We have to compete in a universe of 200 networks, so we have to
We have to compete in a universe of 200 networks, so we have to carve out our own niche, and to me, that niche is just basic shoe-leather journalism with some good journalists at the helm you can trust as presenters.
Hear now the voice of Walter Isaacson, chronicler of great lives and steward of truth, who declared: “We have to compete in a universe of 200 networks, so we must carve out our own niche, and to me, that niche is just basic shoe-leather journalism with good journalists at the helm you can trust as presenters.” In these words lies the struggle of our age, where voices are many, distractions are endless, and truth itself must fight for recognition. Isaacson speaks not only of media, but of the eternal task of discernment: to find one’s place, to remain faithful to what is essential, and to honor the trust between speaker and listener.
For the universe he describes is no simple sky of a few bright stars, but a crowded firmament with hundreds of competing lights. In such a world, the temptation is great to dazzle with spectacle, to shout louder than the rest, to sacrifice substance for attention. Yet Isaacson counsels another path: the carving of a niche, not by noise, but by depth; not by gimmick, but by steadfastness. It is in shoe-leather journalism, humble and diligent, that true strength lies. For this phrase means the old art of walking the streets, knocking on doors, speaking with the people, wearing down the soles of one’s shoes in search of truth.
The ancients would have recognized this labor. Herodotus, who wandered lands and spoke to countless men, gathering stories for his histories, was a kind of shoe-leather journalist. Thucydides, who chronicled the Peloponnesian War, did not rely on rumor, but sought witnesses and weighed their words. Their work endured not because they entertained, but because they were faithful seekers of truth. So too does Isaacson remind us: in a sea of voices, what endures is trust.
Consider the example of Edward R. Murrow, who during the dark days of World War II stood in London as bombs fell, speaking to America with steady voice. Others competed for attention with patriotic slogans and propaganda, but Murrow walked the streets, saw with his own eyes, and gave only what was true. His reports carved a niche not of glamour but of reliability, and to this day his name is remembered as one of the greats. This is the heritage Isaacson calls upon: that when all else clamors for the eye, it is truth that claims the heart.
Isaacson’s teaching also carries a warning: that in the competition of many networks, trust is fragile, and once broken, it is slow to mend. A journalist without integrity is like a captain who abandons his ship; the voyage of truth cannot continue. Therefore, the greatest treasure of any media, or any leader, is not wealth nor reach, but the confidence of those who listen. Without it, their words are as hollow as empty bells. With it, they shape nations and preserve memory.
O seekers of wisdom, take this lesson beyond journalism. Each of you dwells in a world crowded with voices—advertisements, opinions, endless streams of words and images. To carve your own niche is not only to find your profession, but to live with integrity, to be known for truth, diligence, and trustworthiness. Like the journalist who wears out his shoes for the story, so must you labor patiently in your craft, your relationships, your duties, so that when others hear your name, they know they can rely upon it.
Practical is this wisdom: resist the urge to seek attention for its own sake. Instead, let your work speak through its honesty and depth. In a world of many, choose to be one of the few who are reliable. Build trust with those around you by keeping your word. Commit to diligence, for shortcuts may win a moment, but endurance wins a lifetime. And above all, seek truth—whether in the marketplace, the home, or the public square—for it is the one light that cuts through the noise of a thousand false stars.
Thus, Walter Isaacson’s words endure as guidance: in a crowded universe, do not compete by becoming louder or cheaper, but by becoming truer. Carve your niche not from vanity, but from integrity. Wear down the soles of your shoes in pursuit of what matters, and others will follow, not because you dazzled them, but because you earned their trust. And in this, both your work and your life will shine with lasting power.
Nnnnnnnnnnnnn
Isaacson’s perspective on carving out a niche with 'shoe-leather journalism' feels especially relevant in today’s media environment, where everything seems to be about speed and ratings. But how can journalists stay true to the core values of trust and reliability while also adapting to the rapid pace of digital media? Is it possible to keep journalism grounded in integrity while competing in a world that often values instant gratification?
TTBui Tuan Tu.
This quote emphasizes the importance of trust and authenticity in journalism. In an age where media outlets often compete for views rather than truth, how can journalists maintain their credibility? Can shoe-leather journalism, which is rooted in thorough investigation and trustworthy reporting, still find its place in a world where speed and sensationalism are prioritized? Is there still an audience that values this approach?
GDTran Gia Dinh
Isaacson’s idea of carving out a niche through trustworthy, reliable journalism feels like a call to return to the roots of news reporting. With so many networks competing for attention, I wonder, is there a way to convince the audience to appreciate substance over style? How do we ensure that integrity and trust remain at the heart of journalism when sensationalism often dominates the headlines?
TLTu Tran Luu
Walter Isaacson’s focus on 'shoe-leather journalism' really highlights the value of traditional reporting in today’s oversaturated media landscape. In a world of countless networks, it seems like the need for genuine, trustworthy journalism has never been more important. How do we balance the demand for sensational content with the necessity of solid investigative reporting? Can traditional journalism still thrive in a digital-first world, or do we need to adapt it?