Isber:
My name is
Caroline Isber, and I have had a career in and out of media,
both in radio and television, and then in government, working on
environment and health issues, and right now I work on climate change
legislation and executive branch issues on the outside of the federal
government. In
1963, I had my first job in
broadcasting after working as a reporter for a short time for the Boston Globe, and I was a
producer of radio in the early days of the Eastern Educational Network,
which later became the National Public
Radio. I was at WGBH in
Boston, and we had a very
small group of people in basically a broom closet before the first
building was built, and then we moved into the first building.
We were very excited about the March on Washington, and when it
was proposed that the Eastern Educational Network cover it live, it
seemed as if we were at the cusp of new technology, because before that,
we used to what we call ‘bicycle tapes,’ which meant that we’d mail them
from station to station, and duplicate a few of them but this time it
was going to be open mike. I wasn't allowed to go to
Washington; I was really annoyed about
this, because I was an on-air person, and I covered the state house, and
I did all sorts of things. And I was very young, and so I thought I
should go and cover it, but I was told to stay and produce the show out
of
Boston, and
Susan Stamberg produced
it out of
Washington.
We were the only women producers; this was not an era
where you had very many women allowed to either be on the air or working
as producers. So we thought this was unfair and all the men went down,
but on the other hand they kept saying it was going to be very dangerous
and they were worried, and we had a wonderful team of people.
Basically, my job was coordinating some of the
discussion because it was all over
Washington, the police station and on
the
Mall and all sorts
of places. When were people supposed to come in; there was a lot of back
chatter of “I've got somebody here to interview, I found somebody
interesting, Where are you, George? Where are you Al?” This kind of
thing. And then there's a lot of time to fill, fifteen hours is a long
time. And so we had pre-produced a few interviews that we could put into
a slot when there seemed to be some time available that we were worried
we couldn't fill.
I had a interview with one of the leaders of the March,
Dana McLean Greeley, a
Reverend, Unitarian
Universalist head, who was one of the major organizers of the
March, and they
were bringing in people from all over the country on behalf of the civil
rights movement. He was a great mobilizer and a great speaker. I happen
to know him well as he was the father of a friend of mine, and I had
spent a good deal of time growing up in their household. So when I saw
on your wonderful website that I done an interview with him, I had no
memory of it. But I knew it had to be true, since I knew him well, and
then I listened to it, of course, and enjoyed it. I was very delighted
with this because I’d been fond of him; I thought he was so important to
the civil rights movement and to many other good programs on behalf of
tolerance. And so I e-mailed the interview to his daughter Penny Greeley
Elwell, who was also thrilled and not remembered that I interviewed her
father. And she then sent it to her daughter, so this is the
granddaughter of Rev.
Greeley, who teaches civil rights! And of course this was
very exciting to the third-generation, doing good things in this
department.
When we set out to cover the March on Washington, when the
Eastern Educational Network decided to do it and fund it, we really felt
that we were doing something very significant, and that it was important
for all the stations and listeners to know what it was really like to be
there. And we wanted it to be something that made a difference, that
brought together all kinds of people that we could interview and see who
came to the
Mall, what
it was like, and of course we were rooting for the Civil Rights Act but we were trying
to keep it very neutral by keeping ourselves out of the discussion; just
asking questions. We felt very strongly, Al Hulsen, George Geesey, and
the others, that our role was just to report what was really going on.
And therefore the ability to have several people in the field, at the
same time, able to talk to each other and moderate it was very important
to us.
And so the back chatter that I was involved with in
being part of producing the show was to go back and forth behind the
scenes when they were not talking. The person who was talking would be
heard on the air, but I would be talking to the other people, and
saying, “Where are you? What are you doing? Is there anything of
interest?” And then we would assess where we should broadcast from
there. And this is really the first time that we had done this. It seems
so easy now, with all the radio and television that goes back and forth,
but then it wasn't so easy, and we worried about the breakdown of
equipment. There was no guarantee that we wouldn’t be thrown off the air
by mistake or something would happen. And I was thrilled at the end, it
seemed seamless.
Tom Connolly and Al Hulsen came back to WGBH exhilarated and exhausted, because they had
been going nonstop, reporting what was going on. And trying to find each
other, and not really being sure what that story was going to be. The
Eastern Educational Network as we called it then was an imaginative
organization, which was then part of the founding and people like Al
Hulsen and Don Quayle became the first heads of the National Public Radio. So they always had in mind
a greater link than what we were doing technologically. This was our
dream.
And when the March on Washington came and we
felt so strongly that this needed coverage of a new kind than we had
been able to give, we had rehearsed what we were going to do to a
certain extent. And so the engineers had a panel discussion with
Geoffrey Godsell, whom
I worked with every week about looking at what all this meant. To put
the March into
perspective. We didn’t know what they were going to say; they were ready
to be there when we had a time to do it. So that had not been pre-taped,
they were in the studios in
Boston, they weren’t in
Washington. But they were listening to
the coverage of what was going on, and my memory is that one of these
people on the panel was in
Washington observing it.
So
Reverend
Dana Greeley had
been interviewed before he went to
Washington and as you’ll note in the
interview, he expressed what he hoped the March would do, and how important
it was. At that point, I believe the civil rights movement was not
getting a lot of publicity. There had been a lot of talk; there had been
sit-ins a couple of years earlier. And then it was all quiet, and so how
to get this going, how to get the Kennedy administration to move on
the Civil Rights Act was something
that people all over the country felt needed publicity. So Reverend
Martin Luther
King organized this March with a lot of other people
including Reverend
Greeley. So the fact that we could talk to him in advance of
what he hoped the civil rights movement and March could do was very important
to put it in, as he was down there actually implementing it, and you
hear him talking about how they were training people from all over the
country, how they were bringing them in buses.
And the important thing is that really gives you a
feeling for how well-organized they were. And they were organized to
make sure there was not any violence. There were a lot of things around
the edges that were going on, and to everybody's great relief, it ended
up being a very good, nonviolent march. But there had been threats that
people would come in and disrupt it on purpose. And I think that it was
this coverage, along with other coverage, but I think it was very
important for people who couldn't go to hear what this was really
about.
My role was to be in this very tiny room which had no
ventilation and listen to what other people were saying behind the
scenes on what was going on, to coordinate what was scheduled on the
Mall and whom we
had as commentators, so that we could put in the interview when there
was a gap. And with 15 hours, you had gaps. And we were prepared for
those. And so after talking to the various people on the
Mall in my back channel
discussions - which I remember mostly as telephone calls, not real links
the way you see people with something in their ear, talking to somebody.
It was fairly primitive, which made the fact that it all worked seem
amazing. Also sometimes we couldn't reach people, but we were
sufficiently coordinated that I could make a decision and ask people, if
it’s alright, I am going to put in this interview which is X number of
minutes long, and if there's any problem, let me know, we can interrupt
it, but basically I'm going to do it, and then I would signal, and it
would be rolled as we called it, and you would hear the interview.
George Geesey, Al Hulsen, Tom Connelly were down
there with a few other people, and they would say, “Okay,
Caroline, you've cleared
with us that we don't have anything important to say.” In fact,
sometimes they’d say, “Help!” (laugh) You know, filling fifteen and a
half hours isn’t seamless, or we’re lost, or I've lost my connection, or
something's going wrong. My job was to make sure that on the air,
nothing went wrong. And so we would then say, “Okay, I'm putting this in
a minute,” or something like that, and I’d wave to the engineer, and
he'd run it. And the engineers, producers, everybody were very close
friends. We worked seamlessly together. The engineers were as good
producers as the producers, they could really do anything, they had good
ideas, they were creative, and so it was really a joy to work with
everybody, and we were a very nice tight-knit unit. And so we expanded
that to be at a distance, but it was the same trust that we had in all
of us that we would do the best we can, be as objective as possible, and
if something went wrong, the other person would rush in to make sure
that on the air you couldn't tell. And I’m, you know, a lot goes wrong
behind-the-scenes.
I reflect on the civil rights movement, because I had,
of course been very interested in it. It was a precursor, in some ways,
to the women's movement. And I had gone when I was in college, a couple
of years earlier, to
Greensboro,
North Carolina, where the sit-ins were taking place. I went
on an exchange for Mount
Holyoke, where I was in college, to Bennett College, which is a
girl's college in
Greensboro,
North Carolina. And so I had gone to the Woolworth's counter
to look at it, and I had been the only white person at this college, and
my roommates and I discussed my Bennett College roommates and I discussed what was going on
in the civil rights movement, and that immersion to me was important
emotionally, and I had made some good friends. So when I got to work on
this production, I was pretty excited about it, and I was also hopeful
that the civil rights movement would move a little more quickly. And of
course, as a woman, who was a rare woman producer in this world of
public broadcasting, it sort of brought the need to integrate women on
an equal footing to the forefront, too. So a lot of us found this an
inspiring opportunity to talk objectively, and analyze what was going
on.