I was watching Lee Conklin last night also, and my wife commented on how distressed he looked after furry-hat guy spoke. I didn't catch the names, either, but what distressed me was that the chucklehead felt free to offer his analysis of why the shooting occurred: "..management should know this is going to happen, we're worked too hard over here, at the old plant we used to have fun, now it's just work, work, work." That's actually what he said. On your radio show this morning, there were several callers voicing the same opinion. I think the appropriate question to ask of Lee Conklin is, why didn't you challenge this guy when he started off like this? I mean, I know it was cold out and everything..
Maybe this is a little cynical to ask, but where is the statement from the UAW? What an opportunity for these people to come together. But I'll bet they only throw out some self-serving blame.
posted by Guest at 11:55 A.M. EST on Thu Jan 27, 2005 #
If you check 13abc.com WTVG's news director has written an apology. If that doesn't satisfy you, JR, then feel free to demand his head, okay? Why don't you go down to the station or write a letter to be read on air. "I, JR of ToledoTalk.com, demand that you quit because I don't think you should have let that happen."
It's live TV. What do you want, a 30 second delay? 2 minute delay? A panel of censors in the studio with control over the bleep button and fuzz-dot generator? It should not have happened but it did. Maybe next time they'll put a delay on their coverage. If you want to know for sure, ask them.
posted by Guest at 12:24 P.M. EST on Thu Jan 27, 2005 #
"The gunman was identified as Myles Meyers, 54, of East Rowland Road. He was pronounced dead in the office area of the body shop after shooting himself in the head. He fatally wounded Roy Thacker, 50, of Oregon, who died at 9:20 p.m. about 40 minutes after the shooting."
Those are the names given by Furry-hat-guy around 9:30 p.m., whenever the interview was conducted. I thought the worker said Roy Factor.
A statement from Ch 13.
"A number of questions have been raised following live news coverage of last night's tragedy at the Toledo Jeep plant. Those questions deserve a thoughtful and honest reply."
"Some viewers questioned the need for live coverage during prime time programming. Rather than interrupt our entertainment programs why not wait until 11:00pm to provide coverage?"
Okay. Now that's weird. I can't believe people are actually upset that their favorite TV shows were interrupted? That could be a sign of an addiction. Too much TV viewing, maybe?
During the 10-11 hour, the ABC, NBC, and CBS stations didn't break away from normal programming much at all. I was surprised at that, but based upon the above statement, I can see why. Since Fox 36 has their news at 10, they could obviously cover the incident in detail. Ch 11 ran a scroll of news info.
More from Ch 13:
"We also received calls and emails questioning a live interview we conducted last night. During that interview a witness mentioned the first name of the suspect and the first and last name of one of the victims. Our policy at 13 Action News is not to release such information until it has been officially confirmed by authorities. We apologized immediately after the report. I apologize again now. We did not expect that to happen and we deeply regret that it did."
So let anything go and then apologize for any wrong later. You think that's a strategy of the media? I do.
Um, Guest 2 rants: "If you check 13abc.com WTVG's news director has written an apology. If that doesn't satisfy you, JR, then feel free to demand his head, okay?"
I'm guessing Guest 2 is one of those who watches too much TV and is still upset that his favorite mindless, worthless TV shows were interrupted. Or his coffee maker is broken.
"It's live TV."
So what? So that's an excuse for the media to do whatever the hell it wants?
Damn right, I'm not buying the apology. It's probably standard operating procedure for the news director to make some kind of statement.
I think Ch 13 knew exactly what it was doing. Didn't expect it. That's crap. Why didn't Conklin reign in the person being interviewed after the first name was given? Why did we have to hear Furry-hat-guy say the other two were probably dead because they looked so bad?
I'd say it's the family members who have to be satisfied by Ch 13's apology. Not me. And it looks like plenty of other people have contacted Ch 13 about the incident, so I don't need to.
Guest 1 said: "On your radio show this morning, there were several callers voicing the same opinion."
There's no radio station affiliated with this website. You're probably referring to WSPD's morning show host Bob Frantz. I caught his show this morning during the 8-9 hour and it did seem a bit ugly at times. Jeep workers were complaining about working conditions. Some Jeep workers said there aren't any work problems. Non-Jeep workers were telling Jeep employees to quit their bitching.
This is related to the other interview Conklin did during the 9-10 hour that Guest 1 is talking about. I think the interview was conducted right after Furry-hat-guy.
And because of this second interview, I'm not buying Ch 13's apology. This second Conklin interview with a big guy with glasses and no hat looked rigged, staged, planned, whatever.
I'm not saying the worker was not employed at Jeep. I'm not saying he doesn't have valid complaints about work conditions. But if you saw the interview, you'll understand why I think Ch 13 intentionally went looking for someone to complain about management.
I think the first thing Conklin asked was, what's the environment like or he asked what's it like in there?
I thought Conklin was wanting to know what it was currently like in the body shop where the shootings took place. The dead shooter was still there. People were told to leave. It was chaotic when the police arrived. That's what I thought Conklin was wanting to know.
No. That wasn't it. The worker answered with there's a lot of pressure. I was confused with the answer, because I'm still not thinking the interview was going to be about working conditions.
These aren't direct quotes from the interview.
The worker said they worked harder at the old Jeep plant but they had more fun there.
What? I wasn't following the interview. There's a shooting and this worker is talking about the old Jeep plant?
The worker then said that at the new plant there are always threats of layoffs.
The worker said that he believes that management thinks "they're above God."
The worker said if you push someone too far, then you can see what will happen. Referring to the shootings.
I was surprised by the interview. The timing of it was shameful. Ch 13 let this worker air his gripes about management less than an hour after the incident happened. And I believe Ch 13 planned it.
Is that the proper forum and time to complain? The first worker Conklin interviewed gave a name of the dead supervisor, and the second worker interviewed basically implied that management had it coming.
I couldn't believe how matter-of-fact the second worker interviewed spoke. Like, hey management, better lighten up or you could get more of this. Like there was no surprise that the shootings happened.
I heard a couple of other sound byte interviews on the radio with workers expressing similar thoughts. Then Bob's radio program had more workers airing similar sentiments about tough working conditions and management pushing too hard.
You watch, Ch 13 will use snippets from their coverage of the shooting in their next commercial promoting their news program.
posted by jr at 04:38 P.M. EST on Thu Jan 27, 2005 #
Then, JR, if you're so unhappy/upset, why don't you invite WTVG to read this here on your site and comment?
Or should I send them a link?
posted by Guest at 05:13 P.M. EST on Thu Jan 27, 2005 #
Obviously, channel 13 has already received similar comments, questions, and complaints.
If you want to send Ch 13 a web link, send them this one. I've recommended this book before. It's not just for people in the media. It's also for those who consume the news. You should read it, Guest.
I'd like to direct you to chapter 10: "Journalists Have a Responsibility to Conscience."
On page 180:
"In the end journalism is an act of character. Since there are no laws of journalism, no regulations, no licensing, and no formal self-policing, and since journalism by its nature can be exploitative, a heavy burden rests on the ethics and judgement of the individual journalist and the individual organization where he or she works."
It's a good book, but certainly not the final word on journalism. Still, was Ch 13 exploitative? Did Ch 13 handle the heavy burden appropriately? Did Ch 13 execute good judgement?
Who cares, right, Guest? Afterall, Ch 13 made an apology, so everything is just fine.
I still think it's the motto of some media orgs to do whatever it takes and deal with the consequences later.
posted by jr at 10:30 P.M. EST on Thu Jan 27, 2005 #
I think it was unfortunate that the person being interviewed live decided to divulge that kind of sensitive information. Channel 13 found one of the potential pitfalls in providing a live conduit to the community to an unknown person. And they have repented twice for what was unintentionally broadcast. I don't have a problem with it.
How much responsibility rests on the shoulders of the Jeep worker for taking it upon himself to divulge that information? Does he also owe anyone an apology? I say no because the public also has a responsibility to determine the reliability of information for themselves. In this case, the source of information was an autoworker, not a doctor. I would hope most viewers would discount his medical opinions.
"So let anything go and then apologize for any wrong later. You think that's a strategy of the media? I do. " - J.R.
Ah, "it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission." That's usually the rule the newspaper photojournalist needs to live by to gain access to areas that authorities (rightly or wrongly) don't want them to. In other words, keep walking until a cop tells you to stop. It's only acceptable because the image editing happens before publication. It's not right for live broadcast though. But I haven't seen anything more than anecdotal evidence to accuse channel 13 of it. Unfortunately, evidence against it would be things that didn't get aired, so it's impossible for me to offer any examples. If a pattern develops with ch 13, then I will give the theory more credence. As for why Conklin let it continue, it's impossible to say without asking him directly. Maybe he's not particularly bright or maybe the weather conditions kept him from concentrating on what the guy as actually saying. Trust me about the conditions, I was actually there outside the plant and it was bad enough to have an impact on people. My point is that you're assuming it was let through purposely without taking other circumstances into consideration.
Live interviews are riskier but this kind of mistake doesn't happen often. Usually the people who are most sensitive about this kind of information *are* the fellow workers. I doubt anyone expected him to say what he did. If the public continues to thirst for live reports, things like this will happen occasionally.
posted by photodan at 02:13 P.M. EST on Fri Jan 28, 2005 #
The worker said if you push someone too far, then you can see what will happen. Referring to the shootings.
It would seem that the workers of Daimler-Chrysler are unaware of the fact that slavery was abolished more than 140 years ago. Basically put, if it is such a terrible place to work at, quit. You are not forced to work there.
posted by mike2004 at 08:57 A.M. EST on Sat Jan 29, 2005 #
"As for why Conklin let it continue, it's impossible to say without asking him directly."
Well, this brings up another question for me: Why was Conklin at Jeep in the first place? Ditto for 24's Jim Blue. What is with this tactic of putting the stations' main anchors at the scene for select news events? Especially a breaking news story. What's wrong with their field reporters? I don't know about 11, but 36 didn't have their main anchors at Jeep, did they?
posted by jr at 11:53 P.M. EST on Sat Jan 29, 2005 #
From Blade columnist Russ Lemmon:
"While WNWO's initial cut-in included a telephone interview with a Jeep employee, the NBC affiliate was reckless in its zeal to report the story. The Jeep employee told WNWO news anchor Jennifer Stacy the full name of the man who was shot to death, Roy Thacker, and the first name of the shooter, Myles Meyers. WTVG made the same mistake more than an hour later."
"WUPW was first with the story and the last to leave it. It was on the air continuously from 9:42 p.m. until midnight. Though plagued by technical problems, particularly with its live shots, WUPW's reporting was solid and, best of all, rumor-free."
"More than any other station, WTOL was efficient with its cut-ins. It had five cut-ins from 9 to 10 p.m., but none lasted more than five minutes."
"WNWO's Jim Blue, who was at the scene, had the best pre-11 p.m. interview -- one with a Jeep employee who said he witnessed the shooting. Mr. Blue's experience was evident as he guided the Jeep employee through the interview; the employee refrained from naming any of the people involved in the shooting."
"On a different night, the local stations might have reported the shooting in crawls at the bottom of the TV screen and waited until their regularly scheduled newscasts (10 p.m. for WUPW; 11 p.m. for the other three) to dive into the story. But with all four stations breaking into network programming within 25 minutes of the shooting, the crawl gave way to competitive pressures."
posted by jr at 01:50 A.M. EST on Sun Jan 30, 2005 #
Syndicate ToledoTalk
