An Interview with the reporter and producers from new documentary JFK: Breaking the News

Executive producer Rick Thompson, producer Krys Villasenor and reporter Hugh Aynesworth recently spoke with APT about their new documentary.

Q. How does JFK: Breaking News differ from all of the other documentaries about the assassination of JFK?

A: Rick Thompson: We've been in discussion with our co-producers, The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, for a long time about its tremendous archive of assassination-related materials. Ultimately, we were able to access that entire archive, which includes copies of most television, radio and print news report from the time of the assassination. Individual stations have in the past produced stories based on their own coverage, but the entire body of Texas coverage had never been woven into one comprehensive story. Because we had a lot of seldom-seen news footage, it rapidly became apparent that this was a story to be told through the lens of journalism, through the reports of those who became eyewitnesses. But we also knew that there was another larger story — that this footage captured the first moments when television became a leading source of breaking news.

Krys Villasenor: One thing that has really fascinated me is that a lot of footage that we're using is material that would have been cast aside in the past and considered as outtakes. We've included many images and scenes that will look familiar — but viewers will see them in more depth and understand their context. They'll also see and hear a great deal that will surprise them. We have audio of Governor John Connally's wife, Nellie, talking about the moment JFK was shot. We have rarely seen television interview with Abraham Zapruder within hours of JFK's assassination, and the only moving pictures in existence of Oswald's being apprehended at the Texas Theater. We also show glimpses of Jack Ruby hanging around the police station hallways in the days before he shot Oswald.

Q: What would you like viewers to learn from this program?

A: Krys Villasenor: Well, it's a different look at JFK's assassination from virtually any other documentary that we know of. It's not a rehash of past assassination footage and stories. It's a broad look at how Americans were affected by the assassination just for that weekend, and also how it has affected expectations for journalism and news coverage ever since.

Rick Thompson: One of the benefits of public broadcasting is that there are no commercial competitive issues or ownership over any particular footage, so you are able to bring forward the full context of the story without any particular network biases. You can get the unique perspective of the host or reporter which also becomes part of the story as well.

Q: Hugh, you clearly have a big presence in this documentary. How was it you learned about this project?

A: Hugh Aynesworth: My wife, Paula, works here at KERA — and I have a lot of friends at the station who knew about my coverage — so it just came up in discussions over time.

Q: How was it that you were assigned to cover JFK's trip to Dallas? What kind of stories were you covering before this visit and with which newspaper?

A: Hugh Aynesworth: Well, I wasn't assigned. In fact, at the time, I was the science and aviation editor. I was probably the only one among all of my friends who wasn't assigned to do something that day. Before this, I was assigned to cover science, aviation and military for the Dallas Morning News. I covered every manned space flight that we had in the '60s.

Q: How do you feel about being the only reporter to cover all three events? (JFK assassination, Oswald arrest and Oswald assassination)

A: Hugh Aynesworth: A lot of people ask me if I feel that I was lucky. I would say it was a mixed bag. As a journalist, I'm glad I was there and had the opportunity, but some of these memories stay with you. Some of these things affect your life. I know the first time I saw the documentary, I almost teared up. It makes you very emotional.

Q: Was it difficult to write these stories under such extreme circumstances?

A: Hugh Aynesworth: No, I don't think it was. At the Dallas Morning News, we set up a system where one man who was the best writer sat on the desk and everyone fed everything to him for the main story the next day. It wasn't that hard really. What was hard was that we all worked so many hours and had so many tips on conspiracies and had so many people fighting for positions. New people from out-of-town would actually try to take over our desks sometimes; we had to actually fight for them.

Q: How many hours were you working at the time?

A: Hugh Aynesworth: I only worked about 12 or 14 hours that first day. In the days after that, I traced Oswald's escape route and various other things that developed. I worked 18-hour days.

Q: After 40 years, what are your thoughts on having witnessed these three moments in history? What do you all think will be difficult for people to understand regarding the challenges of journalism today vs. journalism during this time in history?

A: Hugh Aynesworth: I consider myself fortunate to have had the opportunity, but I don't know that I would want to do it again. We didn't have cell phones and contacts that we have today. The TV cameras that we had were heavy and bulky and if you didn't have units you would have to share coverage. It was pretty tough to cover things then.

Q.After 40 years, what are your thoughts on having witnessed these three moments in history? What do you all think will be difficult for people to understand regarding the challenges of journalism today vs. journalism during this time in history?

Rick Thompson: From the broadcast standpoint, it's hard to compare the two. The reason that footage exists around that weekend is largely because local stations that didn't have equipment to have live shots from every single location were essentially forced into pool arrangements and all stations had equal access to that footage. Also, they did 72-plus hours of continuous broadcast going in, even though they had no concept of the 24/7 news environment. I think that CNN today, or any of the others that are on 24/7, have so many reporters on standby to fill in that it's a different beast then it was then. They were trying to assemble a story that was rapidly changing and it became even more surreal before the weekend was completed.

Krys Villasenor: Many historians have made the point that if any one of these media (print, broadcast or otherwise), had sat down and thought about how to adequately cover this event over four days in 1963 — with technology that was still in its infancy — they would have sat down and said, 'Forget it. We're not even going to try.' Yet the reporters' instincts took over and they got the assignments out. They were overwhelmingly successful in both print and broadcast and really getting the story out there. They prevented the American people from panicking in a time when there could have been a fear of a communist element to this. Somehow, information that got to the American people kept Americans together in those four days.

Rick Thompson: You have to wonder how this story would be covered today. Many journalists didn't necessarily feel that it was their job to calm the nation, yet they knew instinctively that the manner in which they reported was very important. In the 24/7 environment, where you have the news ticker and theme coverage that adds a lot of additional subliminal messages, perhaps the panic would be greater today than what it was initially in '63.

Q: Hugh, how do you think this experience affected you as you moved forward with your career as a reporter?

A: Hugh Aynesworth: I still had to cover the space flights on through the moon landing, but I spent a lot of time on the Kennedy story — I covered every day of the Ruby trial, and I dealt with all that the Warren Commission was leaving out. I was the first to publish Oswald's Russian diary. I had many interviews on this subject during that time so it wasn't hard to do the science and aviation, but it got a little busy sometimes.