Connect with us
Barrett News Media Summit 2024

BNM Writers

Media Professionals Deserve Safer Streets

“Whether one wishes to admit it or not there are similarities, parallels even, in news reporting and police work.”

Bill Zito

Published

on

They stand out pretty much wherever they are; they draw attention all by themselves.

The journalist covering the story, casting an aura all their own; a news crew no matter how large or small often becomes the focus of as much interest by passersby and neighborhood kids as the police crime scene tape or smoldering building they stand in front of.

Picture the enthusiastic sports fan leaving the stadium and spying the camera, the radio mic flag or the live truck and suddenly it’s like kids spotting the ice cream truck coming down the street. That said, what is becoming more and more common are those attracted to the scene not because of the news presence or the story but because of an opportunity, and not the righteous kind. Unfortunately and more often these days making for a story all by itself.

Released this month, reporting from the latest RTDNA/Newhouse School at Syracuse University Survey showing 1 in 5 television news directors describing attacks on their newsroom employees.

One in five, that is a lot.

In addition, one might think it’s only happening at large stations in the big markets or only at the most extreme events or perhaps while covering incidents like protests and demonstrations that got out of control. Nope. Actually, it’s rather evenly spread out across market and station size and happening whether there is a 3-person crew or a 1-person MMJ (Multimedia Journalist) on the story.

The type of assaults and/or attacks are equally diverse. There are random interruptions by the opportunists, jumping in and out of live shots or shouting profanities. Most reporters and photographers will say those are an almost everyday occurrence and just part of the job.

Nevertheless, we have all seen the YouTube and other social media postings where it goes further, sometimes much further. Spit upon, slapped and even punched, news cars and equipment damaged or stolen.

What drives it? Is it a rising dislike and distrust of the media?

Doubtful, only because that has always been there in some form, it is nothing new. However, in decades and generations past we were not regularly attacking our reporters. 

More likely, it’s instance and opportunity, much like any crime or any offense. Sometimes the crew can fend it off but with eyes and minds on the job at hand it’s next to impossible to prevent.

If we wonder why it’s happening more ask yourself what life was like when field producers had a common presence.

So, is this supposed to be the norm for the journalist on the street? A cop on the street maybe, but the reporter? Granted, they are both on those types of scenes and in similar areas but for differing intents and purposes.

I am not saying it is the same but whether one wishes to admit it or not there are similarities, parallels even, in news reporting and police work.

There are lines of demarcation certainly, but the interactions with people and the scenarios are often the same. Knowing the streets does not always mean beating the streets; both cop and reporter have been on the wrong end of that idea.

Cops worry about going through the wrong door, pulling over the wrong car. And while not yet at that level, journalists need to measure the story they are covering, their resources and the environment.

Hopefully news people out there have a heightened sense of danger or the awareness that the potential exists for bad actors with bad intentions. That does not mean incidents can be easily be prevented or stopped in their tracks, but efforts should be made to try.

I think in terms of the first year MMJ in a small market, sent on a breaking news shooting or accident scene.

“It’s 45 minutes before the 11pm newscast…get out there and go live for the top of the show”.

There is no News Director at the station at that time; there might not even be an Executive Producer. The reporter rushes to get there, there’s no real time to do anything else but set up and maybe ask somebody a question or two. Assessing the scene and its safety concerns is not often on the checklist.

Who is thinking safety and security at that time? Who is making the decision? Who has not seen the recent video of the reporter hit by a car during a live shot?

It was professionally handled by that journalist yet who back at that station was looking out for her that day? Who set the plan in motion? While off the path a bit of the primary issue, one still could spend the better part of the day looking at footage or reading accounts of journalists at scenes in similar predicaments or attacked, assaulted and worse.

No, this is not just about MMJ’s…it can be a team or a trio with a live truck, and back to the survey, not everyone cited was working alone or at a volatile scene.

Maybe think about it in terms of the way news covers bad weather: What does a viewer or a listener really thinking about storm coverage? “Why is that reporter standing in a hurricane?” What is the reporter, the photographer, the field producer, or the live truck operator thinking about storm coverage? “Why am I standing in a hurricane?”

By the way, I came to this business late so I tend to ask questions that often get me looks of frustration and annoyance by those who did not. A beloved former coworker once quoted me back to me following a period of long form storm coverage.

WE KNOW IT’S A HURRICANE…CAN’T THEY BE SOMEWHERE SAFE AND SHOW YOU THE HURRICANE? THEY CAN TELL YOU ABOUT AND DESCRIBE THE HURRICANE…NOBODY NEEDS TO BE HIT BY A FLYING STOP SIGN TO BRING YOU GOOD COVERAGE…THEY CAN DO THAT …THEY CAN BRING YOU THAT…SAFELY…THEY’RE REPORTERS.

So, what can be done about it all to keep those out there a bit safer? Consider analysis and preparation when putting staff in various situations. It is done for storm coverage.

It begins before the next story, playing out scenarios in the conference room with staff members, measuring priorities in coverage and making sure the security philosophy penetrates. You’re in a bad situation; let us plan a way to get out of it.Truthfully, it’s not something I’ve heard often discussed at length in planning and editorial meetings. True, storms may be more predictable but so is the unknown. You know it is out there.

Luckily there are those willing to advocate for themselves; I worked with a reporter who abruptly ended a live shot right on the air, before anyone had to chance to say anything. “Guys this isn’t safe, I’m wrapping it up…back to you.” Excellent! It’s not unheard of, it’s certainly prudent and hopefully, we have all seen reporters, photographers and producers make that kind of call.

This is not about bad management, or uncaring or unthinking bosses. They are out there, sure but nobody wants their people hurt or put in dangerous situations. It is however, about asking the right questions at the right time. Where are we sending our people? What is the neighborhood like, the mood on the streets? More importantly, what are we losing or giving away by pulling back from the center of the most vulnerable areas?

When in doubt, send an extra body to the scene. ANY body. If managers want the story, managers need to make it safer to cover. A sports anchor and I would go hit the streets to parallel and back up crews on demonstrations and protests. Generally, not for physical presence or as a deterrent but instead to be the extra set of eyes on a scene and it is often a game changer.

I have seen news directors go out there, sales people and of course interns. Yes, interns have eyes. Interns are often heroes. Stop sending them out for Chick-fil-A and Starbucks runs!

Getting the story means keeping the staff safe. Just as the cop cannot help anyone if they crash the patrol car running code to a hot call or a fellow officer in trouble, the reporter cannot tell the story if they’re sidelined by an attack or a disruption that might have been avoided by having a plan or the right number of people there. No matter what happens out there, the MMJ or one-man band reporter is not likely to go away nor should they. Radio, digital and print are usually alone, they are certainly harder to spot in a crowd but generally, they are solo.

Moreover, who can say there aren’t smarter ways for all platforms to do the job with a little more safety in mind? 

It’s certainly better than showing up on YouTube.

Subscribe To The BNM Rundown

The Top 8 News Media Stories of the Day, sent directly to your inbox every afternoon!

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

BNM Writers

It’s Time for News Radio to Clean Its Clock

With radio, the top of the hour always begins with a self-aggrandizing, overly-produced introduction to a program I may have been listening to for half an hour already.

Avatar photo

Published

on

A photo of clocks

News radio is an interruptive format that swiftly moves listeners from one informative topic to
the next but over the years we’ve gotten bogged down with an insufferable amount of clutter: too many commercials, endless promos and teases, and pointless production pieces. All of it
interrupts the flow and cuts into the interesting information you promise to provide.

Let’s clean the clutter, starting with the anachronistic basis for it all: your hourly format clock.

I’ve never understood why radio stations root themselves to the clock. The show starts at the top of the hour and you bury your boring features at the end. Why? Why should the top of the hour be considered the beginning of anything? It’s not how people live their lives. Radio isn’t like TV where shows start at specific times. Hell, TV isn’t that way anymore.

But with news radio, the top of the hour always begins with a self-aggrandizing, overly-produced introduction to a program I may have been listening to for half an hour already. This is especially true with morning shows, where simple logic would suggest that people trying to get to work by the top of an hour begin listening at various times before then.

Who even owns a clock radio anymore?

The 21st century is nonstop. There is no daily news cycle, no beginning or end to anything but
news radio programmers still think of time in divisions of hours, minutes, and seconds. We still draw empty circles depicting analog clocks to plot hourly radio formats.

On news and talk stations, the top of the hour almost always begins with the hourly network
report. It’s the biggest of big-time radio, steeped in tradition, professionally detached, global. In other words, it sounds nothing like your radio station in your unique market and it contains the least interesting content you have to offer.

We cling to the networks at the top of the hour for their prestige, because that’s just how we’ve always done it. Any national or international stories of real interest to Americans, the latest Trump-Biden court decisions, for example, will be well covered in talk shows and you’ll probably want to drop it into your local programming, too. How about a one-minute segment twice an hour, 60 seconds of just the big national and world stuff, in 10-15-second boil-in-the-bag headline segments? I’m just spitballing here. You’re the programmer.

In my heretical news radio mind, the networks do great journalism but they still sound flat,
stuffy, and old-fashioned. They don’t sound like anything else on my station. I’ll dump the top-of-the-hour five minutes and cherry-pick the network sound bites. We’ll deliver them ourselves.

While I’m carving up your format and trying to get you thinking outside the box, do you need
traffic reports every ten minutes? Or, at all? Heresy, I know. Catch your breath and read on.

When we had real-time airborne local reporters telling us what they were looking at it had a gee-whiz factor and the information mattered because it was live, local first-hand reporting. I could imagine the scene as it was being described. Now we have reporters in booths looking at
computer feeds and doing shotgun-style traffic reports for multiple cities. Words without
pictures.

I knew an L.A.-based traffic reporter who did reports for Salt Lake City though she had never even been there. These so-called “real-time traffic” reports are nearly always recorded and delayed for playback. Does this practice serve any purpose at all except to deceive listeners?

Not incidentally, traffic reports are a prime target for AI exploitation. How difficult can it be to
attach state and local transportation agency traffic data to AI voice-to-speech generators? For all I know this is already being done. You can argue it’s cost-efficient but as a longtime morning news host/anchor/personality, I despise it. One of the greatest assets to any morning news team is the interaction between news and traffic people.

When Amy Chodroff and I started working together at KLIF a dozen years ago we had that human contact with remarkable radio veteran Bill Jackson doing traffic from an adjoining studio. Bill wasn’t just a voice, he was a talented news radio veteran and a valued part of our show. He was so good the company, Cumulus, put two more stations on his plate, ripping a valued team member away from us.

As hosts, Amy and I had to assume Bill wasn’t able to listen to the show anymore because he
was too busy gathering and preparing his reports for the other stations. Then he was shipped out of the building to do his work from home which made his insights and witty exchanges
impossible. We couldn’t talk to each other off the air. We couldn’t exchange glances, smiles, and hand signals or bump into each other in the hall. Our show suffered and our audience became a bit more detached.

Bill Jackson, real name Dale Kuckelburg, was also significantly detached from his career.

But I digress. The biggest problem with traffic reports is the shotgun approach I mentioned,
telling everybody in our listening area driving to their unique destinations how traffic is snarled thirty miles away. Good god, we have apps in our cars that do a much better job in real time.

How about the weather? What the hell, we’re swinging the ax here. Let’s be realistic.

There isn’t a day in my life that I don’t wake up with a fair idea of what weather I should expect. I don’t need someone on the radio telling me to carry an umbrella. If it’s iffy the immediate and highly local details are now available at the touch of an app. When the weather becomes of critical and life-threatening importance it’s a major news story and that’s when local radio news shines, making it the center of our continuous attention, not just a regular feature at scheduled times.

It’s your radio station, do what you think is best. I’m only suggesting that you might want to
reevaluate all the things we’ve all taken for granted for far too long.

News radio has always been an interruptive format. We promise listeners “the news you need” in the time it takes them to drive to work. They understand that they’ll receive useful and
interesting content in exchange for frequent subject switching and sponsorships. The great news stations know how to capitalize on that agreement but too many have sold their souls to
commercial clutter that chokes a news team’s ability to serve the promised meal.

As if 22 minutes of inane and repetitive commercials per hour aren’t bad enough programmers, struggling to do their work in a hurricane of increasing spotloads, add to the clutter with recorded promos that simply beseech listeners to keep listening while offering nothing of substance. Meanwhile, the same programmers tell talent to tease, tease, tease the subjects they’ll talk about six, twelve, and twenty minutes from now.

I know the business reality. Radio — especially news radio — is struggling to meet the profit insistence of corporate boards and the overhead needs of staying afloat locally. But at some point, we must answer the question, who do we have to serve first, our clients or our audience?

Station managers and their corporate masters have to stop issuing profit mandates without
offering programmers the opportunity to do their jobs, to provide more valuable content while
limiting commercial minutes, sponsorship rhetoric, and eliminating distracting bells and
whistles.

Clean your clock. Stop filling empty circles with stuff that made sense 50 years ago but is merely clutter today.

The only way to think outside the box is to get rid of the box.

Subscribe To The BNM Rundown

The Top 8 News Media Stories of the Day, sent directly to your inbox every afternoon!

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Continue Reading

BNM Writers

AM 680 WCBM Leapt Into Action As the Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapsed

Our employees live and work here and know what’s important to our listeners.

Published

on

As Americans woke up to a cargo ship hitting Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge Tuesday morning, the crew at AM 680 WCBM was already hard at work gathering the facts.

Just before 1:30 AM, a cargo ship lost power exiting the Baltimore harbor, striking a support beam that toppled the 47-year-old structure. In the wreckage, six people working on the bridge died, while drivers were rescued from the rubble in the chilly waters of the Curtis Bay.

The AM news/talk station — which celebrated its 100th anniversary Thursday — went wall-to-wall breaking coverage, something most outlets now avoid because of budget concerns. 680 WCBM morning host and Program Director Sean Casey told BNM in an email exchange how his crews handled the breaking news.


BNM: When did you guys hit the air with breaking news coverage?

Sean Casey: We first broke in with updates at 3:30 AM, approximately two hours after the bridge collapsed. Breaking news updates continued every half hour until 6 AM.”

BNM: How did you coordinate coverage in those moments?

SC: Full wall-to-wall coverage started at 6 AM and included full newscasts as well as interviews with state and local law enforcement agencies, eyewitness call-ins, and our national news partners. Our producer made call-outs and our news department shifted to full-blown local coverage.

BNM: How much experience did you have in putting together coverage of an event like that on the fly?

SC: Having been on the air during 9/11, I used the same formula that listeners want to know: Who, What, When, and Where? The why will come later.

BNM: How does your coverage show the importance of both local radio and AM radio?

SC: In times of breaking news events that impact our listeners, local AM radio stations are more in tune with the local listening audience. Our employees live and work here and know what’s important to our listeners. We also know the local players and officials and can get immediate reaction.

The talk component of our news/talk format offers listeners a chance to vent, share, and communicate with each other in good and bad times. This is why AM radio is still relevant. In some emergencies you can lose your cell service or have too weak of a signal, AM radio remains viable for in-car listening and at home with battery backup.

The AM 680 WCBM morning host and Program Director concluded his thoughts by noting the importance of a team effort, not only in coverage of breaking news events but also in operating a successful station and business as a whole.

“One of the biggest concerns we have is budgetary. More and more AM stations are abandoning the format because of its expense. Very few can afford a live and local news staff and show hosts,” Casey told Barrett News Media.

“Now more than ever, it’s vital that there be synergy between ownership, sales, and programming to maximize ratings and revenue so that we can continue to deliver vital information to listeners in our market.”

Subscribe To The BNM Rundown

The Top 8 News Media Stories of the Day, sent directly to your inbox every afternoon!

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Continue Reading

BNM Writers

News is the Only Thing Missing From Election Coverage

Coverage of the election is, as we’ve discussed, still very horse-race-centric, and there’s been, of course, coverage of the various Trump court cases, but where is the coverage of exactly what the candidates plan to do if elected?

Published

on

A photo featuring I voted stickers

The first thought I had when I heard NBC had hired Ronna McDaniel as a commentator for $300,000 a year was to wonder how many actual journalists they could have hired for that money. Then, I recalled that NBC had laid off dozens of news staffers just a few months ago. Then, I remembered that I had just recently written a column decrying news organizations throwing pretty much anybody on the air as a “pundit” and this….

This was worse. It’s one thing to grab some rando who happened to be a minor functionary for the Executive Branch. It’s another to hire someone whose job was to promote election denialism and pretend that her opinion is something valuable for viewers. And, yes, it’s just as ridiculous when news organizations hire former presidential press secretaries (that’s you, Jen Psaki and Sean Spicer), their very jobs were to spin everything in their bosses’ favor and now you’re going to pay them big salaries for, um, what? Because they “have a name” or you’re afraid someone else will snap them up? Why them?

The McDaniel deal lasted five days, one completely unilluminating interview, and one unexpected Chuck Todd spine-growing outburst, so it’ll all blow over soon enough. The problem is, though, the part about having fired several news staffers, and what it means in an election year on both the national and local levels. If you have the money to hire an alleged pundit – any alleged pundit – you have the money to hire reporters, and I don’t mean anchors or opinion show hosts.

Coverage of the election is, as we’ve discussed, still very horse-race-centric, and there’s been, of course, coverage of the various Trump court cases, but where is the coverage of exactly what the candidates plan to do if elected? Who’s probing Project 2025 and why isn’t it front-page, first-segment news? Who’s pressing the Biden administration on Gaza? Is anyone reporting on the candidates’ record on climate change?

Beyond prescription drug prices, is anyone digging into the broken healthcare system and demanding answers from the candidates about what they’ll do to fix it (and not letting Trump get away with “I’ll have a better plan, a beautiful plan” without a single specific detail, like they did in 2016)? Why didn’t anyone focus on, for example, the GOP candidate for governor of North Carolina and his incendiary past comments well before the primary?

Pundits are not going to do the legwork on the issues; they’ll just talk about swing states while John King and Steve Kornacki point at their touchscreen maps. We need reporting on the things that matter (and can affect that horse race, even if most people have made up their minds). It shouldn’t just be Pro Publica and scattered independent journalists doing the dirty work.

Honestly, I don’t want to hear the complaints about the quality of the candidates or how this is a rerun or any of that. (We’ll leave that to The New York Times.) We are a horribly underinformed electorate and we got the horse race we deserve. It might just be idealists like me who think that, just maybe, the news media can play a role in educating the public and bursting the bubbles and echo chambers. This country has survived and prospered for a few centuries with the press shining a light on injustice and corruption.

Now, when we need that most, they’re more concerned with what they think will bring them ratings and money (although someone will have to explain to me who thought having Ronna McDaniel as a paid commentator would draw a single viewer to NBC).

Here’s a thought: Don’t lay off reporters, especially in an election year.  Assign them to dig deep on issues that matter to the voters.

Let the pundits talk about that.

Subscribe To The BNM Rundown

The Top 8 News Media Stories of the Day, sent directly to your inbox every afternoon!

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Advertisement
Advertisement

Upcoming Events

BNM Writers

Copyright © 2024 Barrett Media.