role of the journalist today has become that much more important as well as perhaps dangerous. talk about that. >> guest: there is no question that it is a danger from a number of points of view. when a president of the united states links free american journalists to enemies of the state, enemies of the people, was he aware that expression was one of the favorite expressions of joseph stalin and the soviet union, of mao in china, mussolini in italy. a favorite of dictators? often either communist or

fascist dictators and an american president uses that kind of expression, to define an american journalist, i found horrible and felt the need to write a book, "enemy of the people." but even more terrifying than that, the president used that expression very effectively and many, many, again, tens of millions of american citizens, believed him, and that result right now is that many people in this country, 60% of people in the republican party, according to recent polls, do not believe that joe biden won the election fairly.

52% of republicans believe that the press deliberately distorted the result of the american presidential campaign. why would they believe that? because donald donald trump said then a lot of people who represent part of the american press corps, who simply feel that it's in their interests -- i'm not quite sure, maybe they mean only financial -- i hope nat political -- interest to propagandize this idea. so it's dangerous no the country and democracy, it is dangerous for journalism, and very dangerous for the american people. but i sincerely hope that more and more of them with understand

there is a distinction between a free press and a press that is married to a particular political point of view. >> host: this past year has been a head spinner for all of us, between the pandemic, the politics, the protests, the presidential election, the failed insurrection the u.s. capital and the skewered security laden inauguration, but we have found in record time the he effective vaccines to combat the coronavirus and we appear to be on the cusp of a recovery. based on your experiences, inclusion those articulated in these two autobiographical volumes, what is your view of the state of our democracy today and the state of the world? >> guest: fragile.

fragile. i think that our democracy today has demonstrated a fragility that perhaps many of us did not quite appreciate until it was challenged so dramatically during the trump era. when as i said before, facts became weapons of war, and denounced as weapons and not accepted as truth. we are at a point now, i find myself in absolute agreement with president biden when he describes the political atmosphere in the united states today as a war between democracy on the one side and authoritarianism on the other side. those are the words he used to define the state of american

political life today. in other words democratics who believe in throughout and can accept truth, and awer to tareans who believe they -- authoritarians who believe they control truth and can impose truth on the american people. that battle is being fought right in front of us. anybody who picks up a newspaper or watches the evening news sees it. it's right there. what do they do with it? are they so wedded to a single political point of view that they cannot accept a wider judgment of reality? that question mark is very much in my mind, and i think stares the person people in face idon't want to allow the hour we have together to end without offering you an opportunity to talk a little bit about some of the

people that are so important in your life and who are critical players in your books. so, if we can engage in a lightning round here i'll ask you to offer some thoughts about some very important people, and let's start with mad mcdonald's lin kalb. >> we have been married for 62 years, i can only say i fell for her the moment i saw her, and she remains beautiful in my eyes to this day, and she has been with me all the way, my closest buddy and adviser, quite a girl. >> host: and your big brother, bernard kalb. >> guest: enormously influential in my life. he -- i think more than anyone else, steered me in the

direction of russian studies, to pick up the language. he thought all languages incredibly important. a journalist can go into russia -- an american journalist speaking russian. imagine how the advantages that you have. as opposed to going into russia and finding yourself with a russian interpreter. an average russian is not going speak to an interpreter. so, the language was essential and bernie pointed me in right direction. >> host: i didn't have an opportunity to know your parents, but i did get to know your sister and at the time we first met 27 years ago, your mother-in-law, bill green, was living in your home, and talk about your parents and madeline's parents. >> guest: well, my parents, my father was born in a small

polish textile town. he was by craft a tailor. he came to this country in 1914. win a brief period of time became a great fan of this country, and really ended up believing we could probably do no wrong. however, i stressed earlier that the country gave him the opportunity to flourish. economically he did not. quite the contrary. but he was given the opportunity and he never forgot that. he thought that was the key. what do you do with the opportunities that are given to you? my mother was born in kiev, the capital of ukraine, came here in

1913, was a -- was sort of a mixing of genders here but kind of the kingpin of her family. she was always the brightest, the most sensible, most responsible, a terrific person to have for a mother. i speak with authority on that. my in-laws, rose and bill green, rose was one of the smartest, most sensitive, intellectual people i have ever met. she was also a fabulous cook. and bill green was a stock analyst, a marvelous he sense of humor, died at the tender age of 96. and even as he went out was

cracking jokes. >> host: two professional colleagues, walter cronkite and bill small. >> guest: walter cronkite was the greatest an forman i ever worked with. he -- anchorman i every worked with. he sort of just knew when you ought to do a story and how to lead into the story, his kindness, i thought cronkite was outstanding. bill small was the bureau cleave for cbs in washington. one of the toughest guys i've ever had to deal with and one of the fairest, most decent men i've ever had to work with. bill small did more to bring women into the industry than any big shot i know. he was the one who introduced people like leslie stahl and

connie chung goo the top ranks of cbs, diane sawyer. yeah. >> host: there's a poetic irony in the book. your beginnings were mr.ow's conclusions and you in some many ways became his legacy at cbs news. the last correspondent personally hired by murrow in 1957, and you were a newcomer what turned out -- in what turned out to be his final broadcast, the year-end aroundup of 1960 called years of crises. her invite outside join him when he became director of usia in the kennedys a, and the most poignant response you said you needed to carry on his work in journalism and you did. and in fact, the book begins and ends with murrow if have you consciously felt this sense of

irony, being their hand-picked, hand-select as the final laster day murrow boy? >> guest: that is a question i can answer from the current vantage point. i can answer now because i'm able to look back. at the time it was happening, i knew that he was special, he was for me an idol. i listened to his 7:45 newscast every night. i watched his broadcasts. his broadcasts bringing down senator mccarthy, who was one of the most historic pieces of the television news i've ever seen, or perhaps there ever was. i was filled with admiration for what this man was able to do and did. but at the time it was happening, i was not able fully

to appreciate the impact he would have on me and many, many, many thousands of messed that have come along over the decades. wherever you are today, you will bump into a journalist who knows about edward r. murrow and wants to be like edward r. murrow and if they could be like edward r. murrow we would be a much better country today but that's hard to do. that's why he is held up with the kind of esteem he is and deservedly so. he set an extraordinary example of courage, of professionalism, of decency, of fearlessness, if he had to say something he knew was going to offend a senator or even a president, he said it it

-- because it was true, believed to its be true. when murrow left cbs and went to be the head of usia invited me to join him to be his specialist on communist affairs. i was obviously flattered but i had to say no to him and it broke my heart. i didn't -- how could i say no to murrow. that was ridiculous. ...

and who we want to be. yours is a life well lived rich and full and you always seem to be looking ahead. give us your thoughts as you look back and you look around and you look ahead in april of 2021. >> let me tried to look at that for a moment. i am a very proud grandfather and i have a grandson at 15 named aaron and a granddaughter named eloise at 12. they are both incredibly special to me. i know they are the brightest kids in the world.

but i would love for this country to be as open and rich in its potential as it was at different stages of my life helping me along. i would like the good angels of america to in effect bless all of those kids who represent the future of this country. it's a very complicated messy world and there are many examples left. this is the best example in my judgment. it's in the midst of very difficult times and it's between democracy and authoritarianism

a dangerous one. but at this particular time, we have the chance to see democracy win and i want it to win for eloise and for aaron and for all of their buddies. because then we can all sit back and say we did a good job. >> host: that will be the last word today. it is a good one. the book is entitled assignment russia:becoming a foreign correspondent in the cold war. thank you for joining us today. >> guest: my pleasure, thank you and thank the national press club. >> host: we are pleased to present you with our natural press club copy month along with our hope that you will join us again in person in the very near future so thank you.

>> booktv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at noon eastern south carolina republican senator tim scott talks about his book america:a redemption story on his life, political career and thoughts on america's future and at 10:00 pm eastern on "after words" missouri democratic congresswoman cori bush, author of the forerunner, discusses her life and advocacy work. she's interviewed by huffington post editor and chief daniel belton. watch booktv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime, booktv.org. if you are enjoying booktv, sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on screen, to receive the schedule of upcoming programs, book festivals and more. booktv every sunday o