journalism – Page 7 – Media Matters

December 5, 2015

Journalists Behaving Badly

A tweet by Will Federman, an Audience Engagement Editor at Fortune Magazine, captured the essence of a bizarre incident that took place yesterday at the home of Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, suspected of the recent mass shooting in San Bernardino, CA.

ThanksMSNBC

The tweet was a response to live news coverage from inside the home of the accused couple, where reporters from MSNBC, CNN, the LA Times, and other new organizations, were combing through the house and the occupants’ personal belongings. Social media erupted as the live coverage of the “home invasion” played out on the screen. According to reports, the landlord (the accused were renting) used a pry bar to gain access to the home.

For more coverage of the “coverage”, NPR has photos and commentary.

The fact that police and FBI agents apparently stood by as journalists entered and began sifting through personal belongings does not excuse their behavior.

Problems, of course, include: the invasion of privacy of people associated with the accused, the voyeuristic nature of the coverage, the inability to make editorial decisions on the fly when broadcasting live, and possible contamination of a crime scene. Journalists, and other members of the public, are typically kept out of crime scenes until after the police and investigators have done their work. In this case the police realized too late what was going on and failed to close down the scene until after the integrity of the home was compromised.

The lesson for students attending j[ournalism] school is that reporters should know their ethical and legal rights when covering criminal news, and should not allow a mob mentality to overtake them when doing their job. I’m sure that some of the journalists present knew that they were acting in a way that was unprofessional and potentially illegal, but the fact that others were doing it…potentially “scooping” them in the process…was enough to convince them to join in. Of course there may have been a few who were confused by the apparently lack of direction from those in authority. However, ignorance is not a defense and access to private property should always follow appropriate legal procedures.

So there you go j-school students…you don’t have to wait until next fall to learn this lesson.

know the law
don’t be swayed by the mob mentality
question authority…even if the authority figures in question appear to be aiding rather than obstructing your efforts to get the scoop

November 15, 2015

I Need Some Muscle Over Here

Rarely is the 1st Amendment on such public display as it has been in recent days at the University of Missouri. On the bright side, the right to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition Congress for a redress of grievances has been front and center. But so too has been some pretty ugly behavior that makes one wonder if people really understand why press freedom is such an important part of the 1st Amendment.

A video of the demonstration contains a startling statement (at 6:30)…and even more so when you realize who said it!

According to the New York Times,

As the video nears its end, the person taking the video, Mark Schierbecker, emerged from the scrum and approached a woman, later identified as an assistant professor of mass media, Melissa Click, close to the tents. When he revealed that he was a journalist, Ms. Click appeared to grab at his camera.

She then yelled, “Who wants to help me get this reporter out of here? I need some muscle over here.”

In what may provide some consolation to journalists and 1st Amendment supporters, Ms. Click resigned her position with the School of Journalism the following day.

Again, according to the NYT,

Mitchell S. McKinney, the chairman of the department of communication, released his own statement, saying: “We applaud student journalists who were working in a very trying atmosphere to report a significant story. Intimidation is never an acceptable form of communication.”

You can watch the full video here

In this version of the video the confrontation is @ the 7:15 mark

Jan 27, 2016 update: The Chronicle of Higher Education published an article that explores the content of Melissa Click’s email inbox in the days after the incident.

November 2, 2015

Prognostications about Political Programming

The first Tuesday in November is typically election day…the day that ordinary citizens voice their preferences for candidates and ballot issues. This year is an off-year election, meaning that candidates on the ballot will be those running for school board, city council, mayor, etc.–not governor of the state or president of the United States. The national election for the office of president will come next year.

But 2016 will be here before you know it, and the major political parties are well under way with their process of determining who will be their candidate for the general election. While the Democratic party appears to have settled on Hillary Clinton as their candidate, the Republican party is still struggling to find the best candidate to go toe-to-toe with Hillary.

The surprising strength of billionaire Donald Trump’s candidacy is having an equally surprising effect on TV ratings. The three Republican debates thus far have generated much higher ratings that similar events in the past. Trump, the media celebrity, has leveraged his “star”-power and bombastic personality to attract viewers to TV programming that might otherwise be about as exciting as watching C-SPAN.

Which brings us to a very strange phenomenon. The appeal of huge ratings has the TV networks fighting over these political debates as if they were NFL games. Winning the contract to televise a presidential candidate forum has become a permit to print money…and the candidates know it. That is why representatives from each of the major candidate’s campaigns recently met to agree to new rules that will allow them to dictate to the networks how to structure future debates. The candidates are in the driver’s seat and they are going to decide where they want to go.

And one place they want to go, collectively, is away from networks and moderators who are less than friendly. The most recent Republican candidate debate, hosted by CNBC, a subsidiary of NBC, was widely criticized by political observers, and the candidates themselves. According to RNC chairman Reince Priebus,

While debates are meant to include tough questions and contrast candidates’ visions and policies for the future of America, CNBC’s moderators engaged in a series of ‘gotcha’ questions, petty and mean-spirited in tone, and designed to embarrass our candidates.

CNBC’s approach will work if the candidates are at the mercy of the TV networks to get their message out. But in this day and age with social media and websites and competing news outlets, the control is slipping away from TV networks. If they want to keep the debates, and the associated advertising dollars, they will have to make concessions to the news-makers.

In all of this journalists and TV news networks need to remember that credibility is their primary product. If and when they lose credibility they will have little to offer. And according to a recent Gallup poll journalists’ credibility is below business executives, on par with lawyers, and just a few notches above advertisers, politicians, and lobbyists.

October 13, 2015

#NoNotoriety for Killers

You may have seen the hashtag #NoNotoriety in response to the latest mass killing at the community college in Oregon. The idea has plenty of support from well-meaning and thoughtful people who want the violence to stop. If only, they argue, the perpetrators could be banished from the front page and forced out of the limelight. Unfortunately it’s not quite that simple. Yes, media coverage likely contributes to copy-cat killings. But media coverage contributes to lots of things, good and bad.

What is a realistic alternative? Are we going to selectively decide to cover some stories when we think it will lead to positive outcomes and not cover other stories when we have reason to suspect that readers/viewers/listeners will take the information and use it inappropriately? The dictionary definition of “slippery slope” might as well use this scenario to illustrate the concept.

Steve Henson, CSU-Pueblo Mass Communications alumnus, editor of the Pueblo Chieftain, and guest speaker to our class last week, wrote a column recently addressing this very issue. You can read it here. In his column Mr. Henson lays out his argument for why the Chieftain will not refrain from naming killers. Henson argues that more information, not less, is likely to help us prevent future instances like these. What do you think?

September 6, 2015

Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea

The title is a saying that is intended to capture the painful choice between two equally bad options. You may have also heard someone use the phrase “between a rock and a hard place.” Both are idioms used to describe a dilemma.

When I saw this AP (Associated Press) photo in my local newspaper a few days ago I knew that this was one of those photos. It grabbed my attention and forced me to acknowledge a painful reality. Refugees from Syria and other nations under siege by the Islamic State are trying to get to safety, and some are dying in the process. Three-year-old Aylan and his five-year-old brother Galip, along with their mother, were just three of the victims of this tragically failed bid for freedom. To see a lifeless body of a young child is never easy…but is it necessary? That’s a question for journalists and reporters…and media ethicists.

The decision to take the photo or to record audio/video of an event unfolding is fairly straight-forward. Unless you can do something to change the outcome, your journalistic responsibility is to shoot the photo and record the event. Once you get back to the office, away from the urgency of the situation and with the support and counsel of colleagues who are emotionally one step removed from the situation, you can make the decision whether to use some part or all of the material.

As expected the photo was widely distributed, not just by AP but by social media users: some who were shocked by the photo, others by the reality that it represented, and still others by the decision to publish the photo at all. It’s not an easy call. Those who published the photo argued that the shocking nature of the photo may serve a greater purpose. According to the BBC article linked below, the UK newspaper The Independent said it had decided to use the images on its website because “among the often glib words about the ‘ongoing migrant crisis’, it is all too easy to forget the reality of the desperate situation facing many refugees.”

This incident is not without precedent. There have been other photos that have forced us to face harsh realities and the dilemmas inherent in life-and-death moments captured on camera. In an earlier blog post I asked similar questions about photos of men who were seconds away from dying. Years and continents away, a South African photojournalist, Kevin Carter, took a Pulitzer Prize winning photo of a Sudanese child as a vulture waited for her to die. Carter later took his own life. You can read more here and here.

If you believe that these photos should not be published, then you see me as contributing to the problem. I thought about that…and decided to take the risk. I hope that you think deeply about what this picture means, and what it means for you. If we turn away and go back to our Twitter feeds, our video games, or our Netflix movies…or even back to work or whatever else we might be doing this Labor Day weekend…without asking soul-searching questions about our role in the world and how this tragedy might be averted for future Aylans or Galips, everyone loses.

For more information:

The Telegraph, includes a 90-second video summary of the immigrant problem
National Public Radio
BBC World News
The Washington Post
CNN

May 27, 2015

Stumbling Upon a Little Slice of America the Beautiful

Monday was Memorial Day, and since I had no other plans I decided to head east of Pueblo to grab some footage of the Arkansas river at flood stage. I’m working on a documentary about the Arkansas river, and footage of it flooding might be useful as I try to explain how this precious, over-tapped resource occasionally delivers more water than anyone wants or needs. I grabbed a few shots at the bridge at Avondale and then continued east towards Rocky Ford.

On my way I noticed a small crowd beginning to gather at the Fowler Cemetery. With American flags flying, and Boy Scouts and veterans of war in uniform, it quickly occurred to me that this was a Memorial Day observance at the local cemetery. Since I wasn’t on a schedule I decided to stop and grab a few quick shots. As I moved through the crowd I saw young and old, mostly ranchers and farmers, turning out to honor those who died fighting for freedom. They sang patriotic songs, a local minister delivered an inspirational speech, and the local Boy Scouts raised the flag…to which the crowd recited the pledge of allegiance.

After returning home a few hours later I edited a short piece that attempted to capture this little slice of America…and a scene that I’m sure was repeated in hundreds, if not thousands, of small towns across America. KOAA-TV used a portion of it in their 10pm newscast and uploaded the entire video to their Facebook page where it attracted more than 17,000 views, 570 likes, and 182 shares in the first 12 hours.

https://youtu.be/6T1mKhvU4yM

April 17, 2015

Stop, or I’ll Record

Stop CSU-Pueblo MCCNM alum Daneya Esgar (class of 2001) is co-sponsoring legislation before the Colorado state legislature. Before becoming a State Representative, Esgar was a news producer for local affiliate KOAA-TV. In her new role Esgar is promoting legislation that expand protection for citizen journalists and ordinary citizens who may find themselves eye witnesses to law enforcement agencies working in the local community.

HB 15-1290 “would allow a civil suit against a law enforcement agency if an officer seizes or destroys a recording without a person’s consent, possibly resulting in damages of up to $15,000.” Recent incidents in the news have demonstrated the value of civilian video recordings that have brought to light misbehavior by law enforcement personnel.

Body cameras on officers are becoming the new norm and many expect this change to have a positive effect. Now, with nearly every citizen having the ability to record and broadcast (in near real time) video from the scene of the incident, we may have even more evidence of wrongdoing and…perhaps more important…incentive to do the right thing in the first place.

Of course one downside is the loss of privacy that we all will experience as the “surveillance state” expands.

March 31, 2015

The Infamous Spaghetti Tree Harvest

April Fool’s Day is a time to prank your friends and family members with a tall-tale or fib designed to make them believe something that isn’t true. When I was growing up it was not uncommon for one of us to look out the window first thing in the morning and exclaim, “Wow, look at that…it snowed last night!” Of course one could only hope that the target of the prank would look outside before remembering what day it was.

But how would you feel if your local news broadcaster pulled a fast one on you this April 1st? In 1957 the BBC’s Panorama program broadcast a 3-minute segment about the spaghetti harvest in the south of Switzerland. Here, see for yourself…

According to the hoaxes.org website,

The Swiss Spaghetti Harvest hoax generated an enormous response. Hundreds of people phoned the BBC wanting to know how they could grow their own spaghetti tree. To this query the BBC diplomatically replied, “Place a sprig of spaghetti in a tin of tomato sauce and hope for the best.”

To this day the Panorama broadcast remains one of the most famous and popular April Fool’s Day hoaxes of all time. It is also believed to be the first time the medium of television was used to stage an April Fool’s Day hoax.

You can read more about it here.