NBC Mum on Buying Hilton Interview; Why Would Any Journalist Give Political Money?

It seems obvious now -- amid rumors NBC is offering $1-million for the first post-jail Paris Hilton interview -- that NBC is continuing the ethical two-step that has allowed them to get high-profile interviews with Princess Diana's sons and develop the widely watched To Catch a Predator series, opening its checkbook to buy access.

As the Los Angeles Times details nicely here, it's a dance well-known to network executives. You cut a deal with an interview subject for some ancillary material -- paying them for video footage, or personal mementos or, in the case of the royals, rights to broadcast a charity tribute concert (the only mistake CBS seemed to make in offering a similar deal to Jessica Lynch was putting the money offer in the same letter where news coverage was detailed). Everyone involved knows the cash also includes a Big Interview, but technically the money is a payment for materials or a fee from the entertainment division (CBS, for example, bought a Michael Jackson special it never aired).

Clearly, the network suits haven't read that part of the journalism ethics code which talks about the appearance of impropriety being bad as actual wrong doing. And given that the interview with the royals was such a ratings hit -- Monday night's Dateline NBC got its best rating in two years -- no one should expect this practice to end anytime soon.

UPDATE: CBS' Public Eye blog suggests dropping the pretense and openly paying for interviews. Isn't that a bit like saying everybody wants to speed anyway, so why not get rid of speed limits?

More Stuff, In No Particular Order

--- The Orlando Sentinel is among the first Tribune newspaper web sites to present a redesign. Looks OK, though I think it remains confusing and cluttered. Few newspapers have licked the basic problem with Web site design -- put too much on the home page, and you confuse the reader, put too little,and they have no idea how to find all the cool stuff you have to offer.

--- I'm always surprised by stories about journalists giving hundreds of dollars to political candidates. And this MSNBC story  noting 144 journalists who gave political contributions between 2004 and the start of the 2008 campaign was no exception. I'm wondering: a) how can journalists afford to be giving thousands of dollars to  political candidates, and b) why would news reporters court such obvious conflicts of interest? There's lots of complaints about the overwhelming amount of money given to Democrats -- 125 to 17 --  which is yet another  reason why journalists should avoid this kind of stuff. Romenesko posted a link to a very cool dissection and debunking of the story here.

-- I was also amused by Gov. Schwarzenegger's warning to Hispanics that they should reject Spanish-language media -- that it is mostly a crutch which keeps them from assimilating in the U.S. Besides noting that what he says is true in a ruthless, bottom-line kind of way, I was also struck by how old school that vision is these days. One thing I think black folks have taught other dispossessed groups in the U.S. is how to demand inclusion on their own terms. Why accept the notion that participating in America means leaving all your culture behind? I have a feeling Hispanics are going to define a new American culture which blends part of their Spanish-language heritage more strongly with our own.

Just a thought.

Super cool Kathy Griffin spot sparring with Larry King and Anderson Cooper

Comments

[Jim Johnson]

"I'm wondering: a) how can journalists afford to be giving thousands of dollars to political candidates, and b) why would news reporters court such obvious conflicts of interest? There's lots of complaints about the overwhelming amount of money given to Democrats -- 125 to 17 -- which is yet another reason why journalists should avoid this kind of stuff."

Journalists are people, too... right? Certainly ethics play a role - news and politics reporters should not give... but sports reporters? lifestyle reporters? If the reporter will never write about the office, why not donate or volunteer for a campaign?

Einstein has a pretty good thought about how there is no truly objective observer...

[Eric Deggans]

Journalists are people -- but there are some things we have to forego to serve our jobs. When I started work as an entertainment journalist at the Pittsburgh Press in 1989, I had to sign a pledge that I wouldn't get involved with political campaigns and avoid some other potential conflicts.

And its not like I'm saying journalists can't vote -- is it really that important to give money?

You make a good point about non-news or political journalists, although I think these days it is much more likely that even feature writers or sports writers may work on stories with political dimensions.

As I said in my blog post, given the current pre-occupation with journalists' political leanings, I'm not sure why a non-opinion journalist would even flirt with potential conflict by giving money to a candidate or party...

[dreaming]

i dont see how you can divide up newsrooms among those who can give and those who shd not. way too messy.

none shd. its a no-brainer to me. it just drives another nail in the coffin of mainstream journo cred.

but really, the myth that journos are too poor to give is just that. maybe some are, but those at papers like the sptimes are relatively well paid. im sure you eric probably make more than 80k or 90k? am i right? many are in the top 20 percent of their local demographic income range.

not to mention people like paul tash who clears, what, 500k 600k?
let's be real.

[mike]

It seems rather silly to be upset by political contributions. Is anyone really surprised that mainstream media is bought and paid for by the left? Is this a big shock to anyone?

I think you, Eric, just did more to promote Schwarzaneggers idea than he ever could. The last thing in the world that Hispanics want to do is end up like blacks.

Why do i get the feeling mike is about five seconds away from buying a whole bunch of lumber, gasoline, white sheets and scissors?

Anyway, to answer dreaming, I do make a good living. But I also have a wife and four kids to support. And I can think of a whole lot more things I need to spend $500 on than a gift to any politician (though I admit my wife objects to this all the time, and has given money on her own to politically active charities).

And one more thing, Mike. I think the struggle over immigration reform also taught Hispanics that, as much as the GOP may cater to them on issues it doesn't care much about (Castro and Cuba), when something surfaces tht the base is passionate about, all that talk about valuing hispanic input flies out the window.

They now know they will have to challenge the mainstream to get a fair deal, the same way black folks have had to challenge the mainstream. And I think their recent protest efforts show the black civil rights movement has inspired a lot of their current strategies...

[Mike]

Seems to me that by "challenging the mainstream," blacks have ensured that they will fail to become a part of it. But then I must be a cross burner, right? Black America is in a sorry state. Despite being foreign born and having a different first language, hispanic kids score better in school than black kids. How is that possible? And why? I think it's largely because of people like Eric, who promote racial identity even while decrying racial stereotypes. "Keepin it real" hasn't done jack for blacks, and hispanics will likely join them in the cellar if they adopt the attitude that Eric suggests.

[Eric Deggans]

I'm not sure what you mean by black people failing to beecome a part of the mainstream. We have a black secretary state, a black supereme court justice, several black congressmen, black people at all levels of corporate america and the entertainment industry.

At my own newspaper, the third highest news executive is black. Some of our most prominent columnists are black.

As always, there are improvements to be made and we're hardly at parity. But to say that black people are not a part of the mainstream is probably the most prejudiced thing you've written on this blog.

Black people have turned the tide of 400 years of opression in just 40 years. We've gone in a single lifetime from being unable to vote or marry outside our race, to becoming some of the most powerful politicians, entertainers and businesspeople in this country.

If you ask me, black folks have accomplished quite a bit in the mainstream -- often on our own terms. And if you can't see that Mike, that is mostly your problem.