The landscape of Asian representation on Boston local television news was certainly different in the 1970s and early 1980s. Stalwarts like Chet Curtis, Jack Williams, John Henning, and Tom Ellis were the faces that brought viewers news of snowstorms, busing and City Hall shenanigans in their stentorian tones and square-shouldered masculinity. Janet Wu’s appearance on the Boston media scene, first as a GBH State House reporter from 1978-1983 and then at WCVB from 1983 until her retirement in December 2022, was trailblazing for several reasons. She was the first woman on the job and the first Asian American. Her thirty-nine years as a fixture at WCVB and co-host since 2009 of the political affairs program, On The Record, demonstrated remarkable resiliency in a field where many on-camera reporters are shuffled around like a pack of playing cards.
Sampan recently had the opportunity to speak with Wu about her life and times on the job here in Boston. Wu is a 1972 graduate of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. She was a 1989 and 1998 recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award, and in 2001 and 2005 she was part of a team that won the Walter Cronkite Award for Excellence in Television Political Journalism. In 2010, she was inducted into the Massachusetts Broadcasters Hall of Fame, and in 2011 received an Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Emerson College.
SAMPAN: What was the spark that lit the journalist’s fire in you as a young woman from Bridgewater, NJ?
JANET WU: I grew up in a household with parents who both immigrated to the USA because of political, social and economic turmoil in China. Politics and government were always the top subject of discussion at dinner every night. My father commuted from New York City and brought home 5 daily newspapers every night: The Herald Tribune, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Daily News and the New York Post. We watched the nightly news during dinner. When I was a sophomore at the University of Michigan, I had to declare a major. I hadn’t realized until then that my interests were politics and the news. So I double majored in political science and journalism.
SAMPAN: You have many compelling stories for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is being a woman in a typically all-boys club as well as an Asian American in what was at the time a predominantly white profession. In a November 4, 2022 interview with The Boston Globe, you noted that things were tough with few female State House reporters on the beat. You added…”to say I was not welcomed initially would be an understatement.” Was this resistance to your arrival gender-based, racial, or a mixture of both?
JANET WU: I think it was both, equally. In 1975, all Statehouse reporters were white and primarily male. Only two other women were in the press corp. Most of the politicians were white males and apprehensive about stopping and chatting with me in the Statehouse hallways. While the male reporters could casually drop by the “Golden Dome (the bar that is now the “21st Amendment” across the street) to meet people and develop sources, I didn’t feel comfortable putting myself in that position as a young woman. So the process of getting political consultants, staffers and future politicians to trust me and relay information was doubly difficult.
SAMPAN: You obviously take seriously the journalistic mission to inform and educate. Among the reflections you added in “freepressconnection.org” is the unfortunate fact that “…not enough voters connect what they learn with their obligation to weigh in at the ballot box.” Is this disconnection the fault of an increasingly distracted public or a television news media that seems to be failing in their obligation to invest time and money in strong and vital community affairs programming?
JANET WU: I believe the obligation to learn about how government works or doesn’t work is the responsibility of every voter. But often lives are so complicated and consumed with day-today responsibilities to provide for families, that voters don’t have time to fit this self-education into their schedules. The fault also lies with our schools where civics is no longer the priority it was when I was in primary, middle and high school due to budget restraints. As for the media, most outlets are owned by major corporations and their priority is to make money for their shareholders and owners. It often is easier and cheaper to give viewers the easy headlines: fires, accidents and pop culture. Investigative and political journalism takes more time and more digging and is, thereby, more expensive. Also with the development of online news outlets that are cheaper to produce, but also maintain less oversight of accuracy, the voter can easily be misled or can simply choose to expose herself/himself to what they already have decided is the truth. It’s like fast food: easy, quick but not nutritious.
SAMPAN: What role do you see podcasts playing in allowing commercial news programming to
rebuild their obligation to provide a voice to the public? In an era of “tik tok” and on-demand programming, the blurred lines of infotainment and heightened flashy crime drama seem meant for binge programming. How can commercial news programming gather and maintain an informed audience?
JANET WU: Podcasts can be very informative, but fall into the category I described in one of your earlier questions. Voters and consumers often choose to listen to what they already believe. It is the responsibility of major news outlets like The Boston Globe and WCVB to invest in investigative journalism, which they do. But they don’t have the resources to also drill down into local city and town governmental activity in each community. Newspapers like Sampan are dying around the country, and with that happening so does accountability in reporting on governance at the local level.
SAMPAN: Could you elaborate on the importance of FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) laws allowing journalists to obtain documents that will define and contextualize their stories? You’ve noted the importance of journalists allowing voters to see how the“sausage is made” The executive and legislative branches of Massachusetts state government have exempted themselves from FOIA. What stories have been effected by this exemption?
JANET WU: Massachusetts is one of only a handful of states where the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government are all exempt from public records law. Bottom line, they can conduct a majority of government business in secret. I am on the board of NEFAC (New England First Amendment Coalition) and our attempts to change this have been shut down for decades.
SAMPAN: You worked for UPI and you were a Massachusetts State House reporter for GBH before joining WCVB as a State House reporter in 1983. The longevity of nearly forty years at one television station is a rarity in your field, Is there any Boston story that slipped away from your grips? What’s been your proudest professional moment?
JANET WU: I get asked this question repeatedly and there are simply too many stories to list that have slipped away. But one of my favorite stories, not necessarily my proudest professional moment, was when the head of one of the largest unions in Massachusetts, the AFL-CIO, tried to intimidate me with his height at a John Kerry press conference because he didn’t like the questions I was asking. We were on Boston City Hall Plaza at the time. Several years later, Bobby Haynes ran from me at the Statehouse when I tried to ask him questions about a conflict of interest issue. With a camera in tow videotaping the incident, I asked him if he wanted me to put the video of him running from me on the news that night. He finally stopped and answered my questions, reluctantly. Bullies often can’t take what they so easily dish out.
SAMPAN: What’s next for Janet Wu? You’ll be traveling and enjoying your grandchildren, but can we expect another act from this veteran Boston TV fixture?
JANET WU: I am 72 years old and unlike many others, I am not afraid to retire. I may work on a few projects if they come my way, but only if the issue and the people I’d be working with are folks and issues I respect. But I’d like to enjoy my family fully and cross off many things still on my bucket list. I am grateful for the career and opportunities I’ve enjoyed. Time to focus on important matters of the soul! Thank you for your interest and time.
