Ron Fineman's ON THE RECORD

Last week, Metro News reporter Sandy Wells was attacked while on the job for KABC radio. He was outside of a charter school in the El Sereno area of east LA. According to a news release from the LAPD, "Wells had just finished trying to interview parents, students, and administrators at the Academia Semillas del Pueblo Charter School, which was across the street from where he was standing, in the 4700 block of Huntington Drive in El Sereno."

While standing on the sidewalk, Wells said a car jumped the curb, trying to hit him, but missed. Wells then ran, and the driver chased him down, pushing him against a car, and trying to get Wells' audio tape from him. Wells, in fear, gave the man his tape, which had nothing on it but some ambient sound and someone telling him the principal wasn't available for an interview. After Wells drove away, he says he was followed for a time, which of course also concerned him.

This all came about after KABC morning talk show host Doug McIntyre had been looking into the school, questioning whether they are promoting a separatist/anti-integration agenda. It's an interesting story that Doug has found, and he deserves credit for finding something that the LA Times and local TV news have missed. (The latest is that the LAUSD has found that the school is sticking to its charter).

But my point here is something different. I would like to know what the local news media organizations are doing to help catch Wells' attacker and speak out against this attack. In other words, why aren't the LA Press Club, the Radio and Television News Association of Southern California and the LA chapter of the Society for Professional Journalists raising some hell about what happened?

Here is what I am suggesting. Any or all of these groups should get together and hold a news conference. Here is what I would suggest they say:

"Last week a local radio reporter was attacked for simply doing his job. Any attack on one reporter is an attack on all of us, as well as you, the public we serve. It was carried about by someone who clearly wanted to intimidate this reporter from doing his job, and used violence in order to carry out that plan. To say that this is unacceptable is a great understatement. When a reporter goes to a war zone, like Iraq, there are certain dangers which automatically come with the job. But Los Angeles is not Iraq. We are in a country of laws. Our right to report on the issues of the day is so important, it was included in the First Amendment to the US Constitution. In truth, the attack on Sandy Wells was an attack on The First Amendment.

The Los Angeles Police are investigating this incident, but they need help. There were witnesses, but so far, none has come forward. In order to help the process, we are offering a reward to anyone with information which leads to the arrest and conviction of the attacker.

We realize that Sandy was not hurt. We also realize there are far greater crimes of violence in our city. But again, this was more than an attack on one man. It was an attack to stifle the free flow of information, which is the lifeblood of our democracy. A message must be sent to those responsible, as well as the rest of Los Angeles, that we in the news media will not be stopped from doing our job. We cannot and will not let this attack stand."

I would suggest that people in these groups get the reward money by soliciting from those in our business who can easily afford it. Tell me that Paul Moyer or Paul Magers couldn't each kick in a couple of thousand dollars. I'm serious. Tell me that reporters who make six figure salaries couldn't at least throw in one or two hundred dollars. And I will put my money where my mouth is. If any one of these groups will take my advice, I pledge to kick in a hundred bucks.

So what are we waiting for?

A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT IS WRONG WITH LA TV NEWS

www.notas.com

This morning supporters of the school picketed KABC Radio, which brought out some TV cameras. On Good Day LA, they began interviewing Doug McIntyre. The Q&A probably hadn't gone much more than a minute when Steve Edwards abruptly ended it. Why? Because they had a scheduled satellite interview with Donald Trump and Mark Burnett. Can you believe it? Unfortunately you can. They dump out of a hot local topic involving a taxpayer funded school so they can promote a Donald Trump TV show. Even Steve noted that they were abandoning a good story prematurely. Whoever made the decision has questionable priorities to say the least.

I know that Good Day LA is not a newscast. Especially the 9pm hour is full of fluff with a minimal amount of news. But here was a real issue! And they drop it to talk to Trump. I can't imagine a better -- and more pathetic-- metaphor for what is wrong with Los Angeles TV news.

Fortunately, I believe most of the intimidation that reporters may face is verbal. (That I have faced). I do want to give a tip of the hat to both KNBC's Angie Crouch, and KCAL's Paul Dandridge for speaking up for their rights in two different stories.

First, check out Crouch. This happened at the school where Wells was attacked.

Three cheers for Angie! In the following clip from yesterday, Paul Dandridge was on church grounds. They had a carnival where one of the workers (NOT the man on camera) has been accused of fondling little girls while securing them on a particular ride.

At the end of his piece, Dandridge said that the church asked them to leave their property, and so they did.

I was once doing a critical story on a trucking company in Bakersfield. While waiting for the owner on the street in front of his property, he came driving up in a hurry, as if he was going to hit me and my photographer, but stopped short. This guy was built like a wrestler, and immediately came out of his car and put his hand on the camera. I yelled at him to get his hand off, and he told me not to yell at him. So I stopped yelling and he let go of the camera, declining to be interviewed.

I let him know that I'd be contacting the Sheriff's department. I don't know how much they would have done, but I certainly felt it was important to let this guy know that there could be consequences for grabbing our camera. When I got back to the station, before I could call them, this guy called me and apologized for his behavior. I figured it took a big man to apologize, or maybe he just didn't want any trouble with the law. In any case, I accepted the apology and did not bring in the Sheriff's Department.

I just feel that everyone needs to know...they have a right not to talk to reporters, but they have no right to touch them, or their equipment.

Please click on the appropriate link for each anchor, and please only grade those you are familiar with. I should add, that for those anchors who may be readers, I cannot count your grade for yourself. That goes for all stations. And remember, only one set of grades per subscriber. Grading closes at 6pm Thursday. Thanks!

I am the first to say that celebrity news is overdone. So needless to say, I agree that all of the coverage of the baby of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie is an embarrassment. On the KCBS 11am news with Sandra Mitchell and John Elliot filling in, this tease was read: "And we know you want to hear about this. New details about Angela Jolie’s and Brad Pitt’s daughter." Elliot added "I can’t wait! I can’t wait!"

As a viewer, I have to say, if YOU the news anchors know it is a stupid story, and you clearly think your viewers also think it is a stupid story, then WHY are you reading it?

I have long noticed that it seems like no matter what the spring weather had been, the fire season was going to be a real problem. If there had been lots of rain, then there would be a lot of foliage, extra fuel to make any fire worse than it would have been. If there had been little rain, then the land was especially dry, more susceptible to fire. Either way it was trouble.

But KCAL's Jaime Garza did a package recently which I thought might put an end to all that. He interviewed fire inspector Scott Ross….who said the more recent vegetation and the dead stuff are both equally read to burn. There is NO difference.

But his story also said "this could be the worst fire season in years." Hmmm. I'll admit I'm a bit confused. And I so I did a search on the subject, and found this from Associated Press:

"The risk of wildfires is rising in the West due to an unusually thick blanket of grasses that is drying quickly, creating copious fuel, according to a forecast Thursday from federal land managers.

"Anything in the rangelands, we are looking at above-normal fire danger because of all that fine fuel," said Tom Wordell, head of the Predictive Services Unit at the National Interagency Fire Center.

The national wildland fire outlook calls for above-normal fire danger across much of the West later this month, if temperatures climb as forecasters expect them to.

In lower elevations of the Southwest, normally bare ranges are flush with grass due to a wet winter and carry-over vegetation from last year's similarly ample precipitation. A warm spring has dried those fuels."

With all of the mistakes I see on the news, I continually wonder if a second pair of eyes ever reads a script after it is written. Here is another example.

Paul Moyer said that results released by State Schools Superintendent Jack O'Connell show that nearly 26 hundred seniors still need to pass the high school exit exam to graduate. Actually, more than 41 thousand still have not passed it. The 26 hundred figure comes from the LAUSD. However the story failed to make the distinction.

There've been a lot of bear stories lately, haven't there? In one that KABC's Leo Stallworth was covering, he said a bear that he saw in a video was the size of "an all pro NFL linebacker." But then a Sheriff's deputy said the bear weighs 150 – 160 pounds.

I can assure you that there are no NFL linebackers who weigh 160 pounds. I don't even know if you'll find a linebacker that light in most high schools.

Stallworth also said new housing tracts "are literally going up in mountainous areas….." Just why would he need to say "literally?" In other words, he could have simply said that housing tracts are going up in mountainous areas. I don't think anyone would have thought that Stallworth was speaking figuratively, especially with the video to show it.

So why it is so tough for reporters to know when to use the word "literally." Usually the problem is a reporter saying "literally" when they really mean figuratively. Then sometimes, you have people like Stallworth who say it when it simply isn't needed. So what would be a good example of when it is appropriate to use the word? Well, if you saw someone who had their nose pressed to a grindstone, and you were telling someone about it, you would rightly say "their nose was pressed to a grindstone, literally."