Sometimes I see or hear something so stupid, I lose control and have to call it out right away. That’s especially true when it comes from somebody who makes herself seem like some sort of expert on a topic. Unfortunately, this is one of those times.
I woke up to a lot of emails, as usual, but three were about blog posts from Laura Nachman, who has “Philly TV and Radio” on the top of her site. She has been writing about the subject since before I first came to town in 1998.
So much of what she writes is nonsense, which makes it good that her posts tend to be short, but take a look at the first of her three posts from overnight:
The ONLY thing good about this is that it happened after the storm and not during it!
She’s not just angry, but furious KYW-CBS3 broke into programming for what she referred to as a “weather alert” which was really a tornado warning, if she knew the difference and was paying attention. I mean, if it was on for ten minutes (I’d say almost, but I was doing my own work and not timing the meteorologist), wouldn’t a normal viewer have been able to get that? The coverage and maps seemed on point.
Does she really think TV stations make information like tornado warnings up? Maybe she’s confused that some stations call a “First Alert Day” or some other branding to get viewers to watch throughout the day because something may happen, but a tornado warning comes from the National Weather Service.
In fact, here it is:
If a TV station didn’t break into coverage for a tornado warning, then what type of weather coverage should warrant a special report? A few inches of snow?
And the tornado warning came from an arm of the same federal government that licenses TV and radio stations to use the public airways for the public interest.
“Biggest Takeaway: (Their bold font) Whatever plan you base off a tornado warning, that NWS tornado warning needs to be received instantly, & your plan triggered and accomplished rapidly (within a few minutes) to be of value.”
Isn’t that something that should be of concern to the public?
Nachman claims she’s furious because she “missed Inside Edition‘s coverage of the Bill Cosby sentencing.” BFD! (See definition #1.)
I’m sorry that was inconvenient for Ms. Nachman, but Philadelphia didn’t miss any coverage of the Bill Cosby sentencing.
Didn’t every station break into afternoon programming when he was sentenced? Didn’t all the stations have live reports from the Montgomery County Courthouse for the past two days?
Was anybody really surprised Cosby was sentenced to prison? The only variable was the length of time, and that gets less and less important when the convict is an 81-year-old blind man.
Then, she chastises the station:
“You just had three and a half hours of local news from 4-7 to talk about the possible tornado.”
That’s absolutely wrong. First, some math: 4-7pm is three hours, not three-and-a-half hours as Bachman claimed. Furthermore, the half-hour from 6:30 to 7 was not local news. It was the CBS Evening News with Jeff Glor, so that’s down to two-and-a-half hours.
Nachman certainly wouldn’t make a good news producer if she can’t time her newscast. Maybe her boss should double-check her timesheets for other exaggerations.
And yes, Glor’s newscast covered Bill Cosby for his national audience. I didn’t have three TV sets on at the same time but I’d guess the other two network newscasts did, as well.
You wanted more national coverage? What about CNN, MSNBC and Fox News? Did you consider those for hour after hour?
Does Laura Nachman really think local news from 4 to 6:30 can cover a tornado warning issued at 6:47pm? Let’s give her a lesson in telling time. 6:47pm comes AFTER 6:30pm. Therefore, there was no way to put a tornado warning issued at 6:47 into a newscast that ended at 6:30pm. Besides, if we could go back and control time, wouldn’t you be furious irked if that took away from your Cosby coverage?
Let’s look at some other numbers. CBS3 claims the two ‘Most Viewed’ stories on its website are Bill Cosby stories. Nachman can check there if she wants to know more. Plus, just about every other website in the world has Cosby coverage in some form or another! Does anybody else think demanding specific coverage from Inside Edition makes her sound like a two-year-old?
Does she think the weather wasn’t a story?
Look at all the storm reports around the area.
Also, look at the number of rescues, thanks to first-responders. The video of the ambulance that had to be pulled out because it was stuck in high water was obviously from after the sun went down, and close to the area of the tornado warning.
By the way, has she checked Inside Edition‘s website for Cosby coverage? It’s right here:
Seems like much ado over nothing.
By the way, her other gems from overnight:
I’m so glad she got to see this, which has been all over the local news for two days, and the mascot even visited the local stations yesterday. It’s also here, for the rest of you:
Nachman is into sports coverage. Yesterday, she published separate posts naming the announcers for this weekend’s Penn State and Eagles’ games, and two short items on Monday about the same sports radio story.
Unfortunately, in this #MeToo world, she missed the big universal story that FTVLive.com’s Scott Jones mentioned and even non-sports fans would care about.
“Amazon’s live streams of 11 NFL ‘Thursday Night Football’ games will feature the first all-female broadcast booth in league history, the company announced on Tuesday.
“Andrea Kremer, a longtime NFL reporter and recent Pro Football Hall of Fame inductee, will announce the games alongside Hannah Storm, an ESPN ‘SportsCenter’ anchor and ‘Monday Night Football’ pregame show host.”
And finally, her specialty, that she can’t stop writing about:
(That’s its, not it’s!)
Maybe Nachman should consider other people’s lives and property, and think of herself as lucky instead of furious. She did lose her credibility in the storm but I’m sure that won’t stop her from hosting a Brady Bunch party for herself today. Priorities!
I just wonder if Nachman is so furious at CBS3 she’s going to boycott Jessica Dean’s last newscasts tonight. Nah! I don’t wonder at all.
Her readers deserve better.
And please, don’t miss out. If you like what you read here, subscribe to CohenConnect.com with either your email address or WordPress account, and get a notice whenever I publish. I’m also available for writing/web contract work.
The year 1982 was 36 years ago. Do you have your calendar from back then? Heck, were you even alive back then? (I was and I remember, but my calendar situation was mainly my parents’ responsibility at that time.) At least Judge Kavanaugh can’t say his was accidentally deleted from wherever we keep our calendars, these days. On the other hand, looks like we’ll be keeping our calendars forever!
I explained in a lawsuit about 17-18 years ago (half the time since 1982?!) – when I mentioned plans and the other side immediately asked for my calendar – they’re good for some things and not for others. Calendars will tell what your plans were when you wrote (or saved) them. They were your intentions. Calendars won’t tell whether you actually followed through with the plans or changed them. Maybe you got sick.
(“So as I told you, despite what my old calendar said,no, I didn’t go to a movie with my friend Harry, that night!”)
Anyway, the calendar is supposed to help with Judge Kavanaugh’s denial, at least to some degree.
Let’s see. He was born in 1965. (Damn! All these “old” people’s birth years are getting closer and closer to mine!)
During that clerkship, he worked alongside Neil Gorsuch (born 1967!). He and now-Justice Gorsuch attended the same prep school! Small world.
SIDEBAR: Remember, Justice Gorsuch’s nomination came after President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland, who remains Chief Judge of the Federal Appeals Court, DC Circuit, where Kavanaugh has been a Circuit Judge since 2006! Again, small world.
But the Republican-controlled Senate never took up Judge Garland’s nomination.
Then and now: Clarence Thomas at the EEOC (1989–1990), and as a Supreme Court Justice
Whose name is missing from that last paragraph? Law Professor Anita Hill, of course!
She’d worked under Thomas at the U.S. Education Department and then at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. It wasn’t until the end of Thomas’ confirmation hearings that her behavior allegations against Thomas were leaked to National Public Radio’s Supreme Court correspondent Nina Totenberg (still on the job!) from a confidential FBI report. I think we have déjà vu.
BACK TO THE STORY: Many of us actually learned the phrase “sexual harassment” during the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill frenzy. Hill – a Yale Law School graduate and University of Oklahoma law professor – testified a mutual friend introduced her to Thomas. Then, he asked if she’d leave a private firm and work as his assistant at the Department of Education. After being happy for three months, he asked her to go out with him socially and everything changed when she told him it wouldn’t be right, since she was her supervisor. (I’m summarizing her statement from that same link above, sure to bring back memories for us older folk.)
“I thought that by saying ‘no’ and explaining my reasons, my employer would abandon his social suggestions. However, to my regret, in the following few weeks he continued to ask me out on several occasions. He pressed me to justify my reasons for saying “no” to him. These incidents took place in his office or mine. They were in the form of private conversations which would not have been overheard by anyone else.
“My working relationship became even more strained when Judge Thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. On these occasions, he would call me into his office for reports on education issues and projects or he might suggest that because of the time pressures of his schedule, we go to lunch to a government cafeteria. After a brief discussion of work, he would turn the conversation to a discussion of sexual matters. His conversations were very vivid.
“He spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals, and films showing group sex or rape scenes. He talked about pornographic materials depicting individuals with large penises, or large breasts involved in various sex acts.
“On several occasions Thomas told me graphically of his own sexual prowess. Because I was extremely uncomfortable talking about sex with him at all, and particularly in such a graphic way, I told him that I did not want to talk about these subjects. I would also try to change the subject to education matters or to nonsexual personal matters, such as his background or his beliefs. My efforts to change the subject were rarely successful.”
Then, Prof. Hill testified,
“During the latter part of my time at the Department of Education, the social pressures and any conversation of his offensive behavior ended. I began both to believe and hope that our working relationship could be a proper, cordial, and professional one. When Judge Thomas was made chair of the EEOC, I needed to face the question of whether to go with him. I was asked to do so and I did. The work, itself, was interesting, and at that time, it appeared that the sexual overtures, which had so troubled me, had ended. I also faced the realistic fact that I had no alternative job. While I might have gone back to private practice, perhaps in my old firm, or at another, I was dedicated to civil rights work and my first choice was to be in that field. Moreover, at that time the Department of Education, itself, was a dubious venture. President Reagan was seeking to abolish the entire department.”
There were no problems for her first few months.
“However, during the fall and winter of 1982, these began again. The comments were random, and ranged from pressing me about why I didn’t go out with him, to remarks about my personal appearance. I remember him saying that ‘some day I would have to tell him the real reason that I wouldn’t go out with him.’
“He began to show displeasure in his tone and voice and his demeanor in his continued pressure for an explanation. He commented on what I was wearing in terms of whether it made me more or less sexually attractive. The incidents occurred in his inner office at the EEOC.
“One of the oddest episodes I remember was an occasion in which Thomas was drinking a Coke in his office, he got up from the table, at which we were working, went over to his desk to get the Coke, looked at the can and asked, ‘Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?’
“On other occasions he referred to the size of his own penis as being larger than normal and he also spoke on some occasions of the pleasures he had given to women with oral sex. At this point, late 1982,1 began to feel severe stress on the job. I began to be concerned that Clarence Thomas might take out his anger with me by degrading me or not giving me important assignments. I also thought that he might find an excuse for dismissing me.
“In January 1983, I began looking for another job. I was handicapped because I feared that if he found out he might make it difficult for me to find other employment, and I might be dismissed from the job I had.
“Another factor that made my search more difficult was that this was during a period of a hiring freeze in the Government. In February 1983, I was hospitalized for 5 days on an emergency basis for acute stomach pain which I attributed to stress on the job. Once out of the hospital. I became more committed to find other employment and sought further to minimize my contact with Thomas.”
Hill ended up taking a job at Oral Roberts University.
“The dean of the university saw me teaching and inquired as to whether I would be interested in pursuing a career in teaching, beginning at Oral Roberts University. I agreed to take the job, in large part, because of my desire to escape the pressures I felt at the EEOC due to Judge Thomas.
“When I informed him that I was leaving in July, I recall that his response was that now, I would no longer have an excuse for not going out with him. I told him that I still preferred not to do so. At some time after that meeting, he asked if he could take me to dinner at the end of the term. When I declined, he assured me that the dinner was a professional courtesy only and not a social invitation. I reluctantly agreed to accept that invitation but only if it was at the very end of a working day.
“On, as I recall, the last day of my employment at the EEOC in the summer of 1983, I did have dinner with Clarence Thomas. We went directly from work to a restaurant near the office. We talked about the work that I had done both at Education and at the EEOC. He told me that he was pleased with all of it except for an article and speech that I had done for him while we were at the Office for Civil Rights. Finally he made a comment that I will vividly remember. He said, that if I ever told anyone of his behavior that it would ruin his career. This was not an apology, nor was it an explanation. That was his last remark about the possibility of our going out, or reference to his behavior.”
In case you were wondering (and who of a certain age wasn’t?), further discussions of pornographic videos Thomas had allegedly rented, including the now-famous Long Dong Silver, must’ve happened during questioning or cross-examination.
Anyway, members of the Judiciary Committee didn’t treat Prof. Hill very nicely. For reasons we don’t know and can only imagine, two women who made statements supporting Prof. Hill to Senate staffers never testified.
“Professor Hill, now that you have read the FBI report, you can see that it contains no reference to any mention of Judge Thomas’ private parts or sexual prowess or size, et cetera, and my question to you would be, on something that is as important as it is in your written testimony and in your responses to Senator Biden, why didn’t you tell the FBI about that?”
Déjà vu, once again.
“Professor Hill, you said that you took it to mean that Judge Thomas wanted to have sex with you, but in fact he never did ask you to have sex, correct?”
And then the former Philadelphia D.A. asked,
“What went through your mind, if anything, on whether you ought to come forward at that stage, because if you had, you would have stopped this man from being head of the EEOC perhaps for another decade? What went on through your mind? I know you decided not to make a complaint, but did you give that any consideration, and, if so, how could you allow this kind of reprehensible conduct to go on right in the headquarters, without doing something about it?”
You can see and hear some other lowlights in these clips:
Thomas denied everything and called the hearing a type of “high tech lynching.”
As we know, the nomination was moved to the full, Democratic-controlled, Senate, and Thomas was narrowly confirmed, 52-48.
Despite the Déjà vu, those were accusations of sexual harassment. The allegation against Kavanaugh is attempted rape.
Kavanaugh denies it happened, but he has had confirmation trouble before. In 2003, when President George W. Bush (#43) nominated him for his current job – Circuit Judge for the Federal Appeals Court, DC Circuit – it took him three years to get approved! He was considered too partisan and wasn’t sworn in until 2006.
Let’s not forget Judge Kavanaugh already has a job for life. Every federal judge does. It says so in the Constitution.
In fact, I got called for federal jury duty back in 1995, while producing afternoon and early evening coverage of the O.J. Simpson murder trial for WSVN in Miami. This was just before the L.A. jury was going to deliberate the verdict and we potential Miami jurors were warned, our case could last weeks.
I was angry after waiting a whole day in the courtroom doing nothing. Finally, we were questioned and I told off a federal judge using the line, “You have a job for life but I have to earn mine every day!” (You’re welcome again, Patrick and Alice!)
At the end, they divided everyone up into groups. Those in my group were very happy to be there, even though the judge hadn’t announced which group would get to go home, have to come back, etc. (Yes, we got sent home for good.) What I won’t do for a job!
So Judge Kavanaugh will not get any more job security if he is confirmed. He will just get more publicity as a justice on the nation’s highest court. (Would you still want that?) And the opportunity to influence the entire country. Also, don’t forget the ability to sell more books further into the future. Plus, maybe a movie, The Notorious B.M.K. (His middle name is Michael.)
In 1987, President Reagan’s nomination of Judge Douglas Ginsburg (no relation to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, of the movie mentioned in the last paragraph) to the High Court ended with his withdrawal nine days after it was announced. Judge Ginsburg, 41, was President Reagan’s second choice after the Senate refused to confirm Judge Robert Bork.
That was a big deal at the time. President Reagan ended up nominating David Souter and not long after, President George H.W. Bush (#41) nominated Anthony Kennedy, who – again – is retiring now. But the way the FBI conducted background checks changed forever, causing a lot of other people to have to answer questions about whether they’d experimented with smoking pot.
Judge Ginsburg continues to serve as a Senior Circuit Judge in that same Federal Appeals Court, DC Circuit, I’ve already mentioned twice. No more ‘small world’ reference. It’s getting late and two pieces of more important news just happened.
Of course, a background check is different than investigating a person who is under suspicion of a crime, but the FBI does that for the president, in order to avoid an embarrassment like the Judge Ginsburg incident. Investigations are not left to people appointed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, as was recently suggested, because that’s obviously political.
Maybe this will again change the questions that candidates for high positions, who will need to be confirmed by the Senate, will have to answer. The questions will have to be more specific than whether somebody sniffed glue in high school, which was one of the additions after the Judge Ginsburg incident, as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow showed!
Let’s stop for a moment and recognize the stories uncovered by these two female journalists.
Perhaps new questions to be asked as soon as the Kavanaugh case ends will include dates of every “base” achieved ending in loss of virginity, as the analogy has gone, which could be a threat to the privacy of willing and non-willing second parties.
Perhaps it will be the height of the #MeToo movement because it could uncover old crimes committed by men who are supposedly upstanding citizens these days. That would be an important lesson to young men with high career hopes, but probably not amount to anything because no president would nominate anybody so much more prone to rejection rather than confirmation.
And we’d never know who they are.
Besides, how many men, in addition to more women these days, would be considered 100 percent innocent of any coming-of-age antics that has probably been around since just after the introduction of the world’s oldest profession?
That brings me to a point somebody – I forgot who – brought up on Facebook last week, probably in a meme.
What about the thousands of victims of priest sexual abuse, just the ones right here in this country? They didn’t speak up right away, for obvious reasons. Should their stories not be heard, even if there’s a statute of limitations to prevent criminal charges?
Then why are people calling for a vote on Judge Kavanaugh before hearing from Dr. Blasey Ford? Should Prof. Hill have not been heard, all those years ago?
According to the York (Pa.) Daily Record, last Monday – less than a week ago – a Pittsburgh-area man and Catholic school kindergartner filed a class action suit as lead plaintiffs,
“seeking the full disclosure of all Catholic dioceses’ records concerning sexual abuse by priests. …
“The complaint notes that the recent grand jury report that identified 301 predatory priests in Pennsylvania (click here to see all 1356 pages) ‘emphasized it did not believe the report identified all predator priests and that many victims never came forward.’
“‘Lack of a complete accounting and disclosure … constitutes a clear and present danger,’ the suit concludes.”
So while Dr. Christine Blasey Ford gets ready to testify against Judge Kavanaugh this Thursday, I’ll close with two pieces of news just in and can’t be ignored as I was about to publish:
“The second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, claims that Kavanaugh waved his penis in front of her face while she was inebriated at a dormitory party during the 1983-1984 academic school year. She told Farrow and Mayer that she believes an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh’s actions is warranted.”
Judge Kavanaugh’s response:
“This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name — and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building — against these last-minute allegations.”
And from White House spokesperson Kerri Kupec:
“This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man. This claim is denied by all who were said to be present and is wholly inconsistent with what many women and men who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time in college say. The White House stands firmly behind Judge Kavanaugh.”
On the Judiciary Committee: Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
“The office of Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley released the unredacted initial letter” Dr. Blasey Ford “sent to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in July detailing her account of the (alleged) incident” that both Dr. Blasey Ford and Sen. Feinstein expected to remain confidential.
To me, it looks like another alleged victim has just been betrayed.
Folks, will this ever end?
Please leave your comments in the section below, and don’t miss out. If you like what you read here, subscribe to CohenConnect.com with either your email address or WordPress account, and get a notice whenever I publish. I’m also available for writing/web contract work.
First, I want to thank you for all your reading. This is my 99th blog and so far there have been more than 14,100 page views. Dozens of you are reading and clicking more than once, even when I don’t post anything, and the numbers have really been going up.
Reading above what’s above would good thing to do over the long weekend. For those of you who haven’t been, I recently achieved the trifecta of categories: golden showers, pass gas (fart), and semen (cum) – all for news reasons, of course, and each used only once – so maybe you’ll start by subscribing.
You never know what’ll come up next!
Here is a hint. It’s called Follow-Up Friday, and it’s good to see Harvey Weinstein in deep (pick a bodily substance from above).
“Weinstein arrived at the precinct at 7:30am, got fingerprinted, then departed in handcuffs—without his books—about an hour later. From there he was driven to the courthouse, where he was arraigned at 9:25am and made bail on a cashier’s check for $1 million.”
Yes, you read “books” and Slate reported,
“Footage of his arrival shows Weinstein entering the precinct with three books in his arms—one about Elia Kazan, another about Rodgers and Hammerstein, and a third, floppy, leather-bound volume that hasn’t been identified.”
Then upon further review, Slate suspected the “books were almost certainly props” since,
Whether criminal suspects in New York get to read books they bring is under debate but Slate noted,
“Under normal circumstances, a person who surrenders to police can expect to wait 12 to 24 hours before heading off to see a judge. This includes time spent waiting to be transported to the courthouse, as officers don’t tend to make this trip until they have a group of people ready for arraignment. The fact that Weinstein got the ‘walkthrough’ treatment—coming in and out in just two hours—suggests that all arrangements (including the amount of his bail) had been worked out ahead of time by his lawyer and the district attorney’s office.”
A student was arrested a short time later, in or near his classroom. The chief said he’d asked for permission to leave the room and “he returned armed with two handguns.”
What did Indiana’s former governor have to say?
Karen and I are praying for the victims of the terrible shooting in Indiana. To everyone in the Noblesville community – you are on our hearts and in our prayers. Thanks for the swift response by Hoosier law enforcement and first responders.
It didn’t take long, but Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg is back in the news for a victory against one of the biggest supermarkets in the southeast – Publix – and Florida GOP primary gubernatorial candidate Adam Putnam, for that matter.
“No other Florida candidate has ever come close to that kind of subsidy from Florida’s largest Fortune 500 company. Its most recent contribution, a $100,000 donation on April 30, was the largest, too, according to the latest campaign finance filings.”
“In 2016, WFTS-Channel 28 discovered seven Tampa Bay-area Publix stores failed health inspections. In those stores, food inspectors found rodent droppings, hundreds of pounds of meat and other food stored at unsafe temperatures, bugs and employees not washing their hands, according to the report. Putnam responded the next day by pulling the inspections from the department’s website and eliminating the pass/fail grading system.”
Publix is based in Lakeland, and Putnam lives in Bartow, both in Polk County.
Thanks to Hogg, Publix faced “consumer boycotts, student protests and threats to its wholesome image.” Now, it’s acknowledging the “divide” it caused by its unprecedented financial support of Putnam’s campaign.
As for Putnam, he’s sticking with the National Rifle Association and against the wishes of the survivors, some of whom like Hogg, will be old enough to vote against him. The primary is set for Aug. 28.
Hit the question mark for help and type in “political ads.”
The social media giant will tell you,
“When ads with political content appear on Facebook, they’re required to include information about who paid for them. An ad with political content on Facebook can be identified by the label: Sponsored – Paid for by. This label is followed by information about who paid for the ad. Learn more about what’s considered an ad with political content.”
Then, after a way to report seeing “an ad on Facebook that has political content, but doesn’t have a label showing who paid for it,” it tells you “Ads that have political content and have appeared on Facebook on or after May 7, 2018 will also appear in the Archive of Ads With Political Content.”
That’s not just candidates, but issue ads from outside parties, too. The details were revealed when the expanded requirements took effect – yesterday.
Something else you won’t be seeing on Facebook anymore are videos from The Weather Channel.
“[Facebook video] hasn’t been beneficial,” said Neil Katz, global head of content and engagement at The Weather Channel, according to Digiday at its Video Summit. “It has been good for Facebook, but it hasn’t been good for us.”
The publication wrote, “The Weather Channel’s Facebook presence included its main page as well as ‘weather-adjacent’ science, nature and travel verticals such as Rockets Are Cool, Crazimals and United States of Awesome.”
In March, The Weather Channel was sold to entrepreneur and entertainment executive Byron Allen, who us older folk remember from Real People. Another wise decision, sir.
I love when people who don’t know what they’re talking about keep talking and talking, digging themselves further and further into a hole. By the way, a person has the right to shoot and record video in a public place. As far as consent for voice, which varies by state, a guy holding a video camera close by kind of tells you that you may be recorded! Sort of like a beep when you hear someone’s voicemail. Just a clue for the clueless.
And this is something I’ve seen several times before: Philadelphia’s own Frank Rizzo – former police commissioner who served two terms as mayor for most of the 1970s. He’d been out of office for less than a year when approached by a KYW-TV3 investigative reporter. This is something you shouldn’t miss, nor should the people above.
And speaking of Americans and our rights, the Philadelphia region’s two largest grocery store chains aren’t looking too super when it comes to our holidays, at least to me.
I hope Acme and ShopRite don’t know the meaning of Memorial Day, in which we honor our fallen heroes who are no longer able to barbecue or go down to the Jersey Shore. Otherwise, it’s just damn rude and insensitive.
Their recommendations to party should’ve been reminders to remember.
On that note, please don’t forget to read, show your friends and subscribe if you haven’t.
And have a good, long holiday weekend. (Wouldn’t that have been enough?)
I’m going to give the writer the benefit of the doubt because reporters don’t usually write headlines, and the headline goes after the format rather than the person.
The article started by criticizing Mike Jerrick’s on-air behavior on International Women’s Day, March 8. It quoted Peter Jaroff – assistant professor of media studies and production at Temple University and a former WPVI-6ABC producer – who described the situation perfectly.
Jaroff told the paper,
“You’re supposed to chat and fill up time and be engaging to your audience, and that can get you in a lot of trouble.”
Let me repeat: “Fill up time and be engaging.”
He didn’t say for how long or how often. Let’s look at the situation.
WTXF-Fox 29 puts on a six-hour morning show.
(I mentioned people who know me. They also know I hate the phrase “show” rather than “newscast” because a newscast is special with the responsibility of informing people about important current events and controversies – even though they typically air too much crime and too many fires, often without putting any of it in perspective. A “show” can be anything.)
Jerrick is on the air for four hours straight, from 6 to 10am. His broadcast, Good Day Philadelphia, actually starts at 4. (Yes, it’s the same name as all the other local Fox stations call their morning shows because they copy.)
Speaking of copying: Today, were we supposed to look at this and know where St. Mary’s County is? No clues. The company itself owns three Fox 5s. That doesn’t include affiliates. But this didn’t cost a cent!
It begins with hard news. Certainly, a lot of the content is from the day before because very little happens between 11:30pm and 4am, except for the crime and fires.
Jerrick is as good as anybody when he goes on the air at 6.
But let’s start before 6.
I worked with him for 15 months. I’ve seen him at 5:30am daily, before the public at 6, telling producers and an executive producer his intelligent, educated, experienced opinion – usually right – on what stories he should be talking about and which shouldn’t air. Four hours, or actually six, can be a long, long time – and a lot can happen to change things.
There will never be a TV station that has the staffing it really needs.
Jerrick would start out doing the news, correcting mistakes in scripts based on what aired earlier, what has changed since then and what he knows is the truth. (In other words, somebody else’s mistake.) He won’t let a live reporter go without making sure viewers have all the facts they need.
That may throw off the time, and producers have to go almost by the second – which probably makes them crazy – but realize Good Day Philadelphia producers do two straight hours in the control room. That’s a lot, even for the most disciplined, attentive, anal person trying to get as much new material on as possible.
The producers can’t read every script before they air. Scripts are still being written moments before, especially in breaking news situations. Jerrick and his counterpart, Alex Holley, may be told a few quick points in their earpieces and given a line or two. Very few TV news anchors can do that as flawlessly as they do multiple times every morning, while keeping tabs on what the live picture is showing, or if the signal goes bad.
At 7:30am, there’s often a live interview with a newsmaker, victim, etc. Jerrick and Holley consistently show the right tone, depending on the situation.
I haven’t forgotten their great job with the return of a station intern, wounded in the Orlando Pulse nightclub shooting, who lost a loved one. Or the controversial Philadelphia sugar tax that mostly affects soda. Or the superintendent of the School District of Philadelphia about needing 1,000 new teachers when the other teachers hadn’t gotten a raise in five years and put up a billboard on busy I-95, making sure everyone sees the claim Philadelphia doesn’t value its students. I remember Jerrick and Holley making sure to present both sides, playing devil’s advocate when necessary, and give everyone a fair shot – for journalism and conscience.
I know because in each of those situations, I took notes and when each was over, I quickly got in and out points to put the video on the web, and wrote stories that started with the new information Jerrick and Holley were able to gather. Often, they made the interviews memorable experiences and that’s exactly what TV goes for: memorable experiences involving people associated with your station. The bosses get credit, the station makes money, but it’s Jerrick, Holley and company who actually do the work.
I’ll tell you now, I have not watched for a moment since I left last Aug. 10. Too painful. And that personal story is far from over. The people I’m writing about may not know that but their bosses sure do!
So how can Jerrick and Holley go from being hard news people – bringing viewers every new fact possible while guaranteeing their accuracy, while sitting inside a studio – and suddenly become time fillers at 9? They’d have to be extremely talented and well-rounded, or bipolar!
Sure, they report breaking news the executive producer decides is important enough until 10:00, but the *show* transitions from hard news to arguably nonsense and no matter how slowly that process takes, and the audience changes, it still involves the same on-air people.
It’s very rare, but I remember the morning hero, reporter Steve Keeley, breaking three new stories live at three different locations one morning! It’s a combination of his sources and reading everyone’s social media (and I included every police and fire department’s tweets in three states when I wrote everyone’s).
The station is too cheap to hire other people.
STOP FOR A SIDEBAR: All I ever got from the station, other than hard times, was a green t-shirt and hat for the St. Patrick’s Day parade in 2017. Most other places give gift bags when you start.
But I got a Good Day Philadelphia Weekend shirt that one of the anchors, Bill Anderson, actually spent time and money to make all by himself! Don’t believe me? He did that to connect with viewers and increase ratings – and then the bosses took him off the show and gave him a reporting franchise, For Goodness’ Sake! Some thanks and appreciation!
Bill is still doing what he does, great reporting, substitute anchoring, and wardrobes.
Yes, folks. This is the fourth largest TV market in America and this is what a local native – great person, great at his job – obviously feels forced to do. Somebody should be ashamed, and it’s sure not Bill!
BACK TO THE STORY: At 9, one of the 4-6am anchors usually joins Jerrick and Holley. They’re given a list of topics to ad lib about. That means no real scripts for them or their director, who has to make sure the right video is playing. Reporters who were on the air earlier usually change stories – not because of news happening, but planned events. Everyone’s time is planned out so there’s no waste, or rest on a bad day.
There’s a lot for the anchors to keep track of while making small talk with weathercaster Sue Serio, the most open, genuine human you’ll ever meet – and traffic reporter Bob Kelly, who has to keep track of all roads and transit in the region, get all the facts as they change without getting confused, and then find the live shots or make the graphics you see without any help. Oh, and then it’s Kelly’s Classroom or Camp Kelly, depending on the season, and Breakfast with Bob weekly.
So there’s a hell of a lot that goes on that viewers don’t see, except for the same faces, over and over again. How they seem to know everything – and at that hour – is incredible! They deserve credit, not scorn.
Of course, the viewers want the local angle, rather than the network or cable morning shows. There’s a place for it but honestly, it’s not for me.
I’ve often thought of Mike Jerrick as Johnny Carson. Who except Dom DeLuise and Joan Rivers ever had a public spat with Johnny?
I mean, Jerrick is from the Great Plains (Kansas), smart, funny, and – yes – older. That’s valuable and lacking in too many places today. I wasn’t around when Carson (from Iowa) started on The Tonight Show in 1962 and wasn’t allowed to stay up late enough to see him until I was old enough, and still, a lot was over my head.
No, not everything goes as planned. That’s the nature of live TV. How the people on-air react is what separates amateurs from professionals. The anchors you see on that station I really don’t like are professionals.
So Mike and Alex’s job is basically to fill time, and it works because they’re often #1 in the later time periods. That means they do very, very well – especially because one of their competitors is the nation’s powerhouse station.
Something ironic: The article with the title about a format possibly being on its way out barely touches on history. It used to be a white guy doing the news. Or two white guys. Same with weather and sports. Then came Adam and Eve – a man and a woman. The article quotes University of Maryland journalism professor Linda Steiner as saying network executives see that “as the kind of ideal nuclear family.”
But this isn’t Leave it to Beaver. This is Fox. So you have to expect a little pushing of the boundaries, especially from a station with the brand We Go There.
As seriousness turns to silliness, children have headed out to school. If they’re home sick, how would you compare Jerrick’s behavior to afternoon soap operas in the past? Or to the lowlifes too often seen on daytime talk and reality shows, these days? Do you want your kid watching Maury(a KYW-TV3 alum) orSpringer? The difference is, Mike is the serious newscaster, earlier in the morning. (I’ve never asked him which role he prefers, if either.)
And HBO’s John Oliver used Jerrick as an example of someone who spent “the entire day (International Women’s Day) acting inappropriately.”
Yes, times change. Jerrick – with daughters and grandchildren – would be one of the first to support #MeToo.
He also keeps colleagues on their toes and the audience interested. I give management and the parent company no credit for that. Absolutely none. It’s the people you see, and I don’t have a bad thing to say about any of them. And when the show is over, they clean up (if necessary), meet to discuss the good and the bad of the morning, plan the next show, and then go out to shoot all the special segments viewers see. It’s usually not far from 12-hour days.
Do you think all the pre-NFL Draft features happened on their own or by magic? It was big planning, changing clothes and going with the flow – just like at the newsdesk but with a little more wiggle room.
So he said “bullshit” when President Trump’s assistant Kellyanne Conway – a local woman – used the phrase “alternative facts” about the Trump inauguration’s crowd size. WHO WASN’T THINKING THAT? And he took his punishment knowing he shouldn’t have used the word, and knowing the station had to pretend to care about Federal Communications Commission rules.
Tom Snyder – who anchored here at KYW-TV3 in the late 1960s – shot a bird on WABC in New York, in the early 1980s. This is how he remembered it, years later, on CNBC.
I can imagine the same situation here.
And who was totally honest about needing to take a few months off?
Nobody is perfect but Mike Jerrick – with the job he has – is pretty damn close. (I can say the same about Alex Holley who, among so much else, has made her own family out in Texas, our own family.) It has earned him promotions and made him a national figure. And I sure hope he’s not working for the money. (I’ve always said money is freedom.)
And don’t tell me Ryan Lochte (pre-2016, Rio) didn’t deserve to be laughed at after his interview,
I’d never put any of them on my show and I doubt Mike would either, unless they did something SO ridiculous that everyone was talking about it.
The article pretty much says Jerrick found his niche and compares him to the Today show’s first host, Dave Garroway, buried here at West Laurel Hill Cemetery.
So bottom line: Mike Jerrick is the right person for the job, the station is lucky to have him and I will blame any future fall in ratings with changes in front of and behind the camera, or the end of an era – not Mike.
(For the record, I was NOT in contact with ANYBODY associated with the station for weeks before, or while writing. The thoughts are completely my own.)
Speaking of people I like, I can’t say enough about the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School massacre survivors outside Fort Lauderdale. They’ve spoken forcefully and eloquently about the need for stricter gun laws.
Just wait, but some of them and other high school students will be old enough to vote by this year’s midterm elections. Mark your calendar for Tuesday, Nov. 6. Every member of Congress will be up for (re)election, along with about a third of the Senate.
Plus, 39 states including Pennsylvania and New York (I’ll get to that one in a few moments) will be (re)electing governors, and there will be many state legislature elections. (If I remember correctly, in ancient times in Florida, you could register to vote at 17 but not actually vote until your 18th birthday.)
Then, in two (hopefully) short years, more than half of today’s high school students will be able to vote in the 2020 presidential election.
Anyone who dismisses the Stoneman Douglas student group over their ages is stupid because they’ll be voting before you know it, and are already convincing other voters! Same for that Fox News host, Todd Starnes, who was troubled by how Cameron Kasky took down Sen. Marco Rubio, the one-time presidential candidate, over whether he would agree to refuse further political contributions from the National Rifle Association during a CNN Town Hall. (Click here to watch and read it all.)
The young people are absolutely right about the need to make gun laws stricter. As for what changes, there are many so I won’t be specific. However, as powerful as this group and their supporters become, I worry about all the federal judges President Trump is appointing, and at least one justice so far on the Supreme Court. The young people and 100 million other Americans may convince some legislatures to vote their way, but those bills-turned-laws will have to be upheld if challenged.
I’ve mentioned Kasky’s mother has been a friend for many years. Besides beating a sitting senator in a debate, he’s the one who had to leave the 60 Minutes interview that aired last Sunday for a family dinner. (Ask them, not me.)
It’s not my place to name Kasky’s mother because she has not spoken out publicly (nor does she have to, with her son doing the job much more than adequately), but for those who are getting over school shootings or need a reminder of how devastating the situation has been for not only the community but 17 families, his mother shared this post on Facebook on Sunday.
nor this self-proclaimed “physical education instructon and football coach” in an outer Atlanta suburb with whom I have two friends in common. He apparently feels it necessary to use some dumb “gun permit” that never expires, that somebody made up, as his profile picture. I’ve read his take on gun issues too many times. I think his priorities are off and he has too much time on his hands. I hope we never meet.
Before leaving the topic, a possible solution to the guns-in-schools problem.
“As schools around the U.S. look for ways to impose tougher security measures, … they don’t have to look further than urban districts such as Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York that installed metal detectors and other security in the 1980s and 1990s to combat gang and drug violence”
“Security experts believe these measures have made urban districts less prone to mass shootings, which have mostly occurred in suburban and rural districts.”
“Officials in some suburban and rural school districts are now considering detectors as they rethink their security plans after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.”
Let’s hope tougher security measures including installing metal detectors is a solution to save lives.
Now, a slightly less vicious politicalstory (and I mean slightly):
Yesterday, I mentioned Sex and the City’s Cynthia Nixon running for governor of New York against fellow Democrat Andrew Cuomo. (I’m shocked this politician doesn’t have his picture at the top of his official webpage!)
“New York is my home. I’ve never lived anywhere else. … I was given chances I just don’t see for most of New York’s kids today. …Our leaders are letting us down.”
In the video, Nixon noted she grew up with her single mom in a one-bedroom fifth-floor walkup.
She has been a vocal critic of Gov. Cuomo’s educational policies. According to People, she accused the two-termer of being the main cause of the divide between the state’s “richest” and “poorest schools.”
Today, JTA reported, “Her two eldest children from her first marriage are Jewish and have both been bar- and bat-mitzvahed.” (I hate that phrase! You can’t simply add an –ed to a word that’s not English!)
but now, the New York Post is reporting Nixon is being “denounced” by arguably the Big Apple’s most prominent lesbian politician, former City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.
Besides being the first openly lesbian governor in the U.S., I think Nixon would be the first governor in the U.S. to go topless. Just a thought, for those interested. Or would you have preferred to see Richard Nixon topless?
And rather than me leave you on that last note, there’s an update after I showed you:
“Data aggregator eMarketer … released a report indicating Google and Facebook’s (aka “the duopoly”) dominance of the digital ad market is about to be less dominant, as “smaller players” like Amazon and Snapchat are on the rise.”
It’ll start with Fox’s own properties and then perhaps go elsewhere.
The change follows the huge “revelation of sexual harassment allegations” that got Fox News chairman Roger Ailes and top host Bill O’Reilly kicked out.
Roger Ailes in June 2013, via Wikipedia Commons
Bill O’Reilly, via FoxNews.com
In July, 2016, former host Gretchen Carlson sued Ailes for harassment, triggering lawsuits, internal investigations, resignations and firings. Carlson ended up settling for $20 million.
Then, The New York Times revealed O’Reilly and Fox had paid millions of dollars to quietly settle other sexual harassment allegations against Ailes, including two after he left. (Real honest? Really?)
That led to big changes to the channel’s lineup.
Ailes died in May, 2017, and denied all allegations of wrongdoing.
Then, last spring, co-president Bill Shine was ousted. Shine – who ran programming – succeeded Ailes despite his “alleged role in abetting Ailes in tolerating a workplace hostile to women,” according to The Washington Post. The other co-president – Jack Abernethy – runs the business side.
Rupert Murdoch, Wikimedia Commons
James & Lachlan Murdoch, both Wikipedia
Women’s groups and some Fox employees had complained the Murdoch family, which owns Fox, wasn’t serious about reforming the company as long as its leadership – selected by and loyal to Ailes – remained mostly intact. The Post said Shine’s removal showed the younger Murdochs – Rupert’s sons Lachlan and James – were finally trying to foster what they called “a workplace based on the values of respect and trust” when Ailes was forced out.
Carlson claims in one of the spots, “Fox is the one place where dissent is allowed,” while MacCallum promises, “We are going to ask the tough questions because there is a lot of conventional wisdom out there that needs to be challenged.”
Ahead of frontrunner Fox, CNN began its “Facts First” marketing campaign last October. Ad Age says it features a narrator using an apple to push back against President Donald Trump and others who call it a purveyor of “fake news” by screaming ‘Banana, Banana, Banana,’ over and over and over again, and even putting ‘banana’ in all caps.
Of course, the honesty of Fox News has been doubted over the years and reinforced just in the past week.
Thursday night, CNN reported Fox reporter Diana Falzone settled a lawsuit with Fox News and left the company. Her lawyer said she couldn’t disclose the terms, and neither side would elaborate.
Falzone sued in May, 2017, alleging gender discrimination. Her suit
Falzone’s column said she was “reluctant to share” her battle with the disorder but she ultimately did “after being persuaded by a manager in her doctor’s office, who told her, ‘Many women suffer in silence alone. Please share your story.’”
It’s still up and still tagged with
Perhaps more seriously and with much more at stake for our country, Fox shelved a Falzone story that CNN reported,
“detailed an alleged sexual relationship between porn actress Stephanie Clifford – whose stage name is Stormy Daniels – and Donald Trump.”
The alleged affair is reported to have happened in 2006. Donald and Melania Trump were married in 2005.
Killing Falzone’s reporting on it allegedly happened in October, 2016, a month before the presidential election in which Trump won. It could’ve been a major scoop and possibly changed the election results.
I wonder who killed that story and why. Was it political? Maybe, especially considering the company’s reputation. Did Falzone have every fact? That’s probably what the person who killed the story would claim. I suggest another investigation immediately, run by an outsider like CBS had after Dan Rather’s report on President George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard duty during the Vietnam War.
The person who killed Falzone’s story about Trump and the porn actress should be fired right away if the investigation finds the story could’ve run back then, especially if that person didn’t bother to tell superiors and to have a lawyer fact-check it. An aggressive, impartial news manager would’ve done everything possible to run this.
President “Trump’s personal attorney used his Trump Organization email while arranging to transfer money into an account at a Manhattan bank before he wired $130,000 to adult film star Stormy Daniels to buy her silence,”
“The lawyer, Michael Cohen, also regularly used the same email account during 2016 negotiations with the actress … before she signed a nondisclosure agreement,” and
“Clifford’s attorney at the time addressed correspondence to Cohen in his capacity at the Trump Organization and as ‘Special Counsel to Donald J. Trump.’”
She even shot a 60 Minutes interview with Anderson Cooper, but we haven’t seen it yet. CBS News president David Rhodes said, “The only reason it hasn’t run is that there’s still a lot of journalistic work to do,” rather than any problem with the president.
“has been seeking counsel from confidantes on how he should handle the Stormy Daniels situation,” and “Trump is being told by advisers not to fight Daniels’ decision to break a confidentiality agreement because it would make him look guilty.”
It’s also the reason Trump has stayed quiet and not tweeted about the issue.
CNN also says 60 Minutes “producers are working to verify claims she made” and “three sources confirmed to CNN that Clifford made new claims about Trump in the interview.”
Sunday, BuzzFeed had reported “lawyers associated with President Donald Trump are considering legal action to stop 60 Minutes from airing” the interview but prior restraints are hardly ever granted. This isn’t national security we’re talking about!
Nah, this isn’t a story Fox would’ve been interested in taking the lead on. They let the other guys have it.
Then Saturday, The New York Daily News reported something that had been out there: “Prominent host Jesse Watters … is in the midst of divorce due to an affair with a 25-year-old associate producer,” Emma DiGiovine, who worked on his show.
Fox is downplaying the dishonesty when it came to wedding vows, with a spokesperson saying,
“Within 24 hours of Jesse Watters voluntarily reporting to the Chief of Human Resources in November 2017 that he was in a consensual relationship with a woman on his staff, management met with both parties and a decision was made for the woman to be transferred to work on another program on the network where she currently remains.”
DiGiovine now works on The Ingraham Angle.
Sources told The News the
“host informed the network of his adulterous relationship … shortly after Noelle filed divorce papers.”
In other words, his wife – Noelle Watters – had already busted him!
Watters, 39, has twin girls with wife, who filed for divorce in October.
(Facebook picture posted Sept. 9, 2017.)
That makes his mistress, DiGiovine, a homewrecker.
In the Fox turmoil, Watters replaced Eric Bolling on The Five when Bolling got his own show, but Bolling was booted “in September following a report he sent unsolicited photos of male genitalia to colleagues.”
Sources told The News rumors of Watters’
“relationship with DiGiovine spread within the network late last year as both posted social media photos of their outings together, including on a Caribbean vacation.”
Yes, unfortunately, things like this happen in practically every office and business, and probably more in TV journalism considering the looks, money, and egos. But there’s just something about this certain company. Maybe leadership from the top.
In this case, Watters has been in trouble before.
The Daily News remembered,
“In July 2014, he called voters who are single women ‘Beyoncé voters’ after her ‘Single Ladies’ hit.
“They depend on government because they’re not depending on their husbands. … They need things like contraception, health care and they love to talk about equal pay.”
“The far-right funnyman landed in hot water again in April 2017 when he made what appeared to be a lewd comment about Ivanka Trump.
“I really liked how she was speaking into that microphone,” he said, while making a vulgar gesture. He took a vacation after the controversy, saying he hadn’t meant to be offensive.
“During the break we were commenting on Ivanka’s voice and how it was low and steady and resonates like a smooth jazz radio DJ. … This was in no way a joke about anything else.”
So, to recap:
He violated his marriage vows and will probably pay a fortune over many, many years.
He has shown a lack of judgment at work before (and so have his supervisors, who let the stuff air).
His pieces judge other people (not that they don’t make themselves look like idiots), and
He’s in no position to be judging.
And I’d say that makes him unfit for his role. He should probably spend some time in local television, if that. But that’s not going to happen, and here is why:
The Daily Beast reported Watters – the adulterer, not the victim – and Sebastian Gorka dined with President Trump at The White House last Monday. Gorka is a Fox News contributor. Also, he was a White House official from January to August, 2017, and aide to former chief strategist Steve Bannon.
President Trump reportedly invited them because “he couldn’t get enough of them on TV,” and wanted to confab with them about what he’d seen on Fox News, politics, gossip, and his administration.
Chief of Staff John Kelly fired Gorka a week after firing Bannon. According to Wikipedia, Gorka claims “he resigned because he believed White House officials were undermining the ‘Make America Great Again’ platform.”
The Daily Beast says Gorka’s detractors call him “an academic fraud, an anti-Muslim zealot, and even an ally to Nazi and fascist sympathizers who never should have set foot on White House grounds.” But “he is a fan-favorite” to others.
The Daily News article did not say whether Watters brought along his own ‘+1’. He did tweet a picture of the autographed menu.
Last night, I did something I rarely do: open a Facebook post to the public, rather than just friends.
Today, I’m blogging about the online battle that followed, something I hadn’t planned to do.
The story was about one of the hosts of a show on the DIY Network — part of Scripps Networks Interactive and sister to HGTV, the Food Network, Travel Channel, Cooking Channel, Great American Country, TVN, Fine Living and the Asian Food Channel.
You’re certainly familiar with some of them unless you’ve been living under a rock.
Unfortunately, it has since been reinforced to me that too many Americans have been living under figurative rocks.
Texas Flip N Move host Toni Snow — who along with her sister Donna — are “real estate entrepreneurs” who “compete head-to-head in a fast-paced and thrilling real estate flipping competition,” according to the show’s website.
It goes on, if you understand flipping, “Our flippers are under the gun to buy low, work fast and sell high.”
And in a recent episode that was shot, produced and edited, Toni Snow asked a participant who was willing to pay full asking price for a refurbished school bus, “You’re not even gonna bicker a little bit, Jew us down?” according to CNN and People magazine.
I’m not a regular watcher of that channel nor show, although I think I once saw part of an episode that was shown on HGTV.
I could say things about people from Texas but I won’t.
The network told CNN in an apology, “An inappropriate comment unfortunately made it past our team” and that they “immediately pulled the episode to edit it for future broadcast.”
My original point was that Toni Snow needed to be edited out. In other words, she should be fired and the episode should never be shown again.
This is an embed of the Facebook post. Be warned, not all is polite.
I have to note how hateful some Toni Schroeder Schwind comes across like those quotes politicians used above, just clinging to the past. I don’t know her but her profile pictures indicate she’s not Jewish, yet she insisted more than once,
“This comment has been around for ages and I think somewhat over reaction was an over reaction. Get over it.”
(Yes, her words.)
I’d say to ask a black person about the N-word, or another minority about slurs about them. Who is she to judge what’s offensive to most Jewish people?
And I wrote “most Jewish people” because some of my friends say it’s no big deal, or it’s the intent that matters.
I also originally angrily posted, “Only #Jews! What other group would tolerate that?”
Seems liberalism has replaced religion for many non-Orthodox Jews and that bothers me. Their thoughts and practices are certainly up to them, but it leaves me with a bad taste. I wonder what will be in the generations to come.
Others would say I should be doing more. Again, that’s their opinion. Most of us know stereotypes like “two Jews, three opinions” carry a bit of truth.
As for the speaker’s intent, who knows? I’m not a mind-reader. I did write in a private message off Facebook,
“I find people who say things like that about Jews and prices to have bad intent. The reason is simply, one side wants the price higher and the other wants it lower. It’s adversarial by nature.”
One friend wrote there are worse words and phrases.
I responded late last night,
“Look at the reaction from the post at this hour, and also all the news articles. It’s not exactly like the president using SHole because he’s the president. Besides, if people hear it on TV, they think it’s acceptable. Don’t give the public too much credit.”
“Are slurs against any minority group tolerable in 2018? After I left the Tri-Cities, a member of the local synagogue – the only one between Knoxville and Charlottesville – contacted me after the station I worked for did a story about a guy holding an auction and using the same phrase, just like his father taught him! It aired at 5:30. At 11, there was an apology. But he was just white trash and not on the payroll. What gets me is that it’s missed in the editing process. Of course, so do curse words on signs at anti-Trump rallies.”
Yes, I used a phrase where the stereotype fit (and not about somebody from Texas, as I promised earlier). I’m certainly not perfect. I tend to be middle of the road politically, but absolutely not politically correct. Society needs civilized discussion.
I’m guessing a photographer who grew up locally shot the interview, wrote the script and edited it. That’s what happens in small non-union markets.
I have files of both the original piece and the apology but won’t show them publicly because the anchorwoman on air had nothing to do with putting together the story. She just read it, along with having to read the apology hours later with her face on air. Her co-worker who should’ve known better caused her to suffer enough embarrassment, and she was simply subbing on someone else’s newscast while that person was on vacation!
I had this last thought while trying to fall asleep last night:
“This conversation reminds me of an episode of All in the Family. It definitely was not my favorite because there was more drama than comedy. Archie and Meathead were locked in the basement and opening up to each other while drinking. Mike tried to convince Archie their fathers were very similar, but wrong as it turned out. Mike had changed completely, becoming a leftist. Archie, his older father-in-law, was more defensive and blindly insisted his father could do no wrong. Most of us have (had) relatives like that, even those who came to this country as immigrants. They lived among each other (in shtetels?) and had no way of understanding anybody else’s feelings or experiences until getting out in the real world. That’s the way things were then. Today, whether traveling a few blocks or watching TV, most people become exposed to others and realize it’s wrong to use and perpetuate stereotypes.”
Keep in mind, Sinclair owns 193 TV stations in 89 cities. See if they’re on the air where you live. They may be soon! Not too shabby!
That’s because FCC rules were recently loosened — reportedly cheered on by President Trump — so it can buy the Tribune Media stations around the country. That’ll get Sinclair’s controversial perspective on a tremendous number of new screens in big cities like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia and Miami, among others, for the first time. Not too sympathetic!
Sinclair requires conservative commentaries sent from its Maryland headquarters to air during its stations’ local newscasts. That causes viewers to think the biased people they see every night, tossed to by their local anchors, are local as well.
Jessell called the “sponsored news” rule antiquated and discriminatory, and claimed “native advertising has been around forever” under “names like advertorial, sponsored content, promoted content and infomercial.”
He also said it’s everywhere, and that print and digital media companies even get paid to invent it.
Plus, the rules may have been OK decades ago when broadcasters were becoming more powerful, rather than today when they face new competition from “aggressive digital giants.”
And he trusts viewers will eventually spot the advertising and change channels or media.
But I disagree. First, I don’t give viewers as much credit. There needs to be a separation — between news and opinion, as well as advertising — and I’d hate to be a journalist losing credibility by following Sinclair’s unique requirements.
I do admit with more competition, a broadcast license is no longer a license to print money as it used to be.
But the airwaves belong to the public. TV stations have special responsibilities. Owners who don’t like them should be in a different business.
Anybody can print a newspaper, start a website, or even shoot material for a cable channel if they can get it carried.
Meanwhile, broadcasters get special protection like must-carry on cable systems, or they can demand money to be carried — which is much more common. (Then, of course, the network they’re affiliated with will demand a chunk of cash. It’s called reverse compensation.)
There used to be strict limits as to how many stations an owner can own. They’ve practically disappeared. Orders come from out of the area.
Owners were not allowed to own two stations in the same city. Now they can under certain circumstances.
Owners were not allowed to own two stations in neighboring cities (a grade-B overlap), since people who live in between can pick up both. Now they can.
Station owners are fighting like hell to be able to own newspapers. I believe the only one allowed without being grandfathered in that was OK was WNYW-Fox 5 in New York. Otherwise, the New York Post would’ve gone out of business. But then Fox also bought WWOR-Channel 9 and got rid of its news department — a big blow to New Jersey. (Fox’s newspaper business was later spun off into a different company.)
The two Democrats on the five-member FCC pretty much called the Sinclair fine peanuts because Sinclair aired the sponsored content 1,723 times on 77 stations, has had trouble with the FCC before and grossed $2.7 billion in revenue last year. The fine could’ve been $82 million.
Go to the article’s website and check out the comments. My favorite:
Fair enough Harry. (1) Remove broadcasters’ FCC licenses. (2) Charge broadcasters 8% of gross annual revenue for the right to transmit on the public airwaves. (3) Remove all special treatment regarding cable/satellite “must carry and retrans.”
1) broadcasters could police airwaves privately; 2) station owners paid plenty for most of their frequencies; few got them for free; 3) retrans could be privatized and broadcasters would get the same amount of money. I have no love of must carry.
Did you notice the first part? Somebody else commented:
Harry Jessell – is this particular article “End Discriminatory Regs Against Broadcast” – PAID FOR, in any way, shape or form?
What I wrote (using my own name):
Broadcasters use the public airwaves. Unlike other media, the airwaves broadcasters use belong to the people. They need to be protected, and the government has every right to regulate broadcasters in exchange for letting them use those airwaves. Throughout the decades, the government has been more and more lenient with broadcasters, letting them own more and more stations, and in closer proximity to each other, and licencing them for a longer time. If broadcasters don’t like it, then they should give up using the public’s airwaves that don’t belong to them and get into one of those other businesses you mentioned. Then they won’t have to worry about public service.
I think Sinclair should consider itself lucky. Very lucky.
I hope the underdog Eagles are as lucky in the NFC Championship against Minnesota and make it to the Super Bowl!
First, I have to thank everybody who looked at Monday’s blog post. The analytics were incredible, the best ever (and that’s all that counts, right? 🙂). If you haven’t seen it yet, it gives a brief overview of the place I worked for 15 months until August. Feel free to comment below it, or on my Twitter page. You can also subscribe to these blogs with your email address and get an email automatically every time I post.
One thing I left out was that during the long interview process, in early 2016, while I was working a great job in the Tri-Cities of TN/VA, the future boss asked me at the end of a Friday Skype interview to write up a critique of the station’s website. I was literally told it was “to see how smart” I am. Two other managers were sitting right there. I was given a week, but finished it that weekend because I was so excited about the possibility of returning to Philadelphia.
Look below and see, it was a very long and thoughtful critique, and included multiple pictures. During my interview at Fox 29 — coincidentally on Leap Day, Feb. 29, 2016 — the boss even joked about still reading it! I guess it was good. Too bad most of it was never implemented. That was a clue of what was to come, but it was too late. I had already moved and started the job. (The document is a slideshow. Click below to move forward, back, or to stop it.)
That’s all I have to say here on the subject of that station.
Just this week, a Pew Research Center report announced fewer Americans rely on TV news, and what type they watch varies by who they are. It found,
“Just 50 percent of U.S. adults now get news regularly from television, down from 57 percent a year prior in early 2016.”
That’s a 14 percent decline! Not only that, but the number takes into account local TV (still first place), cable TV (still second place), and also network TV (still third place).
I think the demographics are even more interesting. According to Pew, college graduates and high-income people watch much less local TV and network TV news. Cable news varies little.
The research doesn’t say but perhaps these people are working longer hours or have more access to news on electronic devices. Or they find the product dumbed-down. The first two possibilities can’t be changed but the last can.
But I think the biggest finding has to do with age. Pew divided the population into four groups, from 18-29 through 65+. It found across all groups, the younger a person is makes them much, much less likely to watch local, network, and also cable TV news. That sounds ominous for the future.
Again, the research doesn’t say, but I’ve learned from working with people young enough to be my children they have no history of getting the news from a scheduled TV newscast, or even cable. They were raised with technology that hadn’t been invented when the older people were growing up. They have no special tie to the TV set, having to watch on schedule, and probably can’t imagine watching in black and white.
(To go along with that, a huge majority of my students — who were younger around the year 2010, plus or minus a few — hadn’t even heard of a typewriter!) Also notice radio and newspapers were not even considered in the research.
Its former chair Kevin Benz admits, “Stations are producing more newscasts because local production is cheap with higher payback potential from selling local advertisers.” Let’s not forget we’re coming off an election year with lots of ads.
The organization claims “profitability has been trending level or up since 2010” and “This is also far from the first time local news has been written off due to changing consumption habits … but newsrooms have been slow to adapt.”
Back in the Tri-Cities, I was told many people get their news from their Facebook feed. That’s pitiful and of course, Facebook benefits but the publishers really don’t, other than a click to their own websites.
According to Digiday, problems are that publishers have different business models and want different things from Facebook. And Facebook has mostly let publishers see new products before they launched, and listen to their feedback on various subjects at twice-annual meetings with nice meals. Subjects have included Instant Articles and starting a subscription product so you can’t read unlimited articles for free. There’s also discussion about separating factual news from somebody posting fiction.
There’s something to be said for the anchor with decades of experience. Overpaid? Yes. But the good ones also play a #leadership role and keep the ship steady when multiple overpaid #CEOs come and go. https://t.co/0wcsXgQAtG
Variety reported, “Host Seth Meyers even joked about the prospect in his opening monologue. The tweet from NBC said, ‘Nothing but respect for OUR future president. #GoldenGlobes.’”
The next morning, the network put out a statement, blaming outsourcing. Of course, the first tweet was removed.
Yesterday a tweet about the Golden Globes and Oprah Winfrey was sent by a third party agency for NBC Entertainment in real time during the broadcast. It is in reference to a joke made during the monologue and not meant to be a political statement. We have since removed the tweet.
How horrible! Oprah hadn’t yet spoken at the time, she never mentioned anything about becoming president, viewers won’t know the difference between a tweet from NBC Entertainment or NBC News if it doesn’t say, and why would the network let a third-party vendor tweet on its account, especially without overseeing? The network has no competent employee in-house? Disappointing!
And late-breaking Thursday morning, we learned 18-year Fox News veteran James Rosen left the network – without Fox giving a reason – after eight of his former colleagues claimed he “had an established pattern of flirting aggressively with many peers and had made sexual advances toward three female Fox News journalists,” according to TVNewser.
“One accusation involved him groping a female colleague in a shared-cab—an action she did not consent to. He then reportedly attempted to retaliate after his sexual advances were denied by attempting to take her sources, which would serve to damage her professional image.”
Also, the Washington Post says it suspended 28-year reporter Joel Achenbach for 90 days what it called “inappropriate workplace conduct” involving current and former female colleagues. He apologized in a statement, but the paper will continue to investigate.
I’m going to end on a better note, in contrast to what I wrote about Monday. Know I’ve been interviewing with different national and international companies here in Philadelphia. Tuesday, I found out I made it to the next round with one firm, and I’m obviously very happy about that. I told the woman on the phone who was simply following up on her morning email that everybody has been so supportive. We’d talked before and her response was simply that they are a partnership, rather than a corporation, and that there is no need for competition amongst (potential) employees.
That’s nice to hear, and it gives me hope.
P.S. On a personal note: Tuesday night in Florida, my mother fell in the kitchen. She hit her face on the floor. There was lots of blood, but no concussion. Turns out, she broke her pelvis in three places: two in the front, and one in the back. No surgery required, but she’ll have to spend another day or two in the hospital. The next two weeks are supposed to be very painful, and it could take her four months to get better. The doctor suggested time rehab since she can’t do much. Please keep her in your thoughts. 😦
I hate the story and wish it would go away. Deep, painful wounds are being opened.
Yes, it looks like justice is happening to a degree — and that’s good — but American newsmen (there’s a word from the past, when the behavior may have been looked upon as typical, or maybe even normal and accepted) are making Trump look right in his spat with them and their bosses.
I didn’t hear Trump say so or tweet it, but it really doesn’t help the non-journalist American men who are his base.
And we’re learning way too many other people, including executives, kept the sexual harassment they witnessed or heard about to themselves, afraid of powerful or popular colleagues.
Young women, in or just out of school, are expected to fend for themselves against these wolves — kind of like dangerously going out on stories by themselves in bad neighborhoods at night. These so-called multi-media journalists, or MMJs, shoot, write, edit, and present the news live on TV — and forced to look over their shoulders, as if they don’t have enough to do — and unfortunately this is becoming more popular.
Recently, I’ve been wondering: Has anybody interviewed the mothers of the accused men? Yes, I know the accused tend to be older. Their once-proud mothers may not be around any longer. But several have to be.
I don’t care where these guys worked. Notice I left out network references, since journalists should be friendly competition to find out the truth and make society better. And most have worked in more than one place. (I did the same with politicians’ parties.)
Politically, I’m close to the middle, depending on the issue. Since the 2016 presidential election, political parties have meant less and less to me every day. It seems both sides have folks who are corrupt, and unworthy of trust and respect. (Kind of like the candidates!)
Gingrich, 1995, CBS News
Chung, 1995, CBS News
I’m not justifying Connie Chung’s 1995 interview with new Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s (Newtie’s) mother — and he has a whole lot to answer for, personally — but I’d like to hear some moms’ thoughts on their sons who are accused of sexual harassment these days.
In the Chung-Kathleen ‘Kit’ Gingrich “just between you and me” exchange below, the trusting 68-year-old admitted Newt told her that then-First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was a “bitch.” Mrs. Gingrich died in 2003 at the age of 77.
Have any of you heard from any of today’s moms?
Lenny with a Brian Williams poster while working at NBC affiliate WCYB. It’s long-gone for a different reason. I don’t remember a Matt Lauer poster. Maybe there was a Today show ensemble instead. I wonder where it is tonight.
In the news these days are Kevin Spacey, Harvey Weinstein, James Toback, Ben Affleck, President George H.W. Bush, Chris Savino, Roy Price, John Besh, Mark Halperin, Michael Oreskes and Lockhart Steele. The names are in no particular order.
But wait, there’s more.
In addition to the names above, Fast Company lists Andy Signore, Harvey’s brother Bob Weinstein, Bill O’Reilly, R. Kelly, Louis CK, Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Matt Mondanile, Oliver Stone, Andrew Kramer, Elie Wiesel, Leon Wieseltier, Twiggy Ramirez aka Jeordie White, Tyler Grasham, Ethan Kath, Knight Landesman, Robert Scoble, Jeremy Piven, Hamilton Fish V, Andy Dick, Brett Ratner, Dustin Hoffman, David Guillod, Adam Venit, David Corn and Steven Seagal.
That’s a lot of names of people you may not have heard of, or at least famous in their own circles.
Some are more prominent than others. Look these guys up if necessary. I certainly needed to! The articles mentioned above have more details.
Some punishments are (or will be) more harsh than others.
Keep in mind, some of these guys have confessed, a few have explained (or tried to), and others deny what are simply allegations in their cases.
CNN mentions other well-known men with issues going back even further: Donald Trump, Roger Ailes, Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby.
He must spend a lot of time making editorial and programming decisions. Maybe too many.
According to TVNewser, late last month, Fox News aired a 60-second commercial calling for the impeachment of President Trump.
That’s probably pretty good money for a full minute on such a high-rated cable network, the goal of any business.
But after showing up on viewers’ TV sets, Abernethy decided to change the channel — the part that’s shown when programs take a break and corporations make money.
It was reportedly paid for by a group backed by Bay Area billionaire philanthropist, environmental activist and Democratic donor Tom Steyer, and called “Need to Impeach.”
Now, TVNewser reports, “Lawyers representing Steyer are accusing Fox News of breaching a contractual agreement to air the ad.”
It quotes Abernethy: “Due to the strong negative reaction to their ad by our viewers, we could not in good conscience take their money.”
The viewers who happened to be watching when the ad was shown? Yeah, our hearts should go out to them!
But what about the people who intended to watch news that’s now accused of being fake news? (I’m not taking sides on that but if true, they and the whole country would’ve suffered a whole lot more than the folks who caught a clip of that supposedly controversial commercial.)
This is extra surprising, considering Abernethy got promoted when Ailes left as part of the shake-ups behind the scenes and on Fox’s air because of sexual harassment (allegations, investigations and payouts).
Online, conscience is called “an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one’s behavior.”
A synonym is “moral sense.”
Pulling a TV commercial off the air vs. a pattern of sexual harassment (allegations, investigations and payouts)?