Movies are consumed by many as a form of escapism—they close the blinds on daily stressors, provide entertainment during moments of boredom, and spark conversations between viewers. A movie set in the 1950s, however, strikes as an exception. For contemporary viewers, it might come as a surprise just how much the film’s thematic elements carry into the present.
Good Night, and Good Luck is a movie retelling of CBS coverage during the rise of McCarthyism. It follows broadcast journalist Edward R. Murrow (David Strathairn) and his co–producer Fred W. Friendly (George Clooney) who, challenged the actions of Senator Joseph McCarthy through their news reports. In these episodes, the duo aimed to address and inform American audiences about unmerited accusations and unfair trials. While news reporters from other networks were reluctant to cover the trials, CBS demonstrated immense commitment in delivering the truth to their audiences—even if it put them at the risk of increased government surveillance.
Twenty years after the movie’s release, a theatrical production of Good Night, and Good Luck, now with Clooney as Murrow, opened on Broadway at the Winter Garden Theatre. Although its closing night was June 8, the play did not end its Broadway run without leaving its mark on live television—a feat that no Broadway production has achieved before. After its penultimate performance, which was streamed live on CNN and HBO Max from inside the theatre, a panel of journalists and reporters analyzed the impacts and implications of the show—providing accessible live theatre for audiences around the world and most importantly, causing the resurfacing of conversations surrounding the significance of integrity and truth in journalism during abrasive times in history.
Streaming the production brought a piece of Broadway directly into viewers’ homes—but does this necessarily mean it reached everyone it could have? Although a historic step for live theater, the streaming of a politically charged performance through a major news network does not air without drawbacks. For a play and film that critiques government interference in journalism, it makes sense that a major news network would want to secure the airing rights. The subject matter of the play strongly aligns with the work of news anchors: who can comment and provide insight on the major themes of Good Night, and Good Luck through their personal experiences working in news organizations. That very association between inherently political media and news networks also limits the ability to engage as many audience members as possible—especially among viewers with differing political backgrounds and perspectives. Art in any medium is political—it presents a message to audience members with the intention of prompting reflection on certain subjects. For that impact to land, it has to reach across ideological lines. If a play only confirms the beliefs of its viewers, it becomes less effective and possibly more polarizing because it creates an “echo chamber” of sorts—solely reflecting what viewers want to hear. While this is not a cause –and–effect situation, airing political media on outlets known for specific, left– or–right ideological leanings, can form a narrow audience—one made up largely of viewers with the same political backgrounds and shared ideologies. This poses an important question: Did airing Good Night, and Good Luck on CNN deter potential viewers who would otherwise watch the play, simply because of the network it was associated with?
The ratings revealed that 7.34 million viewers tuned in to watch the event, making it the second highest prime–time of the year for the network. CNN usually attracts liberal audiences, but the special was also shown on Max—which may have allowed producers to cast a wider net to catch broader audiences.
As we face uncertainty—with public broadcasting channels defunded and news outlets losing press access to the White House—this production, shown to theater attendees and aired for audiences who watched from home, has demonstrated how truth and integrity in journalism are more important than ever. This theatrical adaptation brought a new light and perspective to the film, encouraging ongoing discussions on its themes. This dialogue started almost immediately, with pre– and post–show panels featuring journalists reflecting on the challenges of reporting hard and truthful news, even if it means facing backlash. It was clear after watching the movie and the CNN panels that, at its core, the purpose of bringing Good Night and Good Luck to the stage was not just to inform audiences about the dangers of government control over media, but also to shed light on what is happening to media outlets right now.
As I watched the 2005 film, one particular quote stuck out to me. As Murrow discusses the role that television plays in informing the public he states, “This instrument can teach, it can illuminate, and yes, it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it, towards those ends. Otherwise, it is merely wires and lights in a box.” This still rings true. As audiences watching the stream can attest, programming that seeks to illuminate the truth makes television an instrument to teach and inspire discourse among the public, just as Murrow and Friendly wished it would.
