“Investigators say Lawal apparently tried to use his black Honda hit a person who had just gotten out of a car.
“Then, on foot, Lawal chased another person who had tried to detain him, and then charged at the off-duty officer after he approached, leading to a violent struggle.
“During the struggle, the officer fired about ten shots, hitting Lawal in the torso, legs, and face.”
Lawal was killed, and the officer was treated for minor injuries and released from the hospital.
Thursday morning, WCAU identified the officer as Det. James Powell, a 23-year veteran assigned to External Services and was off duty at the time.
Investigators told the station, before the shooting,
“Lawal continued driving east on Bigler before making a U-turn and returning toward the intersection of Broad and Bigler near Marconi Plaza. … A Good Samaritan used his truck to block his path. … Lawal then allegedly chased the Good Samaritan on foot before walking back to his Honda.”
“A police spokesman confirmed this afternoon terror was being considered as motivation.
“He said: ‘Anytime someone is trying to run people over we got to look at that angle and see what the investigation leads us.’”
That, and the line from WCAU, were the only mentions I could find of possible terrorism.
Note just yesterday, Edward Archer was convicted of shooting police officer Jesse Hartnett in an ambush, two years ago. Archer had pledged his allegiance to ISIS and said he had acted out of religious inspiration. So terrorism on a local level has been in the news this week, but in a different story.
However, in this week’s case, WTXF reported,
“The detective fired several shots, knocking the man to the ground and then continued firing—striking the man 13 times in all.”
That had Police Commissioner Richard Ross (left) concerned.
Tuesday, the Inquirer reported “Ross said he had reviewed surveillance video of the shooting and had ‘some concerns’ about ‘whether all the shots were necessary.’”
New district attorney Larry Krasner (right) promised WTXF “an ‘even-handed’ review of” the shooting.
The Inky reported Powell will be assigned to administrative duties while Internal Affairs investigates the shooting.
The Philadelphia Police website has nothing on the shooting, including a press release. It hasn’t yet made the list of officer-involved shootings.
If you are a witness to the police shooting incident at Broad and Bigler on Monday, 1-29-18, or if you had any interaction with the operator of the black Honda Accord, please contact the Officer-Involved Shooting Investigation Unit at 215-683-1866.
From what I could tell, this story that made international headlines and possibly involved terrorism deserved more news coverage than it got locally: one station reporting police didn’t think it was.
At least there are things on the department’s Facebook page everyone in the area can agree on. Come to think of it, maybe it’s the reason we haven’t heard more about the shooting.
Every media organization sent crews to the Super Bowl in Minneapolis. Those journalists, no matter how good they are, couldn’t be in two places at once. And the police department is planning for fans celebrating the Eagles victory over the New England Patriots — or that other possibility.
I also thank the 21 Facebook friends from all over the country, with different backgrounds and different political views, who shared the link — which I’m sure Facebook’s algorithm, whatever it may be these days, used to help me come across it. I really don’t spend a lot of time on Facebook, outside of work. I may click and see the first few personal posts, and check for birthdays. So please don’t feel bad if I don’t comment or “like” something you put on there.
Besides, I’m grateful for the opportunity to get some deep thoughts out, once and for all, since everything stays on the internet forever. And I’m about to pay for another year of having this site.
(I should add, I spent most of Thursday writing this. Then I slept on it. Now, Friday, I’m adding two brand new items that occurred after the author published her original article.)
Since I figured out how to post again, I won’t say I agree with the article 100 percent, nor would I expect to, but I’ve studied, read, traveled, worked in several newsrooms in different cities with different managers with different companies, and noticed over two decades:
First, what everyone wants answered.
We are definitely aware of and have access to the latest ratings, so we know what you choose to see, when you change the channel, and when you turn your TV off. Online, we know what you click on and what you don’t. Plus, what you comment about and react to. The numbers we get cannot be perfect but they are the best available and the only thing the industry plus advertisers have to go by. They are certainly not the Bible, but we and our bosses certainly look at what works, what doesn’t, and try to please you. Honestly.
At the same time, while we have the responsibility to report the issues, the public has the civic duty to pay attention to what’s going on. If the people choose fluff, nonsense and BS, then it’s their fault and the industry will ultimately provide more. It’ll end up being society’s loss. So please stay away from that. Besides, I don’t feel fulfilled writing it.
Nobody is perfect. Experience as an employee taught me when to ask questions, when to bother people, and when to know when something is going wrong, or could be about to go wrong.
Even if you’re perfect, you can’t please everyone. People will always complain, way too many thrive on it, and often the people who bitch and moan have different opinions for opposite reasons. (One: “You’re too liberal.” The other: “You’re too conservative.” My reaction: We were probably fair.)
Sometimes the people who complain are right and we learn from whatever we did wrong, or could’ve done better, or what to think about the next time the situation arises. (And it will.) Sometimes it’s an accident and sometimes it’s technical. We apologize and correct. And every industry has a few bad apples. Hopefully they don’t last long.
We do the best we can to provide the best content, often under difficult situations. It doesn’t matter whether you’re in a big city or small town. Recognize that. Say something nice and encourage, rather than complain. This article just came out TODAY.
Computers are slow or break down. Programs have bugs that providers have to fix. Not every day is everyone’s best. And I can’t even begin to talk for my colleagues who have to travel far out in the field, despite weather conditions, and gather information, get a signal out, be completely accurate while getting both sides across, and perform calmly while making their slot in the newscast.
These days, it’s a shame there are so many cowards who hide behind their keyboards and tell us we are wrong. They should grow up and make themselves known, provide evidence of the error and a suggestion to make it better. Then, they would earn people’s respect and be the real influence they supposedly want to be.
In the newsroom, I frequently take opportunities to walk up to higher-ups, knock on doors, and email others at home when necessary to ask questions or get clarifications. And never has anyone taken sincerity badly in any way. I actually like it when people ask me to explain myself, because there is always a reason for what I do. Everything should be done professionally, not randomly.
At least in America, when you make yourself famous by running for office, or powerful for running a company that does big business, or rich for having a contract with the government, or even by receiving a paycheck from taxpayers, you are putting yourself out there and the public has the right to reasonably scrutinize you for answers. Those people don’t always like it and have tried lots of ways to avoid publicity. Public relations people know that getting ahead of a situation honestly is often the best course. People respect others coming clean, asking for forgiveness and showing improvement over time, because they tend to like underdogs and are usually willing to give second chances.
In this case I just learned about, did the commentator ask a follow-up to an untruth? Or tell her he’d never heard of what she was talking about on his broadcast? Or become adversarial, play devil’s advocate because it never happened? Or was he just happy one of his producers booked her and she showed up, so she got to say whatever she wanted?
That’s a media error by not challenging the person on the media’s air, and that goes for public call-in shows and comments on social media sites, as well. It this case, it’s ironic because it started with a prominent member of a team that has been criticizing the media.
So besides knowing our stuff and being well-rounded, we in the media have to be good, honest people, and above the board on everything. No appearances of any dishonesty, ulterior motives, etc. Always open with the highest standards.
We are often a diverse group in every sense of the word, and I don’t mean the automatic liberal, bean-counting way many would first assume. Consider so many different backgrounds, hometowns, families, experiences, friends, connections, etc. But we all tend to be curious, ask questions and tell stories. And everywhere, I’ve quickly learned who to defer to for background information on a subject. We should all listen more to each others’ stories.
I agree with the part of the article about news happening too fast. With technology these days, and the 24-hour cable world, decisions have to be made faster. That means there’s less time for thinking, planning, asking other opinions, and other important tasks. We’re not just TV or radio or newspaper people. There are also the websites and the social media that goes along with it. Like it or not, it’s social media that gets people to the web. Don’t automatically believe something if you don’t know the source.
Unfortunately, it costs money to run a newsroom and I wish that was out of the equation. News directors would love to have the best coverage and most crews on every story, especially the most important, yet they also have budgets and bosses to answer to. Unlike the past, we’re on most of the time from morning to night, and always on call for emergencies. There is never enough of something, but the results are usually darn good.
We have journalistic ethics and responsibilities. Journalists should be trained and reminded about these regularly, like politicians should reread the Constitution now and again, but that takes time and money. There are also specific procedures, which vary by station. But, as a former boss put it, there should be guidelines rather than rules, since every situation, story, and circumstance is different.
Like the public, journalists should know who to trust, in and out of the newsroom. People and organizations earn their reputations over time and often generations. Of course, things change. Organizations that were once good are sold, or there is other turnover. And newer organizations can bring in the right people. Look at everything and be skeptical.
The FCC loosening regulations over the decades led to most TV stations being owned by out-of-town corporations. There used to be a limit of five stations per company, and only one in a market, and not in the next city, because people living in between can watch you in both places (a grade B overlap). But the government loosed the rules, companies slowly started to own or run stations in 100 places, and local decisions about public airwaves are made and enforced by layers of strangers, who lack of knowledge of certain communities, and require paperwork be sent (electronically), profits rise every quarter despite local conditions, etc. Whose fault is that and what would any business do?
Still, we are responsible for the public airwaves in the areas our stations are licensed to cover. Deregulation and relaxing the rules created a lot more sharing between stations, and blindly relying on others, rather each station doing its own independent work. Not to mention vertical integration and controlling both the means of getting the signal (cable, satellite, internet), plus providing the original content and perhaps denying the competition a fair shot.
Budgets mean sacrificing the best, the experienced, and the most connected. This past year, one of the biggest media companies offered the bulk of theirs golden parachutes and nearly everyone accepted, knowing their contracts will eventually end and likely not be renewed, so they’d work longer and leave with much less. Instead, cheaper, inexperienced replacements are doing their jobs. Hopefully, they have potential and are getting great mentoring.
It would be nice if hard workers could grow old in the industry. I learned early on to respect my elders and their staying power. These are the folks who have been there and done it many times before, learned from long-ago mistakes and earned their respect. Yes, the technology always changes but gathering the facts to put on the news has not. Media corporations seemed to get rich with last year’s election, even if Donald Trump didn’t spend as much money as they would’ve liked during the primaries. NBC stations did especially well with the Olympics. Playing poor in 2017 doesn’t cut it and the public should know and be angry about it.
On the other hand, all other industries play the same game. Shareholders invest to make money, and that’s not helping the product. Times have changed and there are so few sole-proprietors or family-owned businesses. Another bad thing about that is not knowing where the buck stops. Huge corporations have layers upon layers of managers, in-house, regional and at headquarters. We need another Harry Truman.
It’s always good to check out the competition, but just out of curiosity. There are good folks on every team. Some of what another station does may be better and some not. Everyone has good and not-so-good days. We can learn from each other and each other’s mistakes. But every organization has to be true to itself, its values and its audience. It’s another reason why more independence for stations would be a good thing.
The author’s views on breaking news are correct. It seems to take too much time to get to the truth. We want facts and video as soon as possible, before anyone else, and we’re doing it faster than ever before. Almost anyone can send pictures with their smartphones. We can describe what we see. We can discuss the area around it because we should be familiar with all parts of our region. We can call neighbors around the situation to ask what they see and hear from their homes, because we should have contacts around the region we are responsible to cover. However, there are time, coordination, and safety issues to consider before arriving at a breaking news story. Sometimes we are lucky to be in the right place at the right time, and sometimes the competition is. That’s life.
I’m blessed to be working on the web and not going out, meeting new people in person and having to remember their names. I stink at that and also did as a teacher. (“Is that kid one of mine?”) I’ve come to dislike being in the spotlight, and love learning new stuff every day.
I usually like what I do and want to keep doing it indefinitely, but I also regret I can’t do more. I’m pretty fast, but there are only a certain number of hours in a day and too many stories to do correctly, at least where I live. Nobody can be everything to everyone and trying is impossible and detrimental. Right now, I’m doing what I like best and learning other skills that support it, my organization, and also others should the need ever arise. In this business, you never know, and that’s also unfortunate.
As I mentioned at the beginning, I haven’t blogged in months. Actually, it’s getting close to a year. Between moving and working, I haven’t had time to fully explain myself. But spending most of my day off on this is worth it. I thank the author of the article for writing, also my friends who shared it on Facebook for arousing my thoughts, and of course everyone over the years who taught me something. I hope you know who you are because I have recognized you for it.
I’m going to stay in the middle, avoid extremes and remain questioning while keeping an open mind. And I’m going to end by stealing the author’s last line, which I think may be the best and totally sums up this imperfect industry: “The truth is, we don’t even have time to create an agenda if we wanted to… and if we found extra time, we’d eat!”
I love being back in news. Sure, the hours are long, especially when you don’t have a boss. (My new one starts November 30th). But obviously it’s true when news breaks.
Friday, I was coming off a tough week. Again, no boss. Demands from the sales and weather departments. Plus, lots of plans, work, and expenses at home.
But I didn’t think of any of that when the A.P. urgents from Paris started coming down in the late afternoon. I just wanted to make sure our website and social media had the latest on the story, and that I’d get to go home at a reasonable hour. (I start with the social media at 8am.)
Of course, I worked for hours from home on Saturday and Sunday. I’m a department of one.
One thing about news people I picked up after 9/11 is that they don’t get to personally react to news until well after it happens. The reason, simply, is that we’re working under deadline, trying to get the information out best, first, and without technical problems. Professionals focused only on work.
That’s done, as of the moment. Now, I have a moment to breathe and think.
Since late Friday, I’ve covered the story from home, read so much of what you’ve posted on Facebook, and watched last night’s Democratic debate.
So now, my thoughts:
The first thing to strike me was French president Francois Hollande, immediately vowing a tough response. “We will lead the fight and we will be ruthless,” he said, and also be “merciless” against the extremists.
What’s wrong with that? Absolutely nothing! In fact, it’s about time. Was he in the moment and taking it back after calming down and thinking clearly? So far, no. And that’s a good thing. I hope it happens.
But when Israel is attacked and shows restraint when going after attackers (warning civilians to get out, not turning Gaza into a parking lot), the world feels otherwise. The rules are different and there is a double standard, even coming from America.
Dresden and Hiroshima solved problems for the rest of us, didn’t they?
Go back to my very first blog, written on Jan. 11, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo and Jewish supermarket attacks. Back then, I wrote: “The world ignores terrorism against Israelis. Now, they feel a lot more sympathy because it happened in France. Probably won’t be the last attack against a Western democracy. The world has to act and put an end to it, wherever it is.” Sad but true.
That leads me to our leader, commander-in-chief, President Obama. We’ve contained ISIS? Even if he was misquoted, as was suggested on one of this morning’s public affairs shows, he should’ve known by now to choose his words more carefully. Even yesterday, I thought about President Bush and this picture (thanks for posting, Ariel):
At last night’s debate, Hillary Clinton said ISIS “cannot be contained” but instead must be “defeated.”
I’d like to hear Democratic presidential candidates talking about foreign affairs more. Last night, there was too much back-and-forth about Wall Street reform and reinstating Glass-Steagall. We get it. But did anybody mention “radical Islam” rather than simply jihadists?
My advice to politicians: Name the enemy. Call it what it is. Keep it simple. Make people understand. Show them you understand! (And really mean it.)
The world has to decide what’s right and what’s wrong, and take the proper side consistently. Don’t equate the good with the bad. Sadly, this posting from The Israel Project is really the case:
Don’t believe me? This was posted on my own station’s home page on October 22nd:
I discovered it at about 8am that day. Nobody at work put it up. A company in Minneapolis posted it on about 100 different stations’ sites, including one in most U.S. cities.
This was my note to them: (Click to enlarge.)
And these were their responses:
Look at the article now: “Two Palestinian men armed with knives tried to board a bus carrying children in Israel but were forced back by people inside the vehicle, police said.” Exactly the opposite.
Job done, but I wonder how many people saw it, especially in big cities, before it was changed.
In Nov., 2013, Hollande called on Israel to stop building, saying settlements in the West Bank were “hampering the creation of a Palestinian state” – as if suburban sprawl, mostly near the pre-1967 line, is such a big deal, the source of so many problems, for a country that pulled its people out of Sinai and Gaza, hoping for peace.
C’mon! Treat your friends like friends and your enemies like enemies.
By now, there’s a very long track record. These days, killings in Beirut (40+ on Thursday) would not normally make big news in the U.S. but it did because of Paris. Are these isolated incidents? See for yourself. (Thanks, Mathew. Unfortunately, there have been a lot this month. You’ll have to click to enlarge the print.)
Sometimes the truth hurts. Every group has radicals. If they can’t take care of their own, then somebody else will have to in order to save lives in the long run and stop history from repeating itself.
So let’s recognize the enemy for what it is and defeat it, once and for all. (Dresden and Hiroshima helped Germany and Japan change in big ways, wouldn’t you say?)
P.S. Politically, I’m moderate (I think) and undecided. Right now, most of the candidates on both sides have a shot at my vote. There’s no party registration in Virginia so everybody is game. I want to know who’s viable and who to believe.
Here it goes, my 1st blog post. Seems the shoe is on the other foot after this week’s terror attacks in France. The world ignores terrorism against Israelis. Now, they feel a lot more sympathy because it happened in France. Probably won’t be the last attack against a Western democracy. The world has to act & put an end to it, wherever it is. In the meantime, enjoy this picture I found on Facebook. Perhaps the world should put the same demands on France as it does to Israel.