|
|
||||||||||||
|
A media critique... and then some!
Links to Recent Issues Inside LA TV - Sharon Tay comments on her credibility, and a couple of familiar names are pregnant. 3-15-04 Monday's OTR 3-12-04 Friday's OTR
|
To get on update reminder list, email to Bruin74@aol.com |
PLEASE PLEASE read: you can find out when your subscription is up by clicking on Update Account on the menu up above. To RENEW on paypal, or to find my PO Box to do it by mail, please click on www.ronfineman.com. There are two paypal buttons, you can use either one to renew. If you do it by mail, please remember to include your email address.
If you suddenly find you don't have access to OTR, and you haven't signed up or renewed recently, that very likely means your subscription is up.
CHAMBERS BACK AFTER SUSPENSION
LAObserved.com had the item that Variety's Michael Schneider reports that Rick Chambers was suspended for two days last week, for airing racial slurs in the story about the Claremont College professor.
Let me come to Chambers' defense and suggest that KCBS over-reacted. In
fact this is an issue that has come up here before. When there is a racial
hate crime (let's forget that this one appears to have been staged by the
alleged victim, which obviously is another story), is it a good idea for the
news media to sanitize the hate so as not offend the audience? In a past
example, in 2001 KNBC covered a story about hate graffiti on someone's house.
On that house, "nigger" was written. Some stations showed it, but
KNBC fuzzed it out. About that time, I was interviewing Tom Jacobs, a
black pioneer in TV news management. I asked for his opinion on that and
this was his response: "You don't fight racism by sticking your head
in the sand. No question, the station should have shown the raw, ugly video and
let the viewer have a taste of what that family felt when they saw that word on
their home.
Pictures are what television can do best. Yet all too often we run
from some of the most powerful images. The timidity of a station to run
this in a city where they think nothing of carrying "live" pictures
of a
potentially violent police chase boggles the mind."
And I would suggest that by the same token, Rick Chambers should not have gotten in trouble for running a sound bite in which a police officer described the crime by using the word "nigger."
Obviously it is a very offensive word (except in black rap music where apparently "nigga" is quite acceptable...but that is also another story). But if you actually had a real hate crime, which is what we thought we had at the time, let's expose the ugliness for what it is.
I realize that since the Janet Jackson incident, Viacom is running scared, fearing anything that might anger the FCC, or might prompt viewers to complain to them. Whether they would have treated Chambers differently is a pre-Jackson era, I don't know. And suspending a per diem reporter for two days in not exactly a death sentence. But I am very concerned about the message it sends. While of course we all must consider the sensibilities of our audience, I think KCBS should have let the truth win out on this one. I believe the audience could take it.
SO THAT EXPLAINS IT
You'll recall that I was most critical of KABC's Amy Powell's live report from Fresno last Saturday. The oddest part of all was that the insert package that she ran was by another female reporter, one who I thought must've come from KFSN. Well, it turns out it was a KGO reporter, also named Amy. Here is what one insider tells OTR:
"Amy was sharing a third-party's satellite uplink truck with KGO-TV.
It is a dual path truck, meaning the truck can do two digital satellite live
shots simultaneously. San Francisco's KGO-TV happened to have a reporter named
Amy also assigned to the story, and she was using the second path. What are the
chances of that happening?
The truck operator had never met either Amy until that day.
And at the same time, on deadline, he was handed two edited pieces to feed,
neither clearly marked.
In the deadline crunch, apparently nobody on the receive end listened
carefully to the pieces that were fed (not an unusual occurrence). KGO got
KABC's piece and KABC got KGO's. Apparently KGO realized it had the wrong
"Amy" and corrected the mistake before it aired. KABC aired the KGO
piece before the error was realized.
So don't blame Amy Powell. This is what happens in deadline confusion, unless
there are detail-oriented producers and/or writers to supervise transmission of
stories."
Sounds like there is some blame to go around. But I would have hoped that Powell would have said something to the viewers about the mistake. Even if she just didn't know what to say, and suddenly found that the other reporter's package had used her tagline material, she at least should have said..."as we told you....." At least then it would sound like she was listening to the story.
WHO'S THE BEST LA ANCHOR TEAM?
The nominations are in. Please click on your favorite, and then hit 'send.'
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Brown&Tuzee
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Palmer&Vara
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Moyer&Williams
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Beard&Devine
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Kilbride&Harvey
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Clark&Lopez
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Ono&Leyva
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Michael&Hirasuna
Click here->OTRVote@aol.com?subject=Walker&Nguyen
IS KTLA VIOLATING FCC RULES?
On Monday I wrote about The Vegas.com report which airs on the KTLA Morning News. An insider explained that while it runs during the show, it is not produced by the news department, but in fact is a commercial. Another reader sent along the following FCC regulations which they suggest are being violated by KTLA. I emailed GM John Reardon for a comment, but he did not respond. How rude (but not very surprising)! However, I think I will run the question by the FCC and see what they say. And I'll bet if they have any questions of Reardon, he'll suddenly acquire some better manners. Of course if Tribune has no fear of the FCC, perhaps they should have a chat with Viacom. In the meantime, here are the FCC regs......
§73.1212 Sponsorship identification; list retention; related
requirements.
(a) When a broadcast station transmits any matter for
which money, service, or other valuable consideration is either directly or
indirectly paid or promised to, or charged or accepted by such station, the
station, at the time of the broadcast, shall announce:
(1) that such matter is
sponsored, paid for, or furnished, either in whole or in part, and
(2) by whom or on whose behalf
such consideration was supplied: provided, however, that "service or
other valuable consideration" shall not include any service or property
furnished either without or at a nominal charge for use on, or in connection
with, a broadcast unless it is so furnished in consideration for an
identification of any person, product, service, trademark, or brand name beyond
an identification reasonably related to the use of such service or property on
the broadcast.
(i)
For the purposes of this section, the term "sponsored" shall be
deemed to have the same meaning as "paid for."
(ii)
In the case of any television political advertisement concerning candidates for
public office, the sponsor shall be identified with letters equal to or greater
than four (4) percent of the vertical picture height that air for not less than
four (4) seconds.
(b) The licensee of each broadcast station shall
exercise reasonable diligence to obtain from its employees, and from other
persons with whom it deals directly in connection with any matter for
broadcast, information to enable such licensee to make the announcement
required by this section.
(c) In any case where a report has been made to a
broadcast station as required by Section 507 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, of circumstances which would have required an announcement under
this section had the consideration been received by such broadcast station, an
appropriate announcement shall be made by such station.
(d) In the case of any political broadcast matter or
any broadcast matter involving the discussion of a controversial issue of
public importance for which any film, record, transcription, talent, script, or
other material or service of any kind is furnished, either directly or
indirectly, to a station as an inducement for broadcasting such matter, an
announcement shall be made both at the beginning and conclusion of such
broadcast on which such material or service is used that such film, record,
transcription, talent, script, or other material or service has been furnished
to such station in connection with the transmission of such broadcast matter:
provided, however, that in the case of any broadcast of 5 minutes' duration or
less, only one such announcement need be made either at the beginning or
conclusion of the broadcast.
(e) The announcement required by this section shall,
in addition to stating the fact that the broadcast matter was sponsored, paid
for or furnished, fully and fairly disclose the true identity of the person or
persons, or corporation, committee, association or other unincorporated group,
or other entity by whom or on whose behalf such payment is made or promised, or
from whom or on whose behalf such services or other valuable consideration is
received, or by whom the material or services referred to in paragraph (d) of
this section are furnished. Where an agent or other person or entity
contracts or otherwise makes arrangements with a station on behalf of another,
and such fact is known or by the exercise of reasonable diligence, as specified
in paragraph (b) of this section, could be known to the station, the
announcement shall disclose the identity of the person or persons or entity on
whose behalf such agent is acting instead of the name of such agent.
Where the material broadcast is political matter or matter involving the
discussion or a controversial issue of public importance and a corporation,
committee, association or other unincorporated group, or other entity is paying
for or furnishing the broadcast matter, the station shall, in addition to
making the announcement required by this section, require that a list of the
chief executive officers or members of the executive committee or of the board
of directors of the corporation, committee, association or other unincorporated
group, or other entity shall be made available for public inspection at the
location specified by the licensee under §73.3526 of this chapter. If
the broadcast is originated by a network, the list may, instead, be retained at
the headquarters office of the network or at the location where the originating
station maintains its public inspection file under §73.3526 of this chapter.
Such lists shall be kept and made available for a period of two years.
(f) In the case of broadcast matter advertising
commercial products or services, an announcement stating the sponsor's
corporate or trade name, or the name of the sponsor's product, when it is clear
that the mention of the name of the product constitutes a sponsorship
identification, shall be deemed sufficient for the purposes of this section and
only one such announcement need be made at any time during the course of the
broadcast.
(g) The announcement otherwise required by Section 317
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, is waived with respect to the
broadcast of "want ad" or classified advertisements sponsored by an
individual. The waiver granted in this paragraph shall not extend to a
classified advertisement or want ad sponsorship by any form of business
enterprise, corporate or otherwise. Whenever sponsorship announcements
are omitted pursuant to this paragraph, the licensee shall observe the
following conditions:
(1) Maintain a list showing
the name, address, and (where available) the telephone number of each
advertiser;
(2) Make this list available
to members of the public who have a legitimate interest in obtaining the
information contained in the list. Such list must be retained for a
period of two years after broadcast.
(h) Any announcement required by Section 317(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, is waived with respect to feature
motion picture film produced initially and primarily for theatre exhibition.
TALK ABOUT MISSING THE STORY
It's one thing to go to a news conference with a pre-determined way to cover the story. But you must be able to shift gears if a better angle pops up. On this it would appear that both KCBS/KCAL's Jay Jackson and KTLA's Walter Richards failed. The story is the one last week about a new device being used by the LAPD. It's called Portable Office Data Device, or PODD.
Jackson reported that the device is used by cops in the field to keep a record of who they stop, why, and what their race or ethnicity is. He said the system was a requirement of the federal consent decree. So Jackson focused on racial profiling, interviewing a member of the LA County Human Relations Commission, who is also the head of a local NAACP branch. He also noted that for now, only two divisions are using these PODDs.
Walter Richards also dealt with the racial profiling angle, as well as using a sound bite from Chief Bratton, who said that once a ticket is entered on these devices, that information is sent in real time, so it would not be possible to fix a ticket.
So what did Jackson and Richards miss? Well, let me show the article that Rick Orlov wrote for the Daily News:
"Top Los Angeles officials demonstrated a new handheld computer Friday needed to help the LAPD compile information required by the federal consent decree, but the device didn't work properly and apparently hasn't in field trials either.
At a news conference in front of the Los Angeles Police Department's Northeast Division station in Glassell Park, Mayor James Hahn, Police Chief William Bratton and others talked about the bulky $1,200 device which looks like a giant TV remote control and how it will allow officers to gather information needed for the city to meet a looming deadline for substantial compliance with the consent decree.
The Portable Officer Data Device will be carried by all officers in the field, allowing them to quickly gather information on motorists and pedestrians they stop. It also will allow officials to monitor who police are stopping and whether the person's race or ethnicity appears to be a factor.
About 1,200 of the devices are supposed to be in use by May 1.
But in a demonstration Friday, the PODD failed to read Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa's license when it was scanned. Field commanders and others said malfunctions are common with the device, which is not used by any other police department.
"I recognize these are supposed to be state of the art, but the complaint I hear is that they are still too large," said Councilman Dennis Zine, a retired police officer who now serves on the council's Public Safety Committee.
"Maybe this is something like the original cell phones that came out, and we should wait until they are more tested and smaller."
When the PODD didn't work during Friday's demonstration, Bratton came over to Villaraigosa and joked, "Where did you get that license?"
Villaraigosa responded in his best South Boston accent: "In Bahstan (Boston)," where Bratton once led the Police Department.
But officials brushed aside the problems and insisted that the PODD will help ensure that officers aren't engaging in racial profiling.
"The collection and analysis of this traffic- and pedestrian-stop data will help us better understand the basis for LAPD's traffic and pedestrian stops to determine if race is a factor," Hahn said.
"This will help us make sure the LAPD is committed to achieving transparency and goes a long way toward rebuilding our trust in the community."
Bratton said the device also will help eliminate errors and speed the processing of officers' work.
Developed by the Vytex Corp., the PODD is waterproof and can withstand a drop from a height of 4 feet.
LAPD officials said they expect some problems with the devices because they are new, and that the bulky size will be dealt with in future models.
Lt. Anita McKeown said the PODD failed during the demonstration because it hadn't been booted up. If a similar problem develops in the field, the officers could enter the subject's information manually.
The city faces a June 15 deadline to be in compliance with 95 percent of the consent-decree conditions in order for it to be concluded in two years. If it misses the compliance target, the city will remain under federal scrutiny for another five years.
Complying with the decree is costing some $50 million a year, officials estimate, as well as the staffing of hundreds of officers who otherwise could be used to fight crime.
"We want to do what we can to comply with the consent decree and get out from under it," Bratton said.
The consent decree was enacted three years ago, arising partly from complaints about the LAPD's anti-gang unit in the Rampart Division.
Coming out of that were complaints that many people believed the LAPD was stopping people based on race.
"We have a different LAPD today," Villaraigosa said. "When I was a kid, I think it was a real issue. But, when you look at the city today, at the LAPD today, I don't think it is as much of a problem."
There's another reason you should always read the newspaper if you really want to know what is going.
ARNOLD BIAS? OR FLOWERY WRITING?
In a story about Governor Schwarzenegger's appearances in muscle magazines, here is how KCBS anchor Paul Magers put it: "Schwarzenegger has graced the cover of the magazines some 50 times." Graced? What kind of word is that to use? Who is he, the King of Arnoldland? Maybe the writer is a refugee from Entertainment Tonight, or maybe they sure like the governor. Either way, that was not the right way to say it, and a veteran like Magers should have caught it. After all, we're not just talking about an actor, we are talking about the governor.
WONDER WHAT THAT MEANT?
On the day of the Martha Stewart verdict, Magers said this: "trading on Wall Street continued today, despite the Martha Stewart verdict." What did he think, that Wall Street would close down just because of one criminal case that would only affect one stock? If I am missing something, let me know. This sounded more like an ad-lib too, so I don't know what he was thinking.
MAYBE A LITTLE TOO INFORMAL
I certainly appreciate those who try to stay away from broadcasteze. But sometimes informality can be taken too far. After Attorney General John Ashcroft went into the hospital, KCOP's Maria Quiban reported that Ashcroft is suffering from "a pancreas on the fritz." At least she neglected to say that they might have to remove his "thingamajig."
NEXT ISSUE
I'm not sure about the next issue. On Saturday Night, we are having our delayed wedding reception, after our marriage on December 5th. So that will make for a pretty busy weekend, what with friends and family also coming to town. So, I don't know if I'll have something ready by Monday Night, or Tuesday, or maybe not till next Friday. I'm going to have to play this by ear. I appreciate your understanding.
----------------------------- SEARCH ENGINE FOR OTR YOUR OPINIONS They are always welcome. Please include your first
and last name. You can reach me at BRUIN74@aol.com.
Unless you say otherwise, I will assume your comments are for
publication. OTR's main page
IS PUBLISHED MONDAY AND FRIDAY. Letters are
added Tuesday - Friday.
- - -
