One result of the unexpected success of the November 3 speech was the decision to take on the TV network news organizations for their biased and distorted “instant analysis” and coverage. Unless the practice were challenged, it would make it impossible for a President to appeal directly to the people, something I considered to be of the essence of democracy.
A few days after the speech, Pat Buchanan sent me a memorandum urging a direct attack on the network commentators and a few days later he submitted a speech draft that did so in very direct and articulate language. Ted Agnew’s hard-hitting speeches had attracted a great deal of attention during the fall, and I decided that he was the right man to deliver this one. I toned down some of Buchanan’s rhetoric and gave it to Agnew. We further moderated some sections that Agnew thought sounded strident, and then he edited it himself so that the final version would be his words. He decided to deliver the speech in Des Moines, Iowa, on November 13.
When the advance text arrived at the networks, there was pandemonium; all three decided to carry the speech live. For thirty minutes, Agnew tore into the unaccountable power in the hands of the “unelected elite” of network newsmen. He said, “A small group of men, numbering perhaps no more than a dozen anchormen, commentators, and executive producers, settle upon the film and commentary that is to reach the public. They decide what 40 to 50 million Americans will learn of the day’s events in the nation and in the world.” Referring to my November 3 speech, he said that my words had been unfairly subjected to “instant analysis and querulous criticism.”
".
