Author's Note: This was written in late 1994 for Rabelais, the infamous La Trobe University student newspaper. It was my first uncensored conversation with an "insider" news producer. Gerald Stone subsequently wrote an excellent tell-all book called Compulsive Viewing (Sydney: Random House Australia, 2000).

It had been an interesting week for [Australian TV network] Channel 9's current affairs flagship 60 Minutes.

Early in the week the program had come under fire from highbrow critics, most notably from The Age for a confronting interview between Jana Wendt and the memoir selling [ex-Australian Prime Minister] Bob Hawke. The program's founder Gerald Stone had announced his resignation from Channel 7's Real Life which had appropriated the formers' journalistic techniques and chased the same stories. Finally it saw the imminent release of a book by former field producer John Little, which revealed the harsh realities of the business and some intriguing information about the reporters.

Together with my colleague Samantha Amjadali, we had set up an interview at The Adelphi, a conspiratorial looking hotel whose bistro looked like an art deco nightmare. Accompanied by his publicist, Little arrived fresh from an interview on ABC's [Australian Broadcasting Corporation] TVTV, ironically grilled by Mark Mitchell, who had been part of the Comedy Company [a popular early-1990s comedy revue] that almost ended the program in a rating war during the 1980s.

Television has redefined journalism forever, and according to The New Republic (28 May 1990), the sound-bite has shrunk from 42 seconds in 1960 to 9.8 seconds in 1988. In America educational institutions such as the over-rated Columbia School of Journalism have come under fire for being irrelevant, premier investigative journalist has come under fire for being irrelevant, premier investigative journalist Bob Woodward has become a staple of talk show hosts. Stone fashioned 60 Minutes after its parent in the US which has run for over 25 years, so I asked Little if he felt that investigative journalism as a whole had declined over the program's history, and if 60 Minutes was responsible for this. "I think that 60 Minutes has changed the nature of TV journalism, and that at times we have been sensationalistic, but we've had some important breakthroughs such as uncovering the Chelmsford scandal [covert deep-sleep experimentation on psychiatric patients]. As we're on a national network we aren't always given our dues. We have a different agenda to the ABC's Four Corners for instance, a different institutional style. If we had done "Police State" [the Four Corners program that lead to uncovering Queensland police corruption] nobody would have noticed because it would be claimed we were just after ratings. I saw their interview with Hawke after Wendt's and it was pitiful – Gerald Henderson only attacked Hawke on a voice-over, not directly, whereas Wend dared to do so."

So, on-screen confrontation is a good journalistic technique? "Sometimes, when it's needed!"

Little's book is an easily readable kaleidoscope of activity that I read in one night. It concentrates on the personalities such as the nervous breakdown of [reporter] Jennifer Byrne or the "psycho boy" antics of [reporter] Mike Munro. The internal politics covered reminded me of Frontline [a brilliant mid-1990s satire on Australian television current affairs programs].

"That show's an exaggeration with some thinly disguised portraits, but pretty true," was Little's reply. He had been a field location producer for 9 years, but left in 1993. "My colleagues knew I wanted to write the book when I left, it's the result of many careful interviews with reporters, crew, and staff. The reaction to the book was varied – some people have liked it, some have hated it because it revealed too much. I left some things out because people requested me to do so, so I ethically complied." Well rehearsed answers aside, the book has some unusual scenes, such as [America's Cup winner and ex-media magnate] Alan Bond being interrogated about financial dealings by his own employees before an ABT inquiry, or Jana Wendt being signed to 60 Minutes over an inexpensive chinese meal."

One subject Little covers is the proliferation of "chequebook journalism." In the late 1970s the program had used hidden cameras but its competitors such as A Current Affair with the Chamberlain's story [depicted in the 1988 film A Cry In The Dark] – the biggest story of the 1980s really, which we bought for $250,000. James Scott's story [surviving an avalanche] was another example – people like Harry M. Miller [legendary Antipodean media agent, comparable to Michael Ovitz] are becoming more powerful. We were guilty of starting the trend, and it's something I wanted to expose and confront in the book. Competitors like A Current Affair and Real Life have made the industry more competitive. Like it or not, it's here to stay – even some of the women's magazines are getting in on the act." Little is guilty of the same sin if only for publicity reasons, because he sold excerpts of the book to these magazines during the interview schedules.

What about the role of Kerry Packer and interference with the program? "He used to harass senior executives like Stone or [producer] Peter Meakin – after the first program he rang Stone up and told him he had "blown it." He watches the program every Sunday night like most people.

But there was only incident where he actually interfered with a story, and I feel as the proprietor he was doing the right thing. In 1990 John McMullen did a story on Dr. John Hewson [ex-Australian Liberal Party leader] and interviewed his children, who made negative comments. Hewson's political people made complaints to [Kerry] Packer, who demanded to see the story. His reason was that during the 1983 Costigan Royal Commission, Packer had been linked to drugs and pornography, and Packer's son, who was 8 at his time, was troubled at school. Hewson's people claimed that McMullen had manipulated the children, but when Packer saw the rough edit of the interview he saw that it wasn't the case, and let the story run."

According to studies done by Edward S. Hermann and Noam Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent, stories are more likely to be interfered with by producers or journalists themselves by sticking to a format and jettisoning any "unwanted" material. Little's book has several scenes of this happening, and no doubt, the program's reputation as an elite journalism place does have an impact – each reporter has taken upon an individual personality or style. "Yes the editors do have a tremendous impact on the program," Little admitted, "and the only safeguards we have is the integrity of the producers and reporters themselves. Stories are carefully checked, but there isn't an institutional framework to ensure that this doesn't occur, beyond checking the edits. We have had lapses in "taste" during interviews, but have a high standard. Each story goes through a careful stage of planning - we had over 10 producers and many researchers backing and planning a story. We check affiliates and media overseas for story ideas and pitch them to the executive producers who hone the angle. Some have their pet projects – Jennifer Byrne liked archaeology for example. The reporters have only 6 weeks off a year – they do 4 or 5 stories at a time, going onto each location. Everything's scheduled like a military campaign. No producer has dropped a story because it didn't suit audience demographics. The reporters have always been performers – Stone wanted a "star system" like the studio-era Hollywood when he began the program and that has impacted on the reporting style. Some, such as [reporter] George Negus or [reporter] Ray Martin became superstars in the early 1980s." This proves my point that somewhere along the line the crusading Jimmy Breslin style reporters either went to university, were paid out or became info-commodities and no longer threaten anybody. There are still a few out there, like [reporter] Richard Carleton, who keep the flag up [in the late-1990s, Carleton adopted the tabloid reportage style].

"We tended to stay away from political journalism, the others can cover that, except when we need to, such as during the elections with the 'worm' meters [real-time psychographic profiling] during the Keating/Hewson debates [election political summits]. In one case where Keating forced us not to cut any of his comments, we set a time limit and turned it into theatre."

As a field producer, Little travelled on location, and witnessed many amazing sights, including war zones, massacres in Uganda, the collapse of Eastern Europe, and with [reporter] Ian Leslie, the on-screen arrest of murderer Ernie Knibb. "It started as a case of police brutality, but the evidence piled up, but the evidence piled up, including polygraph tests. I couldn't understand it – he was guilty, but still happy to go on prime time TV!" Like the Gary Gilmore media circus in Norman's Mailer's The Executioner's Song, it seems that everybody wants their 15 minutes of fame and are prepared to pay a heavy price.

"I still think there is another book left in this TV thing, I'm writing it soon." According to his publicists, Little has also written a book of short stories and a crime novel. And Little's closing career advice to aspiring journalists? "Tell the truth of course!" That we should be so lucky.