|
|
|
|
|
Latest Letters |
|
LA TV |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTR |
|
|
A media critique... and then some! Banned in Beijing, Baghdad and at KCAL-TV
Friday Letters are up Coming Monday - KCAL's Leyna Nguyen checks in with what she calls an "honest look at KCAL." Links to Recent Issues 07-09-01 Monday's OTR 07-11-01 Wednesday's OTR 07-06-01 Friday's OTR Send your opinions to BRUIN74@aol.com. |
To get on the OTR email reminder list, email me at BRUIN74@aol.com. |
WHY COMPLAIN ABOUT A COLUMN YOU HAVEN'T READ?
I hope you'll stay with me on this one, because I think it is very important, and I believe it is very telling about how reporter Mike BOGUSlawski operates. As you may recall, I wrote a piece about KCBS reporter Mike Boguslawski's story on Miss Barstow. She lost her crown because she took part in some minor vandalism, using chalk to write on someone's windshield. When Deputy DA Gary Roth told Boguslawski that he would not be charging Emily Arnold with a crime, Boguslawski made it appear as if he caused Roth to make that decision. It was a very poor piece of journalism. In the story, the mother of Miss Barstow, Patricia Arnold, thanked Boguslawski and hugged him. I couldn't figure out why, so I called her up and asked her. She told me that she believed pressure from Boguslawski made the DA's office make a decision which had been hanging out there for weeks. I asked her if she believed Boguslawski was responsible for the decision itself, and she said she didn't know. Roth denied that Boguslawski had anything to do with the decision or the timing of it. You may want to go back and read the column www.RonFineman.com/010702.html.
The following is part of a letter signed by Patricia Arnold which was sent to KCBS news director Roger Bell, and KCBS General Manager John Severino. It complains about how poorly I treated Boguslawski in my column. This letter was passed on to me through CBS channels so that I could print it. When I called up Arnold after hearing about it, I asked her when she read my column about this subject. She said she NEVER read it, but that she heard it was bad. I asked her who told her about it, and she said she couldn't say. I asked her if Mike Boguslawski told her about the column, and she said she couldn't say. So below is a letter signed by a woman who admitted to me that she never even read what she is complaining about. I think it is obvious that Boguslawski told her about my column, and I would guess that she wrote the letter at his request. Consider these two sentences she wrote to me in a subsequent email: "I was trying to help someone I think of as my friend." and "I wrote the letter for Bogey because he had been kind to me." After my phone conversation with Arnold in which she admitted she had never read the column in question, she emailed to tell me she did not want me to print it. Under the circumstances, I think printing the following is the fair thing to do.
"To Roger Bell and John Severino
Dear Sirs:
I am writing on Mike Boguslawski's behalf; I am so upset about what has happened that I feel sick to my stomach. This pertains to Ron Fineman's website, where he has portrayed Bogey shamefully. I had no idea when I spoke to him that he would try to rip Bogey apart. Here is what happened.
The other day I came home from shopping and found 2 messages on my answering machine from Mr. Fineman. He said he had a deadline to meet and asked if I would call him back. When I spoke to him he said that he was a news critic and he had a website where he puts his articles. I had no idea what a news critic was, and I'm not very curious so I didn't ask him what that meant. He sounded like a nice man, and I though he just wanted to know about our daughter's story.
He asked me to explain to him what had happened and why I had been so excited when I thanked Bogey on TV. So I told him how Bogey had come up and was able to persuade the DA to announce publicly on TV that all charges against Emily had been dropped. That he was able to do this before Emily had to give up her title buoyed us all. Our lawyer had been trying for weeks to get the same thing done without any apparent progress. In fact, just that same morning our lawyer called saying that Mr Roth was still waiting for more information before he made any decision. Well, Mr. Fineman told me that after watch Bogey's Corner, where our family was on the news, he got the impression that Bogey had single-handedly gotten the DA to not press charges and he thought it was terrible for Bogey to make it seem he had done this great thing. Mr. Fineman said that he had talked to the DA who told him it was just wasn't true that Bogey had influenced him. I want you to know that I don't believe that! I'll tell you why in a minute. And even if all Bogey did was to get him to announce it on TV, that was a great victory for us. Anyway, if I had any inkling when I began speaking to Mr. Fineman that he would print a slanderous article about Bogey on his website I would never have condescended to speak to him. I am angry and embarrassed to have been used this way. It is just appalling. We will ALWAYS love Bogey for what he did for us.
Why do I think Bogey influenced the DA to do the right thing? A couple of reasons. One is that Bogey had to call the CHP offices, he had to call the CHP Commissioner and he had to call the prosecutor just trying to find a way to get the charges dropped. He worked hard to get behind the scenes and help our family out. He did this just out of the goodness of his heart because Bogey is a great man. After had interview Mr. Roth on TV, Mr. Roth told him, "It's because of you that I made this decision." I believe Bogey when he tells me that."
--------------------------------------
(The next part of the letter deals with accusations against the CHP officer who caught Emily Arnold chalking the car. I have no idea how true that part of the letter is, and I'm not going to print that part. But I will print the close of the letter, which deals with Boguslawski and me.-Ron)
--------------------------------------------
"Hopefully you can see that we needed someone like Bogey, out of the Barstow loop, with the power of TV behind him, to get the right thing done. I want you to know that I condemn what Mr. Fineman has done. It's Mike Boguslawski who is the fine man. May the Lord bless him.
Sincerely, Tricia Arnold"
----------------------------------------------
Look what we have here; a woman accused me of slandering
someone, which I consider to be a very charge against me. She
condemns what I have done. How can you accuse some one of slander
and condemn them without reading what they wrote? On that issue, let
me suggest that if Mike Boguslawski feels I have libeled him in my
column, let him sue me. I'll tell you one reason he won't do
that....because truth is an absolute defense in a libel
action...and every word I wrote is TRUE.
THESE KCBS TACTICS AGAINST ME MUST STOP!
After my July 2nd column about Boguslawski appeared, I'm told he called the KNX newsroom about it. This is at least the third time someone from KCBS has called KNX to complain about this column. Let me say something to Boguslawski and his managers. STOP bothering my bosses and those who work at KNX about what I write in this column. My work at KNX is NOT related to what I write in OTR. It is obvious that you are trying to intimidate me by going to the people who supply my only source of income. It will not work. It only shows you to be cowardly bullies. How can you support the First Amendment for yourself, and then try to stifle it when the freedom to criticize that it allows is aimed in your direction? If you have a problem with something I write, how about having the courage to take it directly to me! You can reach me at BRUIN74@aol.com.
WE CONTINUE OUR FRIDAY INTERVIEW WITH TOM JACOBS
Tom is considered one of the African-American pioneers in TV news management. He was made news manager at a Cleveland station in 1978. He later worked in Boston, LA and Washington DC. He's the creator of a TV show called "The Calling" which he says looks at issues from a multi-cultural perspective, and reports on stories which don't make it to the national or local news. It's a PBS show which he says is in danger of losing its funding.
(You can read part one by clicking on www.RonFineman.com/010706.html )
(7) OTR -Let me be more specific on the media and Jesse Jackson before we move
on. Tax returns for 1998 and 1999 show that of 12 million dollars that his
tax-exempt Citizenship Education Fund took in, only 47 thousand dollars
was spent on education. Do you believe the three major networks have
done an adequate job of looking into this? If not, does it reveal a"
bias in favor of liberal African-American leaders?
Tom - I'm glad you're being specific. You're earlier question about Jesse
Jackson's "questionable tax returns," implied that you were talking
about his personal tax returns. You now say you are talking about tax
returns for a tax-exempt fund that he apparently created and/or runs.
They are two different animals. My questions would be, does Rev.
Jackson run it day to day, or does someone else. Does Rev. Jackson
determine funding initiatives, or does a board? What role does the
administrative staff play in making funding decisions? Who controls the
money? As a journalist, these are questions I want answered before I
start making allegations that something is wrong. I think you would
agree, based on the information you've given me it would be difficult to
draw any kind of conclusion. I would agree that given Rev. Jackson's
public statements on the value of education, the numbers you quote would
seem to be questionable, but we need a lot more information before
making the leap from question to accusation.
With regard to the networks, since I don't recall the story, I have to
assume they either don't know about it or have looked into it and found
nothing amiss. If there was a liberal bias, then I would expect that
Fox, which claims no bias, would have looked into the story. I don't
recall hearing them doing anything either, although they and others have
certainly spent a great deal of time on Rev. Jackson's love life.
If it's a legitimate story it should be covered. If it's not, move on."
(8) OTR - Actually Fox's Bill O'Reilly has been all over the Jackson/Education
fund story. Anyway, I want to hear more about your show. Could you give an
example or two of stories you've covered recently which have not been
covered, or not covered well by mainstream media?
Tom - "Because we take a multicultural perspective on the program we do a
couple of different things. We look at mainstream stories like the new
census numbers or the Florida vote recount, from a multicultural
perspective. Six weeks before the census numbers came out we did a
program on the changing face of America. We featured a background
report on how California has become a non majority state, efforts by the
Iowa to encourage more minorities and immigrants to relocate to the
state and examined the concerns raised by anti immigration groups over
the changing numbers. I should note that in the discussion that
followed this piece, we did not have as you suggested earlier the
"standard democratic liberal view," but rather a group consisting of a
conservative African American, moderate Native American,
conservative/moderate Hispanic and moderate/liberal Asian American. I
think this made for a much more interesting and broad based discussion
than what you would normally find on other news/discussion programs.
The same held true when we looked at the Florida election. Rather than
spending time rehashing the case of chads, dangling chads, etc., we used
a BBC report on voter disenfranchisement in Florida and looked at how a
disproportionate number of African American and Hispanic voters were
erroneously removed from the voting roles. We didn't charge that the
election was "stolen" as many other outlets did. We reported that there
were legitimate concerns raised in the methodology used to purge voters
and this was a problem. Subsequent to our report, the State of Florida
acknowledged there were problems in this area and moved to correct
them. I believe we reported this story fairly and accurately without a
lot of histrionics.
An example of a story we looked at that has had little national play but
will probably soon get some attention involved the decision by the City
of Oakland to require new employees to be bilingual. While Oakland was
the first city to do so, San Francisco is likely to pass similar
legislation and a number of other cities are considering doing
likewise. These kinds of stories indicate a change in the social and
economic fabric of many communities. I think they need to be reported
and it's one of the reasons we created The Calling."
(9) OTR -It sounds like a good show. Why do you suppose you've been having
trouble getting it funded? And, if you can't get permanent funding, have you
thought about shopping it to one of the cable news channels?
Tom - "I think that the industry as a whole is still having trouble coming to
terms with what diversity and inclusiveness really means. It's not just
a numbers game and that's what most people focus on. And I should add,
when I say most people, I mean folks on both sides of the debate,
minority and non minority. We get so hung up on the numbers we forget
that diversity is not racial issue but a human issue. It's about
looking at things from a variety of perspectives, age, gender, physical
ability or disability, cultural and racial. To limit the discussion of
diversity in newsrooms and news coverage to racial numbers shows a real
lack of understanding. Because of that lack of understanding, I think a
lot of people still don't understand what we're trying to do with The
Calling. I think there is an assumption that we're doing a show we're
minority reporters will spend all there time talking about how bad
things are and blaming the mainstream for all our woes. The reality is,
The Calling is designed to be a forum for seasoned, professional
journalists of color (and yes, I consider white a color and we have
white journalists on the program) to examine stories from a different
point of view.
I would add that our different point of view doesn't mean advocacy
journalist, just fair, balanced and inclusive journalism. Unfortunately
while a lot of folks (foundations, corporations, etc.) say they support
diversity and inclusiveness, my experience is that they don't want to
pay for it. Or it's okay if it's sports or entertainment when it comes
to people of color but not discussions of substantive issues by a
diverse group of thoughtful, knowledgeable and reasonable journalists.
As to shopping it to other cable news channels, the standard answer is
that they don't accept product that they don't produce. Of course when
I offered to come to work for them and produce a show like this, then it
wasn't something that was budgeted. Pick an excuse, I've heard them
all."
(10) OTR - You bring up an interesting point, talking about numbers. We often
hear about studies which tell us how many minority reporters work at the
Big Three networks...or what how there are not enough minorities in prime
time programming. Do you suppose it's easier for people to say "There, we
have X percent of minorities in our newsroom, or on our network...what more do
you want?" In other words, I guess quantity is much easier to define that
quality?
Tom - "No question, if you can hide behind numbers you don't have to give any
thought to substance. I can count on on one hand the number of times I
have colleagues call me up and say "I'm looking for a producer,
reporter, anchor, photographer, etc. who is a first rate journalist, but
who also is willing to learn our community. I would like to fill the
position with a minority journalist, but this is not a quota hire, give
me a pro." I don't get calls like that very often (twice in my life I
think), instead I get this, "Tom, I gotta find a (fill in the blank
Asian, Hispanic, African-American, etc.) reporter. I just lost one and
I've gotta find another one."
I'd laugh if it wasn't so sad."
(11) OTR - Do you think the problem is affirmative action? Meaning managers
feel obligated to fill some sort of quota, and quality can take a back seat,
even
though there are obviously many top rate minority broadcasters. And
along
those lines... have you found personally, or do you find other
minorities feel that others assume they got their position through affirmative
action, and therefore they don't get the respect they deserve?
Tom - "I certainly think some managers use affirmative action guidelines as
either an excuse or as a crutch. The concept of affirmative action as
one , but not the only remedy for past discriminatory practices is not
bad. What is bad is to turn it into some kind of quota system that
doesn't work and causes misplaced resentments. That was never the
intent of affirmative action, but more often than not, that is how it is
understood and practiced. What most managers don't understand is that
if you don't take the time to hire the right person for the job,
minority or not, you're going to pay the price down the road. A good
manager needs to have solid journalistic standards and solid life
standards. You either have them or you don't. If you do, stick to
them, take your time and chose an employee because they have what you
think you need to make your newsroom responsive to the audience you
serve. If you do that, you will have a journalistically sound and
diverse staff. Then there won't be any question why anyone got their
job.
Of course I realize my style of managing is in short supply these days.
Standards gave way to the bottom line a long time ago."
WE CONCLUDE OUR INTERVIEW WITH TOM JACOBS NEXT
FRIDAY...
in which addresses fuzzing out the word 'nigger' in a hate crime story, and reporters who change their name to appear more ethnic.
COMING MONDAY
OTR to be quoted in a broadcast
journalism text book? It looks that way!
OTR - ONE YEAR AGO THIS
WEEK
YOU TELL ME, IS THIS A STORY?
I'm surprised this hasn't become bigger national news. Bill Thomas is the leading Republican Congressman in the House on health care. A few weeks ago, the Bakersfield Californian newspaper reported that Thomas has an "intensely personal" relationship with health care lobbyist Deborah Steelman, who represents pharmaceutical companies and HMOs. It's clear that if this was simply about a politician cheating on his wife, the story would never have been published. So far as I know, no one has charged that Thomas's relationship with the lobbyist has made a specific difference on policy. It seems that the two were of like minds on the issue to start with. But obviously there has to be concern that his judgment could be swayed. I haven't seen the phrase "sexual relationship" used in this story, but I think that it what is clearly implied by "intensely personal."
The newspaper's report about this "intensely personal" relationship came from anonymous sources. In statements issued by both Thomas and Steelman, neither has denied having an intensely personal relationship. But both are denying having compromised themselves professionally. I don't know how there could not be an ethics investigation on this. But it may well be that Democrats aren't interested in bringing up anyone's alleged extra-marital affair in an election year. In Thomas's home district, people seem to be divided 50-50 on whether this is a legitimate story. To me it comes down to this question; is it ever appropriate for an elected official to have an affair with someone who is lobbying that official on issues of importance? And that leads to this week's POLL. Based on the above information, do you believe Bill Thomas's relationship with this lobbyist is a legitimate news story? When you're finished with the main page, please to the POLL on the menu and let us know what you think.
WITHHOLDING NEWS
It was an especially big story in LA last week, when the Williams sisters faced each other in the Wimbledon semi-finals. While the match was played very early in the morning Pacific Time, the TV broadcast was tape delayed until the afternoon. But by the time KNBC's 11am newscast rolled around, the match was over. Yet, an OTR reader tells me the newscast didn't give the results of the match, and acted as if it hadn't been played yet!
I realize there are people who might prefer to stay in the dark on the results, and simply watch the match on TV as if it was live. This is not unlike awards ceremonies, which (except for the Oscars) are always tape-delayed for the west coast. But isn't there a journalistic obligation to report the latest news? All they had to do was warn the audience they were about to give the results, and give viewers a chance to turn down the volume for 30 seconds. To pretend a news event hasn't happened yet, just to satisfy the programming department is completely unethical. This is similar to what KTTV's Lisa Joyner did earlier this year, when she pretended the American Comedy Awards happened the night they were broadcast, when in fact they took place weeks earlier. I think some news directors need to take a good look at their conscience, and think again about their obligations as news professionals.
RACISM THAT BAD?
Venus Williams says not much has changed in terms of racism on the tennis circuit since the days of Althea Gibson in the late 50s. Maybe she's heard a racial slur here and there, I wouldn't be surprised. But I find it hard to believe that "not much has changed" over the last 40 years. When I think of those days of segregation, I just find that pretty hard to believe. Makes you wonder how much she really knows about those days. Maybe it would've helped if some inquisitive reporter had asked her to explain what she means. I remember not to long ago, I asked Jesse Jackson to compare life today, versus in the 50s. He gave some specific examples of how very different things were back then. Maybe the young Venus should have a chat with Jesse.
STUPID REPORTER QUESTION OF THE WEEK
When Bobby Brown was released from jail last week, his wife Whitney Houston jumped into his arms. There she was, hugging him, with her legs wrapped around his waist. It was during this emotional moment when some reporter asked Whitney "Happy to have your husband back, m'am?" I know he was trying to get a good soundbite, but he didn't get it. But he did give America another example of a reporter looking stupid.
FUNNY QUOTE OF THE WEEK
On Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, one contestant told Regis "I feel like I'm on the toilet and the whole country is watching."
ONCE MORE WITH FEELING
Did anyone catch Don McLean singing "American Pie" on the Fourth? Talk about just "phoning it in." I'm sure he's sick of singing this song after some 28 years. In fact, when I saw him in concert in the early 70s, I think he may've been a little tired of it back then. (I remember him referring to it as "THE SONG.") Maybe the problem last week wasn't a lack of energy, but just a guy who doesn't want to sing the same song the same way every time. In any case, especially before he got to the hook, McLean just sounded like he wasn't interesting in singing "American Pie." Rather than a labor of love, it just sounded like it was labor for him. As boring as it may be for the singer, I think they should make the effort to sing the song the way they sang it on the record. That's the way we remember it, and that's the way most of us would like to hear it.
THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY
On KABC-TV, there was some bad news to report on the 4th of July, before the usual fluff that comes with such a holiday. After some of the bad news, anchor Laura Diaz said "Sorry about that tragedy...but", and then she went on to the lighter news. I realize that the term "switching gears now" has become a transitional cliché, but certainly that would've been better than "Sorry about that tragedy." In fact saying NOTHING would've been much better. How tired I am of anchors who feel they must comment on tragic stories with such empty phrases. I've said it many times here, but it's worth saying again....please anchors, just read the news! Your little editorial comments to show you're relating to the audience aren't needed. Seriously, does anyone in the KABC audience feel better served that Laura Diaz has apologized for a tragedy she had nothing to do with?
A MARATHON BY ANY OTHER NAME
One of the great traditions of the 4th of July in the world of television is the Twilight Zone marathon. It was done for many years on KTLA, and the Sci-Fi channel picked it up when they began airing the T-Zone. But this time, they didn't call it a marathon. No, this time it was a Twilight Zone "chain reaction." Maybe the same wise guy who thought of that, is the same person who came up with "by suggestion" many years ago, to replace "by request" for disc jockeys. That "by suggestion" always sounded so pretentious. You know... "we're AOR, we're FM, we're too cool to take requests, but we will take suggestions." Okay, so "chain reaction" isn't THAT bad, but it isn't needed either. Let the marathon tradition continue.
AN ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION FOR GUMBEL
Conservative groups have been asking for an apology, but maybe they have it all wrong. Gumbel had finished a satellite interview of a supporter of the ban on gay boy scout leaders. When it was over, he went to Marc McEwen who started doing the weather. About 8 seconds into the weather, the camera suddenly cut to Gumbel getting up from his chair. He could be heard saying "What a....." and then the audio stopped. But those who can read lips say he finished the sentence by saying ...."a f**king idiot."
I've been wondering why CBS or Gumbel didn't just apologize. Because it seemed like the uproar wasn't worth it. But then I read where one conservative publication had an explanation that makes sense. Gumbel may not have been referring to the conservative guest, but to weatherman Mark McEwen. Because Gumbel's comment came with what looked like a smile to me, and more importantly, it came after McEwen had just told Gumbel how he (McEwen) had correctly picked which survivor was going to be kicked of the "Survivor"TV show, but that he was just a week late. If that is the case, it makes sense why CBS won't apologize. Certainly Gumbel is not going to admit to making that comment about the conservative guest if it was really McEwen who was the target. And it's easy to see why CBS doesn't want to say, "Relax, Bryant was only degrading our weatherman!"
After all, it's not like Gumbel doesn't have a history of not getting along with some people that he works with. On the other hand, after hearing the guest Robert Knight interviewed on a talk radio show, he sure sounded like an idiot to me.
NOT AGAIN!
One of the problems with watching a lot of TV news, is that you tend to see the same stories over and over on different newscasts. After last Friday, I felt like if I saw one more Harry Potter story, I would run head first into a courtroom wall. The price I pay to keep OTR humming!
SPEAKING OF SEARCH ENGINES
Every now and again, I find some odd key words which bring people to this website. Last week, one person had written in "Roger Ebert breast," another had typed in "Gomer Pyle & knucklehead" and there was also one which said "panty mania." No doubt that one also led to another dissatisfied OTR customer. I know panty mania is a website which I mentioned here once before.. Otherwise, could you imagine someone typing in those words like they were part of a logical list? Can you picture this word association test..."Up?" "Down"..."Black?".... "White" "Panty?" ..."Mania!" Hmmm. Calling Dr Howard, Dr Fine, Dr Howard.
TAKE YOUR HAT OFF FOR THE STANDUP
Many reporters will tell you they've covered stories where wearing a hard hat is required. Last week, CNN's Jeff Flock was in that situation, and there he was wearing his hard hat in standup. Sorry, but that looks goofy. Unless you've got a sack of concrete over your head and you can't move, a reporter should have no problem slipping of that hard hat for the standup. I just don't think that sort of costuming helps a reporter's credibility.
OTR ON THE ROAD
As this web site evolves, it seemed like a good idea to offer my services for speaking engagements at colleges, service clubs or anyone else interested in the OTR gospel. Of course one of the great advantage to speaking in person is that you get far few typos. If you check the OTR On the Road page on the menu (Netscape users CAN now access it too), you can see learn more. You can also read what some well known OTR readers have to say about this web site. If you are interested, you can email to OTROnTheRoad@aol.com.
YOUR OPINIONS
They are an important part of OTR. Please send them along to BRUIN74@aol.com. Unless you say otherwise, I'll assume it is for publication.
OTR IS PUBLISHED
EVERY MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY Letters to the
editor are updated Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
Ron's disclaimer: Like all reporters I have opinions. I do the best I can to make sure that nothing I say here has any effect on my objectivity in covering stories.
 |
