I want everybody in the news business to think of ABC before they go any place else. If it costs us an extra few thousand dollars to do that, what does it mean?
In the past ABC has made half-hearted efforts or, worse, cosmetic efforts, to do something about news and I wasn't certain about what their real aim was - nor am I now.
One of the reasons why when Elvis dies or the Son of Sam is captured ABC News' ratings go up is because people who don't normally watch news are watching then. The question is, do you want to attract people who don't watch network news or fight over the people who do?
But unlike the setup in most organizations, where there's an administrator on top and creative people or doers underneath, I'm basically a doer and I like to have administrative people underneath me.
Most of what we report from Congress they don't care about unless it affects them directly.
But if you cover the World Series on the news or do a feature on an Ali boxing match then all of a sudden ears go up all over the place and people say what the hell are you doing. The reason for that is that we're doing something that people are really interested in.
The current wisdom now is that if the three networks are covering the news the same way the difference is the anchor people. I think that won't be true in the future.