Ron Fineman's ON THE RECORD

A media critique... and then some!

8/09/02 - Friday

Coming Monday - a complaint about a

newsroom manager who is known as

"The Nippler." Plus, Hal Fishman comments

on that finger-snap audio we played for

you last week. And we'll have the results

of our best entertainment reporter poll.

Links to Recent Issues

8-05-02 Monday's OTR

8-07-02 Wednesday's OTR

8-02-02 Friday's OTR

OTR can use your help to keep publishing.

If you like it, feel free to send 15 dollars to

Ron Fineman PO Box 42364

Bakersfield, CA 93384 OR

you can send $ electronically by clicking

on the PayPal logo

Thanks to Janet James...our latest contributor.

Your help is appreciated!

Send your opinions to BRUIN74@aol.com.

To get on the OTR email reminder list,
email me at BRUIN74@aol.com.

In a staff meeting last month, OTR reported that KNBC GM Paula Madison said NBC would not fight it if Telemundo air talent wants to unionize. However, AFTRA organizer Leslie Simon tells me the reality is something different.

Simon says AFTRA has asked NBC to give access to the union to talk to the Telemundo air talent at station facilities, they've asked NBC to recognize AFTRA as their collective bargaining agent once a majority sign cards asking for representation, and they've asked NBC to publicly remain neutral. The union made that request in May, and NBC's answer was "no." Also before Madison's public statement last month, NBC had distributed anti-union literature. Despite Madison saying they would not fight the union, Simon says NBC still has not changed its position on the above requests. She said "I believe until they give us free access to the facility, they plan to fight us."

In a similar situation in Chicago, 100% of Telemundo air talent signed cards, but NBC still insists on having an election.

One thing Madison said last month that you can believe, is that NBC will not pay Telemundo the same wages as their KNBC people, even though they will be sharing the same newsroom in Burbank. Simon says she sees no reason they should not be subject to the same union scale.

I asked Simon if that would be fair, if Telemundo brings in far less money than KNBC? She said that would be a subject for the bargaining table.

If Telemundo does not generate anything close to what KNBC does, I can see where a case can be made that they have a different union scale. But if the sales department starts to sell the stations in combination, that distinction becomes a little blurred.

I have a feeling that some people may try to portray NBC as anti-Latino in this union battle....treating the Spanish speakers at Telemundo as sub-standard employees. I personally doubt that is NBC's motivation. I think it's all about saving money where ever you can get away with it. So it will be ironic if NBC's former head of diversity, Paula Madison, is accused of implementing an anti-Latino policy. And clearly, her KNBC air staff has been under-represented with Latinos compared to the LA population. While her hiring and decision making have shown her to be very much pro-black, I don't really think she's anti-anything. (Though her past membership in the Nation of Islam has to at least has to make me wonder).

The kind of money I hear that Telemundo people are making seems way out of line for LA TV....especially for a group of people who now work for NBC and will soon share the KNBC newsroom. While they may not get parity, they should get something much better than they have now. NBC and Madison would be wise not to let this thing drag on too long. What they think they may save in salaries, they may lose as much in good will in the community. This could end up needlessly divisive, or it could be handled fairly quickly and equitably. At this point, the ball is in NBC's court.

On WKRP in Cincinnati, there was an episode in which the staff became an encounter group, to solve some of their problems in getting along. I'd later heard that that episode was based in reality. When I interviewed Frank Bonner (Herb Tarlek) in 1984, I asked about that.

The following article spotlights what appears to be some significant media bias. It is written by Michelle Malkin and comes from Jewish Word Review.

Dr. Patrick Chavis is dead. Will the liberal politicians and gullible media who made him a poster boy for government-imposed affirmative action shed a single tear, or will they continue to ignore what a shameful tragedy his life became?

According to a Los Angeles County Sheriff's detective I spoke with last week, Chavis was murdered on the night of July 23 in Hawthorne, an economically depressed neighborhood on the southern edge of Los Angeles. Three unknown assailants shot him during an alleged robbery at a Foster's Freeze. They remain on the loose. The news has yet to be reported anywhere else, but sources told me it was the buzz of the Los Angeles medical community last week.

Seven years ago, Chavis became the toast of the media elite and the racial preference crowd when he was profiled lavishly by New York Times magazine writer Nicholas Lehmann. Chavis, who made the cover of the magazine, was a black physician admitted to the University of California-Davis medical school under a special racial-preference quota. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court later struck down the program after a landmark challenge by white applicant Allan Bakke. Lehmann contrasted what he considered Bakke's unremarkable career following the lawsuit with Chavis' noble and booming ob-gyn practice in the ghetto of Compton.

Three months later, Jane Fonda's ex-husband, left-wing California politico Tom Hayden, heaped praise on Chavis in defense of affirmative action. "Bakke's scores were higher," Hayden wrote in an article for The Nation, "but who made the most of his medical school education? From whom did California taxpayers benefit more?" Sen. Ted Kennedy picked up the banner a year later, calling Chavis "a perfect example" of the need for lowering admissions standards in the name of racial diversity. The doctor, Kennedy crowed, was "making a difference in the lives of scores of poor families."

What the New York Times never got around to reporting, as JWR columnist Jeff Jacoby first noted and journalist William McGowan later chronicled in his award-winning book Coloring the News, is that the "difference" Chavis made in the lives of several young black women involved gruesome pain-and death-as a result of botched "body sculpting" operations at his clinic.

An administrative law judge found Chavis guilty of gross negligence and incompetence in the treatment of three patients. Yolanda Mukhalian lost 70 percent of her blood after Chavis hid her in his home for 40 hours following a bungled liposuction; she miraculously survived. The other survivor, Valerie Lawrence, also experienced severe bleeding following the surgery; after Lawrence's sister took her to a hospital emergency room, Chavis barged in and discharged his suffering patient-still hooked up to her IV and catheter-and also stashed her in his home.

Tammaria Cotton bled to death and suffered full cardiac arrest after Chavis performed fly-by-night liposuction on her and then disappeared.

In 1998, the Medical Board of California suspended Chavis' license, warning of his "inability to perform some of the most basic duties required of a physician." In a statement filed by a psychiatrist, the state demonstrated Chavis' "poor impulse control and insensitivity to patients' pain." A tape recording of "horrific screaming" by patients in Chavis' office revealed the doctor responding callously: "Don't talk to the doctor while he is working" and "Liar, liar, pants on fire."

If Allan Bakke, the white doctor, had engaged in such disgraceful behavior and met such an ignominious end, you can bet the Left would never let us forget it.

But Ted Kennedy and Tom Hayden, who spoke so voluminously about the poor black patients who supposedly benefited from medical affirmative action, had nothing to say about the poor black women who were brutally victimized by the incompetent Chavis. As for the New York Times, Bill McGowan wrote: They "ran nothing to amend their false portrait of an affirmative action hero, or question the legitimacy of the race-conscious social policy that had made him a doctor. A riveting, nationally newsworthy story central to the country's discussion of racial preferences somehow ended up completely falling through the cracks."

Will the Times editors bother to run an obituary about their fallen affirmative action hero? Will Ted Kennedy send his condolences?

WE CONCLUDE OUR FRIDAY INTERVIEW WITH REPORTER BILL GEPHARDT

Bill Gephardt used to report for KCAL, and currently is working for KUTV in Salt Lake City, specializing as a consumer reporter.

(11) OTR - I'd like to hear a little about your time at KCAL. Based on what you've seen and heard in the last few years...how does the news compare now to when you were there?

Bill - "I was recruited to KCAL back in 1989 to be the investigative/consumer reporter by 3 people associated with the Walt Disney Company, or more directly with KCAL. I was in Indianapolis at the time, doing just fine, thank you.   When they called, I was very unsure whether or not I wanted to subject my family to this unlaunched Disney experiment. But I checked out just what the company was trying to do. Their hires in the producer and reporter ranks from around the country were first rate, and the salary offer was compatible with the increased costs of Los Angeles.   So I decided to throw my hat into the ring, and moved to Los Angeles.
     It was the right thing to do. For the first three years, Disney spent well and wisely. I do believe that KCAL "raised the bar" for news broadcasting in Los Angeles. It seems to me that the other stations were also raising their standards as well to compete with KCAL.
     In the background, it always seemed that Disney had a plan to become its own network. The word was that they wanted to become like Turner Broadcasting, where WTBS became a superstation. Indeed, in the first few years, Disney tried to buy channel 9 in New York City, and they almost did. Executives from Pinelands Communications (which owned the New York station) visited our newsroom, and talked to us. Word was that Disney would also try to buy Channel 9 in Chicago as well from Tribune Broadcasting. The combination would give Disney 25 per cent of the nation's viewers, and KCAL would be on the way to being a superstation network.
     But then, that all fell apart. And, it seemed, 3 years into this 3 hour "prime time news" venture the local ratings had peaked and stabilized. Cost cutting began. Sports contracts to carry games began pre-empting our 3 hours. Talk of a sale began. We watched potential buyers groups tour the newsroom. Disney was getting impatient. They wanted a network. And suddenly, Disney owned ABC, and we were owned by Young Broadcasting.
    Then, came the layoffs, and changes...not just at KCAL, but all over Los Angeles.
     I don't get to watch much LA TV, but from what people say, and what I read (in this column, and elsewhere), the TV news has largely returned to the days of being less conceptually meaningful, and more spectacular. The ratings go down for everyone because a viewer doesn't get caught up on the days' events. News shows become more of a fun thing to watch, only from time to time, when something spectacular is promoted, but less of a meaningful, daily habit.
     So, local stations make less money, and pay less money.
     So, while LA used to be a destination market for aspiring TV journalists, now it is less so. Talented reporters, anchors, and producers find they can make as much or more elsewhere in the top 50 TV markets. And, they find, they can express themselves better as newspeople.
     Los Angeles still has a collection of extremely talented reporters. They are largely the veterans. But, it seems, with every ownership or management change their numbers are dwindling.
     Los Angeles is, and will always be, a fabulous place to live. The culture and climate will make it a destination for many, including me, always. But, for talented TV newspeople, in top markets, they may find themselves better off staying put. Indeed, now, recruitment to LA local TV is less from the top markets. It is coming from smaller markets where a person can nearly double their salary from 30 thousand to the AFTRA minimum 70 thousand."

(12) OTR - Doesn't the AFTRA minimum vary from station to station?   Also, why did you leave KCAL, and how did you feel about it at the time?

Bill - "Yes, the AFTRA minimum varies from station to station, but across a market my understanding is that you'll find the AFTRA minimums to be pretty close. In the mid 90's, the AFTRA minimum in Los Angeles was under 60-thousand dollars.
     I left KCAL when Young Broadcasting took over from Disney. It was the best of departures for me. I was offered a marvelous severance package. I was told by Disney managers,(whose futures at KCAL were uncertain) I could stay, but there would be no more investigative unit under Young Broadcasting, and my compensation would be reviewed as I moved to general assignment reporting.
     I felt bad that KCAL, the station that started with such a commitment, was going away.
     So, I left KCAL, and puttered around in LA for a couple of years, before CBS recruited me to their station here in Salt Lake City. "

(13) OTR - Any thoughts about the way KCAL and KCBS are cross-promoting and sharing reporters? Also, for those of us who might like to try puttering
around...are there any do's and don't to puttering?

Bill - "I think from a business point of view, the sharing between KCAL and
KCBS is wonderful. It saves money, while a reporter can do a story for one
station, and then in the next moment, do the same story for the other. The
networks have proposed a similar cost-cutting measure. They have talked
about closing the bureaus for the various networks, and consolidating it all
to one bureau per region of the world that would serve all networks. It
would allow a reporter to cut a report for one network, and then do a
similar report for another.
    So, it's great for business, but I fear that viewers will wind up
with only a limited editorial perspective on a story, and their choices for
point of view variety become more limited.
    And...on puttering, it was wonderful. I spent two years playing
with my family, traveling, learning to play golf, and other stuff after I
left KCAL. It was a wonderful mid-life adventure, and I appreciate that not
everyone gets to take 2 years off from work to do as they please.   The only
problem with taking time off (puttering) is that when you have a job, it's
easy to get a job: you are in demand, and others try to steal you away.
When you're not working, the demand is much lower for your services. I had
job offers in LA, but since I wasn't working, the offers were more
take-it-or-leave-it. And then, after I left LA and began working here in
Salt Lake City, I was again offered much better positions than I was
previously offered in LA.
    Funny how puttering works, eh?"

(14) OTR - I suppose we can call you a "puttering survivor." Before we finish, I'm
hoping you can enlighten the rest of the country about the law in Utah in
regard to buying alcohol. As you explained it to me when we me in person
recently, it's pretty bizarre.

Bill -"The legal aspects of alcohol have always amazed me in that they are
such a lightning rod for so much general political behavior.
    First, Utah. Before moving here, I was, like many, always informed
that it was difficult to get a "drink" in Utah. Having lived here for 4
years, I find that absolutely untrue. Wine, 6% beer and all alcohols are
sold in state operated liquor stores. 3 1/2% beer, hard lemonade, and other
such beverages are sold in grocery stores and convenience stores 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week (including Sunday).
      Utah is filled with beer bars, where they serve beer 3 1/2% beer.
    To get a hard drink, a patron may visit any licensed restaurant that
serves food, and simply order any drink whatsoever.
    To simply drink, and not order food, it is necessary to get a "club
membership," and this is the famously goofy part of Utah Law. Anyone of age
can simply walk into one of these bars, and buy a membership (usually 5 to
15 dollars for a week or two, or 15 to 25 dollars for a year), and be served
any drink on the spot, and you don't have to eat anything. Such
"membership" bars often permit smoking. Alcohol laws are a government
control, or big brother issue. The whole silly idea around "membership"
bars is that the government cannot control what we do in private at our
private clubs.
    The way around buying a membership is to walk in, ask who is a
member, and then ask that person to sponsor you. They always say "yes", and
you can sit with your group, drink until your heart's content, and not buy a
membership. Or, you can sponsor all 500 of your friends to join you at your
just-joined private club for a drink.
    As nutso as these law are, consider that drinking laws across the
country are based upon the religion of the area. True, religion and
government are not supposed to mingle in our society, but that contract is
routinely ignored from coast to coast.
    In Texas, half the counties are dry.
    In New York, beer and alcohol are not sold on Sunday (not Thursday)
because of religion to the extent that grocery stores must cover up the beer
stock with tarps.
    In Ohio many towns and counties are dry.
    In Indiana, liquor stores can only serve unrefrigerated soft drinks.
Refrigerated ones would mean customers could mix cold drinks right in the
store. At the same time, they sell bottled refrigerated whisky sours,
margaritas and martinis. In restaurants, the bar area must be separated by
an opaque partition so under aged people will not see bar patrons drink,
while parents may openly drink in the dining room. And, it's illegal to
carry your cocktail to your table. And free drinks are illegal.
    And on and on.
    So, as far as Utah is concerned, as anyone who visited for the
Olympics: sometimes it's easier to get a drink in Utah than in other
states."

Thanks to Bill for giving us his time these last three weeks.

Next Friday - We have a Q&A with Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters.
-------------------------------

Have a great weekend!

YOUR OPINIONS

They are an important part of OTR. Please send them along to BRUIN74@aol.com. Please remember to include your first and last name. 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.