Two things. First, I am reading a book.  For those political media junkies, it’s “The Boys on the Bus,” by Rolling Stone journalist, Timothy Crouse. Crouse, at the time, who was barely old enough to drink, got the assignment of a lifetime to cover the 1972 Nixon | McGovern campaign.

As I look at the shape of our news media – the ecosystem if you will – I always consider lessons of the past to find a new way forward. And what Crouse writes in Boys, gives us a glance into the relationship between journalists, the news agenda, and the White House.

Second, Helen Thomas makes several cameos in the book as the UPI correspondent along for the ride. My favorite line so far is when she lost her restraint and said to Ron Ziegler, Nixon’s Press Secretary: “Lies. We get nothing but lies. And someday those lies are going to catch up with this Administration.”

Ziegler responds back with a jab. She gives him a “hard look.”

“I’ll say one thing for you, Ron. You’re never lied to us directly. But I don’t know how you stomach your job.”

So why do I bring this up? Well, like I said, the keys to the future are in treasures of the past. And two of those treasures – Boys on the Bus, and Helen Thomas, are telling us where to go from here.

Deviating from the Script to Understand Motives

On January 9, Salon.com writer, Glenn Greenwald, wrote a post about last week’s White House Briefing, where Robert Gibbs, Janet Napolitano and John Brennan addressed the White House Press Corps, about the Flight 253 bombing attempt. In his post, Greenwald focused on the question from Helen Thomas, who once again, parted from the restraint her colleagues share… and said point blank to John Brennan, “What is the motivation of the terrorists – where does it come from?”

In other words, how do American policies fuel terrorism?

Right away I went back to my video archives and pulled out an interview I did with Helen Thomas in July 2009. I had wanted to do something with it earlier – but the timing wasn’t right – and as you will see, the quality – of the video, unfortunately blew. (My fault for needing to use my back up Flip Cam). But regardless, I think this is an important interview – one that will help folks like Glenn Greenwald consider what it means when a Press Corps is intimidated, what questions don’t get asked, what questions get shut down- and what we can all do to get the process back up to the standard.

Sarah Burris, a very active youth blogger based in Kansas, took my post ‘The Truth, I Need It,” to a new level last night. I received a Tweet that read, “Sarah Burris has responded to your post with…“The End of an Erica.” At first, my stomach dropped. The title seemed dire. Then, upon reading it, I realized this.  I, we, are not alone.

And with that, the support for “The Truth” started to pour in. From @EvanSummers, a young political activist wrote:  “That seriously is one of the most direct and scathing insight on the state of the industry that I’ve read in a long time. Well done.”

From a web producer and social media guru working inside mainstream media, I got a simple, “F*ck Yeah.”

From a DePaul University (and a Suma Cum Laude in the Journalism school), Molly Horan, I saw that she linked to me and urged her Facebook followers:  “YOU NEED TO READ IT.”

But perhaps the best conversation came late last night, from a talented freelancer in Washington, who G chatted me to say she valued the piece. We agreed the conversation was one we “need to have” but that, with the recent loss of Walter Cronkite, we are both reminded that for them, there was at least a path. For us, we are searching for a way forward without much support from those before us.

It reminded me of this. Something Helen told me right before I went to the RNC last August. “This is the most difficult time I have ever seen for a young person to enter the business.”

All I could do was let silence fill the room, and then I asked, “How can that be? Even compared to what you went through?”

“Yes. Even more.”

It is true. We have our challenges ahead of us, but as I told my friend over G Chat, the greater the challenge, the greater the opportunity and reward. So let’s do this and fix this problem together.

It pains me, but  I have taken a serious hiatus from blogging. Why? It’s hard to say. My day job has drained me. The fate of journalism scares me. And it feels impossible, without giving up absolutely everything, including a personal life, to seek original content in my spare time, not just spin what’s already been spun. I think you all, the people who visit my blog, deserve some original stories. Not more spin.

Since MTV ended, I have had a ton of offers to write/produce for free. I get it. I’m young in my career. I should be willing to work for free or little cost. But seriously? It degrades what I’m trying to do: prove that real journalism, real information, can’t be found solely at the keypad on my computer.Sure, I can build sources, I can research, read other perspectives. But I can’t go out there, attend a hearing, get reactions at a rally…get a soundbite that actually informs the direction of a national dialogue or changes the perspective of a student, a voter, a President.

While working full time for free, hustling for stories and uploading all the time to iReport, HuffingtonPost and TrueSlant  sounds great, I am a pragmatist. And I’m not about to jump ship, leave my day job, without knowing who is steering us to a better place. To a journalism that doesn’t deny the possibility the Internet brings. To a journalism that admits many jobs will be lost but many more created.  To a journalism that wants to embrace web 2.0 to inform the public to make better decisions. Why, with all that is at stake, are we not there yet?

One of the first times I interviewed Helen Thomas, I told her I considered her the first “blogger” in the White House. I don’t think she was expecting the words that had come out of my mouth. As background, this was back in 2007, when Bush was still in control, and the word “blog” was a sure shot to get my mouth washed out with soap in the wrong company. But Helen listened, and then she asked, “what do you mean?”

I went on.

“In a way, you are. You aren’t trying to kid anyone. You are going for the facts, but you are also going for reactions – and you are putting yourself in the question. Your peers are totally shocked. They don’t know what to do with it,” and thought to myself, “except ignore you.”

A while later, I was at a happy hour with a bunch of people who worked at ABC, NBC, CNN, etc. A senior White House producer from one of these major networks asked me about Helen. I answered by asking her why people in the Press Corp didn’t follow up on Helen’s questions, the ones that were so OBVIOUS, like, Mr. President, are you certain Iraq has WMD? Why do intelligence reports contradict? Do we torture? You know, the basics.

The Producer’s answer? “She makes us all uncomfortable.”

Uncomfortable? What a waste of a press pass. Someone who seeks the truth makes the Press Corp “uncomfortable.”

Why does this matter?

As important as the niche, bulldog blogs have become inside the Beltway, mainstream press is still mainstream press. People from Indiana to Idaho are still busy, focused on raising families or farms, paying bills or the doctor. They don’t have time to do their homework. So they turn to comfortable brands, like network and cable news. The same places that proved in the run up the Iraq war, that they were comfortable reporting what they were told, and uncomfortable looking for more.

But we all know what asking tough questions in recent years has brought Helen. Animosity from her peers. A cold shoulder from a President. A status as a “has been.” Between you and me, she does care that people attack her work. But she also tells me this, “You don’t go into this business to be popular.”

Perhaps that is what we are all afraid of. Not being liked. Or even better, not being rich. Honestly? I’m past it. This democracy is in need of truth. It is in need of a financially vibrant system of press. One that can be trusted, competitive, and open for debate. And above all else, run by people who get the fact that the Internet and technology will make journalism better off. More informed. More conscious. More like Helen.

Helen Thomas meets Twitter. Well, I’ve introduced them once before. But this time on camera – and this time, armed with questions from you. She was a good sport and full of laughs, but then quickly turned the tables and asked me to ask you: who wants single payer health care?

Check out her latest column, Obama Running Scared, to learn what she means.

As CBS’s 60 Minutes called it on Sunday, May 11th, drones are America’s new “air force.”

Funny they said that. A few weeks ago I had a conversation with Helen Thomas where she talked about the military’s use of drones. I was probing her on the defense budget – asking her how I can learn to study it well enough to know when something doesn’t add up. She told me she wasn’t an expert on budgets, but that she does know a little something about the sophistication of the weapons we are using.

After I came home to upload and watch the video, I got a little nervous. Was this kind of stuff classified? I had never heard any of it before. So I called her to make sure.

“No,” she told me, “this is all open information.”

Once again, the student had been schooled. How I love when that happens.

This video contains several references to Web sites and resources that I used to do research. All of the links can be found below. This video is available on YouTube, Yahoo! Video, Meta Cafe and Daily Motion. So get into it and pass it on.

Drones: America’s New Air Force, CBS News 60 Minutes, and CNET, May 10, 2009

Air Force to Build Up Its Drone Supply, Washington Post, March 19, 2005

Lobbying Spending Database, OpenSecrets.org

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.

Here is the next installment. I hope you enjoy. For links to the articles relevant to the video, check out the list below.

Israel Stance Was Undoing of Nominee for Intelligence Post, New York Times

Mark Mazzetti and Helene Cooper
March 11, 2009

What are U.S. goals in Afghanistan?
Helen Thomas
March 12, 2009

Bush, top aides apparently home free
Helen Thomas
March 7, 2009

Thomas: Why shouldn’t Obama aim high?
Helen Thomas
February 26, 2009

I had some extra footage from my conversation with Helen Thomas on 2/19/09. In it, she talked tough to Republicans — “They drove us into the ground” — addressed the first credentialed blogger in the Press Corp, and shared her deepest concern for the crash of newspapers.

Tonight I went over to Hearst, where Helen writes her weekly column, to talk. I told her ahead of time I had some questions and she sounded excited. “Sounds good,” she said. “I’ll see you at 5:30.”

What came of the conversation is the pilot episode for Your Fix with Helen Thomas. Enjoy and let me know what you think. I’ll be back next week for round two.

It’s past 5:00 in Helen’s newsroom. She had a busy few weeks. She greeted the new President with a controversial question, got blasted by Bill O’Reilly…and then got flowers… It hasn’t been an average week for Helen, but then again, it never is. Now, in a completely new role, Helen Thomas will take your questions.

Helen’s last two columns:

Obama Follows Some of Bush’s Footsteps February 18, 2009

Obama Learns Limits of Bipartisan Overtures February 12, 2009

To friends and family when my video launched.

“This doesn’t just close out a month when I (determinedly) worked through each weekend, it signifies a milestone in my Street Team tenure. I am half way through this journey. My production skills have greatly improved, but more than that, I think I found what a friend and mentor advised I do back in January.

“Erica, Humanize this War.”

With that advice, I thought – and continue to think, about the way to do it. For this video, and over time, I talked to dozens of Veterans. Read every article I could. And through conversation, absorbed anecdotes — about a confusing and unorganized war – from intelligence officers, artillery soldiers, explosive specialists and more.

Here is my video, Mission Possible.”

On April 24th, Helen Thomas wrote in her weekly column, “if history repeats itself, the loser of this year’s presidential election will blame the news media.” [SEE FULL ARTICLE, "The Loser Always Blame the Media"]

With the recent case of Hillary versus Barack, Helen’s assessment was spot on.

Last Saturday I had a unexpected, and even scary, confrontation. I was interviewing demonstrators at the DNC Rules meeting and had spoken to about seven people on camera. All of them supported Senator Clinton and wanted the votes in Michigan and Florida to count.

After the interviews, I was getting b-roll when I saw a guy wearing an Obama sign. I hadn’t talked to any Obama supporters so I thought this would help round my story out. He said he would talk to me, so with that, we moved away from the crowd to a quiet area. And I started to roll the camera.

I didn’t know it, but this exchange, between me, “the media” and him “the Obama fan” would come to sum up the hostility Clinton fans have felt towards the media in this primary season.

Within a minute, Clinton fans spotted me talking to the lone Obama guy and lids started to flip. I was trying to focus on the interview but I couldn’t. Loud, confrontational slurs were being directed at me. I looked over and saw two aggressive Hillary fans only an arm length away from my camera. They started yelling into the lens “This is all your fault! You’re to blame! You and the media!”

To my silent and even confused look, they went on.

“Why are you interviewing this fool?…It’s always like the media to support Obama!”

I could hardly believe it. I mean, me? This is my fault? A million thoughts ran through my head. My heart raced. This was the second time during my MTV tenure as a one-man-band that my safety felt in jeopardy. Never during, but always after, I kind of love it. It really puts me in touch with how people feel.

Within a few seconds, two cordial Clinton supporters came over and walked them away. I turned back around and went on with the interview.

The story came back to me as the North Carolina Street Teamer, Carla Babb, wrote an article about whether or not the media had favored Obama over Clinton.

With that experience fresh in my mind, here’s what I think.

To Helen’s point, the loser (and the campaign supporters) might always blame the media. But as I experienced, the assertion that my work somehow reduced (or on the flip, improved) a candidate’s political standing, while quite complimentary, is not at all true. At least I don’t think it is.

But to the Democrats as a whole — hostility, especially directed at each other, is retro active in securing the November election. It would behoove Senator Clinton to make that known to her supporters. The finger-pointing, not always aimed in the right direction, digresses party unity.

And oh yeah, one more thing. I’m not the mainstream media. I’m a citizen journalist. SNAP.

Here is Helen Thomas’ weekly column. Part of me likes it because I’m learning something about history, the other part appreciates it because Helen offers advice about where we - the media, bloggers and journalists -can take the election dialogue to make it more constructive. She ends of the article with seven questions – true to her no BS style- that all of us should be asking right now.

“Under the gun! Can’t talk. Call next week.”

That’s the voice of Helen Thomas. No, it’s not 1973, and no, Helen’s not in a bustling newsroom. Still, there’s something so retro and iconic about the way she tells me she is under the gun. It reminds me of a time when newsrooms were filled with smoke, not women, and fingers typed as fast as possible to break the next big story. 

Something I’ve learned about Helen, and is evident in this quote, is every article she works on is breaking. She writes only about what she thinks you should know. And for a person who absorbs as much intelligence — and harnesses decades of unprecedented access to power– that’s an impossibly complicated task. Yet somehow she sifts through it all — the gaggles, the memos, the talking points and the distractions.

I’m going to start something new and post her weekly columns. Though Hearst distributes it, and they own over a dozen papers (San Francisco Chornicle, San Antonio Express, Albany Times Union) it’s rare that anything but the Falls Church News Press, a small paper south of DC, runs it. And now, because what Helen knows, I think we all should, Erica-America does.

Helen Thomas: War Is Not The People’s Business

WASHINGTON — Back in President Lyndon B. Johnson’s worst days when he was grappling with the Vietnam quagmire and raucous anti-war protests at home, he said that in the big decisions about war and peace: “The people should be in on the take offs as well as the landings.”

Tell that to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, who apparently could care less what Americans think — except every four years at election time.

Cheney made that clear in an intriguing interview with ABC News on his recent Middle East trip. Despite the difficulties surrounding the unprovoked U.S. invasion of Iraq five years ago, Cheney insisted, “It was the right thing to do.”

When the interviewer told him that two-thirds of Americans say the war in Iraq is not worth fighting, Cheney scoffed.

The administration would not be “blown off course by the fluctuations in public opinion polls,” he vowed.

Cheney went on to claim that Abraham Lincoln would never have succeeded in the Civil War if he had paid attention to polls.

White House press secretary Dana Perino later indicated that Bush was on the same page.

Asked about Cheney’s remarks to ABC, Perino said the Bush administration realizes its popularity polls are very low (30 percent) “but largely that’s because of people being unhappy about the war, about the fact that it has gone on five years. . .and we’re aware of that.”

She added that both Bush and Cheney have long believed the reason they are leaders is because they do “not chase popularity polls but. . . hold themselves to a standard that requires people not to like them.”

She went on to explain that the administration would like people to support the president’s decisions but that such a hope is “unrealistic” in time of war.

“And while we’re not able to change public opinion, we have to follow a principle,” she said, “and stand on principle.”

Reminded that she was saying, in effect, that the people had no say about the war, Perino replied that they have “input” every four years, adding: “And that’s the way our system is set up.”

As long as Congress cowers sheep-like and does not retrieve its constitutional power to declare war, an imperial Bush-style presidency will prevail.

The war against Iraq was built on falsehoods — weapons of mass destruction that did not exist and ties to al-Qaida that were a fantasy. The administration used these phony rationales to scare the American people into fearing a threat from a third-world country.

Since the administration’s original propaganda has now been revealed to be bogus, Bush has resumed his claim that it was necessary to rid the world of a tyrant, Saddam Hussein — a friend of the U.S., incidentally, in earlier times.

His aides remain loyal to their chant that Iraq is “the central front in the war on terrorism.”

Any port in a storm seems to be the strategy of White House spin-masters.

Determined to ignore the reality that the war is a debacle and the killing will go on, Bush last year came up with the “surge” theory of dispatching 30,000 more troops to Iraq in hopes of bringing Iraqi submission.

There has been a lessening of violence in Iraq. Could it be that there are fewer attacks on American troops because we are paying huge sums of money to Sunni Iraqis to persuade them to stop attacking Americans and instead go after al-Qaida?

Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker will leave Baghdad in May to report to Bush and Congress on the status of the war and talk about a timetable for a drawdown of more troops — or even propose a pause in withdrawals.

Next November, the American voters will decide on a new president. Before then, reporters will be remiss if they fail to nail the candidates on whether the views of the people on questions of war and peace will count with them.

Tonight was Ivan Scott’s memorial service. I only got four hours of sleep the night before but there wasn’t any question I was going, so I bucked up and walked down to the Catholic Church on 24th and Pennsylvania. Ivan, who went to Princeton, served in Korea and then went on to cover wars as a CBS radio correspondent. I was fascinated by his nine lives and asked him what it was like reporting from a war zone.

“There is nothing more thrilling than having bullets buzz by your head and shells flying in the air. It’s the only place a reporter should be if they want to cover the news.”

For many reasons I believed and admired him.

But let me back up for just a second.  I met Ivan, Helen (Thomas), (Rahubir) Goyal and Connie (Lawn) at a dinner last May 17th. I’ll always remember the date, the moment, the evening. In many ways it changed the course of my life. It also confirmed my direction towards journalism in a profound way.

The dinner, which I won’t get into now, had me sitting right across Helen. Thankfully, my Aunt Debi was there, who served as the perfect generational liaison. I asked Helen if we could have lunch sometime and she said “Sure. Give me a call and we’ll have a Coke.” And that’s how it all started.

My First Memorable Conversation with Ivan

At one point, Helen and Debi danced off to the bathroom together and I was left at the table with Ivan. In his seersucker suite, brown rimmed circle glasses and warm smile, he turned to me and got serious.

“You know, young lady, she’s a legend. She’s a legend in this town.”

I looked at him a bit shocked. He was looking out for Helen like a sister, a member of his family and for a second my enchantment faded. I understood. And although I barely knew the extend of her history, I agreed.

“Yes, I know.”

Ivan went on to take me under his wing, taking me to drinks and dinners, allowing me a rich conversation where I could ask anything about his life, history, war, and relationships. He was, by all means, a mentor who went beyond the call of duty.  Last week, after a brief illness, he passed away. 

Ivan’s Memorial Service

When I walked into the church, I noticed Helen was in the back sitting alone. I decided I’d sit next to her, but first went over and lit a candle. Somehow through my tenuous spirituality, I asked my Mom to sit with me for strength. Funerals, as I know, bring unpredictable, and sometimes, unwelcome emotion.

I went over and slide down the pew with my street team backpack. Helen smiled and welcomed me. After a minute, she broke the silence.

“I didn’t even know. I was away,” she said.

Her make-up was done and her hair curled. There was a sadness about her so I didn’t really say much.

After the ceremony I watched Tony Snowe walk up to her, who had just consoled Ivan’s wife, to give her a friendly stroke. It was a moment of grief for all those around us, but in particular, I thought, to Helen, who had lost a friend who took with him so much heart and knowledge about her life.

She kept an eye on me as we walked out the Church and said in a low voice, “Let’s go get a coffee or a drink.” She extended her hand for me to hold, and told me, “I’m still wobbly from the long flight (from Dubai).”

So I escorted her, through fans of people (I know this because of the nervous compliments people came to give her) and to the curb where, a man who had sat behind us, offered us a ride. During the ceremony she had turned to him, a Navy officer at the Pentagon, and said, “You have a wonderful voice.”

We went to the Tabbard Inn, the last place I had met Ivan, and had our usual gin and vodka. I told her all about the Winter Soldier event.  She was on my every word, especially when I told her about Conscientious Objector, Camilo Mejia.

“He said,” I told her, “that it is difficult being a CO in the military. But that ‘war, is the best argument against war.”

She smiled and looked very pleased. “That’s an incredible quote.”

On our way out, she had barely made it to the steps when she went into a rant about White House Press Secretary, Dana Perino.

“Torture…torture…’we don’t torture’ she says….’we don’t torture?!’ Please!”

Helen didn’t know it but a couple was standing behind us. They couldn’t get through as Helen had paused to finish her rant. I made eye contact to let the woman know to go the other way around.

I figured she had no idea who Helen – or I – for that matter was, and would be on her way. Instead, she walked down the steps and positioned herself in front of Helen.

“Ms. Thomas, I have never been in your presence before. My husband and I were so pleased when you walked in… and…I…I just wanted to say Thank you, for everything you’ve done.”

Helen, as if almost granted these moments by sheer reparation of her age and societal contributions, lit up, like every other time a person thanked her.

“Thank you so much. Thank you so much,” she gently and sincerely said.

Before the woman could walk two steps away, Helen got back to what she was saying to me.

“ ‘Torture…’ We don’t torture! What do you mean, ‘we don’t torture?!’ ”

“Helen,” I said with a big smile, “you sure don’t miss a beat!”

She paused and let out a big laugh.

“I guess I don’t!”

And in that moment, Ivan, a person who knew how to laugh despite the realization that everything in the world is not always right, was in some way there.

At age 87, Dean of the White House Press Corp, Helen Thomas, is still kicking ass and taking names. Throughout her tenure as a wire reporter for UPI, Thomas helped to break the Kennedy assasination, traveled to China with Nixon, and covered the “Washington side” of Vietnam, Korea, the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts and now Iraq. Today, she writes a column for Hearst News Corporation which comes out every Thursday in the Falls Church News Press. When I asked Helen about her New Years Resolution, she paused and then with a burst of energy said, “Send Bush to the Hague!”

The video is here.