It's been weeks since news director Darren Richards left St. Petersburg CBS affiliate WTSP-Ch. 10 for a new career in public relations.
But station officials today announced his replacement, Peter Roghaar, who comes to WTSP after nine years as news director at the NBC affiliate in West Palm Beach, WPTV.
Roghaar actually gets the title director of news and information, perhaps to emphasize the online component now prized at WTSP, which was rebranded as 10 Connects under Richards.
Richards oversaw a number of controversial moves during his tenure -- from the departure of longtime anchors Marty Matthews and Jennifer Howe to letting go forecasters Anna Allen and Randy Rauch go from the weather department and developing the online-focused 10 connects approach.
Roghaar inherits a newsroom still fighting to succeed in mornings and other time periods (they have done well at 11 p.m.,however), while also struggling with the same economic challenges every mainstream newsrooms faces.
The Republican Party could learn a thing or two from Glenn Beck.
While GOP lawmakers were in Washington D.C. dealing with the start of debate over the revamp of the nation's health care system -- in other words, governing -- Beck outlined the early beginnings of a political action which could snatch many true believers from the heart of the Republican Party just before a crucial midterm election.
The speech, delivered Saturday afternoon at The Villages retirement community in Florida, outlined something Beck has been calling The Plan. It's his 100-year plan to "bring us back to the America that our founders would have understood."
And during his speech, Beck gave hints of what that would mean, talking approvingly of libertarian policies to shut down the Internal Revenue Service and bring troops home from foreign conflicts, while implying that the science isn't settled on pollution-inspired climate change and presenting his plan as the solution to "a ticking time bomb" created by progressives many years ago to turn America into a "socialist utopia."
He also announced plans for a series of educational conventions, starting with a March 27 date at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, culminating with a giant rally Aug. 28 in Washington D.C. where his final plan is to be revealed.
He talked about having a team of advisors drafted to help him with different aspects of the plan, and turning his group used to organize politically active fans, The 9-12 Project, to the task of registering people to vote in the manner of the Democratic-supporting group he has long opposed on his shows, ACORN.
"We are going to go out...without taking a dime from the federal government or without smuggling any underage hookers across the border," he said, defiantly.
It is an odd media world indeed, where former GOP office holder and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin(who supposedly left office to effect political change from outside the system) is jetting around the country talking up her memoirs with Oprah Winfrey and Barbara Walters, while a radio and TV talk show host who has never won an election can outline plans to create a voter registration apparatus and series of forums for teaching potential voters about his policy initiatives a year before a major election.
Shouldn't somebody in the GOP be trying something like this?
This, it seems, is what happens when a political party's politicians lose their most effective voices. Now, with GOP lawmakers out of power in Washington, radio hosts such as Beck have stepped up in a major way to snare the hearts and minds of the most politically active, conservative-minded and frustrated voters in the country.
These are the folks who would normally fuel the grass roots voter registration drives and rallies which could change over power in an off year election. But what will the GOP do if these folks are hanging at 9-12 rallies and buying Beck's new book instead?
This isn't unprecedented. Curiously, Beck's plan reminds me of a similar effort put together by radio and TV personality Tavis Smiley, who organized a similar campaign to press the ideas behind his book to address the ills hurting African Americans across the country called The Covenant. But Smiley's efforts wasn't so overtly political, focusing instead on helping black culture re-establish ideas and habits which could help solve social ills.
Beck offered few facts to back his presentation, relying mostly on emotion and drama to carry the day.
If it works, this plan could turn Beck into a powerful political player whose only electoral mandate comes from the millions of fans who listen to his radio show, watch his television program, buy his books and attend his rallies.
The Sarah Palin book tour continues to be the gift that keeps on giving for media watchers.
First, Fox News had to apologize today for telling viewers Wednesday that video from a campaign appearance by Palin last year before adoring throngs was footage from a recent book tour stop.
The flub highlights the ongoing controversy over whether outspoken conservatives such as Palin are widely popular or appeal to an excited niche. And its the second time in as many weeks that Fox had to apologize for leading viewers to believe old footage was new.
It also highlights something I said Sunday on CNN. The problem with having opinionated news networks isn't necessarily showcasing opinion, it's the lack of transparency and accuracy when programmers are actively and deliberately bending reality to fit their preconceived ideas.
I actually think this was an honest mistake -- mostly because Palin is drawing crowds at her book signings, so deception wasn't necessary (in fact, as I write this, MSNBC is broadcasting from a crowded Palin book signing). But when you've had your finger on the scale in the past, it's hard to argue innocence in the future.
The Daily Show also had several great segments Wednesday; particularly a bit where host Jon Stewart explains that critics object to Palin because her positions on issues are mostly conservative-friendly code words and phrases strung together in rambling sentences which sometimes don't even make sense.
Later, he complimented former CNN host Lou Dobbs for his consistency in upholding abhorrent and wrong views.
At a time when some critics insist that content in newspapers is unofficially for sale, Creative Loafing's Tampa edition is about to put that notion to the test.
The items for sale include: its lead cover image, a five-star review from its restaurant critic Brian Ries, a local band profile and photo shoot, the chance to write a music review of your choice and a chance to add your questions in person to an interview political editor Mitch Perry will conduct with a politician for a story in the newspaper and Perry's podcast.
These items involving the newspaper's actual content are sprinkled among more conventional bid items such as an indie record shopping spree and acting classes at the Venue Actors Studio. The suggested opening bids are rather low -- the one for the cover is $100 -- and the possibilities for problems seem plentiful.
What if a group of white supremacists want to buy the cover? Or that guy who swears Stephen King helped kill John Lennon? Can Creative Loafing say no if the image suggested isn't definitively offensive?
And doesn't the whole business, coming as the six-newspaper chain is climbing out of bankruptcy, reinforce the notion that their editorial product is unsteady enough to be bought out?
"This is our way of saying 'This is not how we do business,'" said Creative Loafing editor David Warner, clearly digging how vaguely disquieting this whole episode was for me. "just this once, you'll see what you get if our content actually is for sale. It's ironic, unchartered territory."
Based on an annual auction held by the Seattle alt-weekly The Stranger, it's also an interesting bit of irreverence coming as the chain's new owners hire more conventional newspaper types to run its properties -- from former St. Pete Times publisher Marty Petty joining as CEO to former Chicago Tribune managing editor Jim Warren becoming publisher of the chain's Chicago Reader.
The auction started this morning and concludes in December; the newspaper expects to maintain editorial control over the material provided by winning bidders. Warner wasn't sure, but believed The Stranger raises somewhere around $50,000 with its auctions.
And yes, I realize auctioning the newspaper's content is mostly a bid for free publicity, which I'm providing.
But I'm thinking I just might get a posse together here at Times Publishing and buy a big cover ad for our free weekly newspaper, TBT.
Hey, it's all for a good cause and free publicity, right?
As Sarah Palin kicks off a media blitz this week to hawk her new book, Going Rogue, you have to wonder how the national media got hornswoggled into this mess.
Even as major interviews with infotainment figures such as Oprah Winfrey and Barbara Walters air in syndicated TV and on ABC, reporters from the Associated Press have fact-checked Palin's quickly-written memoir and find it to be full of misleading, sometimes inaccurate statements.
Palin also makes claims about how she was treated by the campaign of then-running mateJohn McCain during their bid for the White House which have been denied by others who worked there. In particular, former officials there refute her claim that she was billed $50,000 for expenses related to her vetting at a vice presidential candidate -- saying the McCain campaign did not bill her and was not asked to help cover any expenses she might have incurred on her own. (See the St. Pete Times' fact checking Web site PolitiFact's area on Palin here)
So how will journalists treat Palin when she sits down? If, for example, Barbara Walters' pre-taped interviews don't address these issues, should ABC News feel hoodwinked? (Click here for a summation of Palin's Oprah appearance by the Chicago Sun-Times; the interview airs here at 4 p.m. on WFLA-Ch. 8)
Jonathan Martin of Politico summed up the issue in an appearance today on MSNBC: "Should we in the media treat Sarah Palin like a conventional politician, who may run for office someday, or a political personality -- somebody on par with a Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity?"
My question: What's the difference? Especially given that media personalities such as Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck are inspiring and/or promoting politically active advocacy groups and movements?
Palin seems to have avoided hard news environments in her initial interviews for the book, rightly concluding that those who love her will believe whatever she says and those who dislike her won't be swayed by an interview with a hard news reporter.
But anybody who interviews her without bringing up the numerous inconsistencies already revealed about Going Rogue risks their own credibility while furthering Palin's rather opportunistic media strategy.
Ever try to get a word in edgewise when two siblings are fighting?
Then you know how I felt on Sunday morning, trying to get in-between Baltimore Sun TV critic David Zurawick and CNN staffer-turned-conservative talk radio guy Chris Plante on Howard Kurtz media show for CNN, Reliable Sources.
The subject at hand: The reasons behind and meaning of "advocacy journalist" Lou Dobbs' resignation from CNN last Wednesday. Plante brought the conservative media party line -- that Dobbs was undone by a liberal media and liberal activists who couldn't abide his conservative stands on illegal immigration.
Zurawick brought the appropriate response -- are you crazy? -- and proceeded to pronounce Dobbs a "disaster" for CNN's long-established brand as a hard news haven.
I was stuck in the middle, trying to have a reasoned discussion between two guys yelling at each other and interrupting everyone (I'm a huge fan and friend of David Z., by the way, but when he goes on cable TV, this mild-mannered journalist turns into a tiger).
I was struck by a bunch of things during this bit of TV theater:
-- It's always odd to discuss media stories involving CNN on a CNN media show. I kept wondering why Kurtz didn't have CNN/U.S. president Jon Klein or some other CNN executive on to tell us directly what was going on with Dobbs. And how weird was it to ask me about Dobbs successor, John King, who just happened to be anchoring the show which surrounded Reliable Sources, State of the Union?
-- Plante conveniently overlooked the most important issue at hand; Dobbs consistently aired false or misleading information to buttress his point of view, which just happened to be that hordes of illegal immigrants from Mexico are bringing untold ills to America. Such work is shoddy journalism at best and racist at worst; if you're going to call yourself an advocacy journalist, you've got live up to both sides of the term.
-- In a media world where consumers have more choice than ever, cable channels' move toward creating "news" channels which bend and manufacture facts to echo their viewers' worldview only makes sense, at least economically. But that is directly contrary to the role of journalists, whose job often requires digging up stories which challenge conventional wisdom and the assumptions of the audience. Journalists are also required to follow the facts wherever they lead, even if the resulting story doesn't fit a preconceived mold.
-- Conservatives have essentially challenged many of the notions journalists use to define news, insisting that they betray a liberal bias. But replacing those criteria with ideas that bend toward conservatives' biases -- America is always a great nation, government is usually bad, etc. -- doesn't produce better journalism. It just produces reports which affirm what the audience wants to believe. And we have seen in our economic meltdown and how federal disaster response fell apart after Katrina, how objective facts have a way of obliterating how we'd like to see life.
-- In a telling interview replayed on NPR's On The Media, Dobbs justified his approach by essentially saying he was experienced and accomplished enough that he deserved to have a level of autonomy on CNN that no other anchor had. But even the best writers need editors, and any justification which says 'I'm great, so by definition anything I do is great,' is mostly a recipe for problems.
Dobbs will appear on Fox News Channel host Bill O'Reilly's top-rated show The O'Reilly Factor tonight; it will be interesting to see what these two, very smart guys, who have built empires on pandering to ideologues, have to say to each other.
A deputy in the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office is suing the owner of CBS affiliate WTSP-Ch. 10 and reporter Mike Deeson, saying the station aired a story unfairly edited to make it appear the officer was laughing at quadriplegic jail inmate Brian Sterner when he was dumped from a wheelchair.
A lawyer for Cpl. Steven Dickey filed the lawsuit Tuesday in Hillsborough County Circuit Court, seeking a judgment in excess of $15,000. His action contends WTSP’s story on the incident drew the officer unfairly into the controversy and led to global ridicule when the footage became a viral sensation on the Internet.
The lawsuit accuses WTSP of deliberately editing video of the moment on Jan. 29 2008 when inmate Brian Sterner was hurled from his wheelchair, making it appear that Dickey participated and was laughing at Sterner’s difficulty.
Ken Tonning, general manager at WTSP, declined to comment. But an attorney for WTSP owner Gannett Co. wrote a letter to Dickey's lawyer Nov. 2 maintaining the station's story was a fair and accurate portrayal of video from the incident provided by the sheriff's office.
“The gist of the station’s report is exactly that of the government’s tape: That deputies dumped Mr. Sterner out of a wheelchair and Mr. Dickey – aware of Mr Sterner’s treatment – found something amusing about the situation,” wrote Gannett attorney Barbara Wall, who also said the officer is a public official requiring a high level of proof to demonstrate any defamation.
Look below to see footage from the sheriff's office and WTSP's story. (In the bottom clip, Dickey walks into the camera frame at 1:24, then walks past smiling at 1:59):
John King, the host of CNN's Sunday program State of the Union, has been named as the permanent replacement for outgoing 7 p.m. weeknight anchor Lou Dobbs, who abruptly resigned Wednesday after more than 25 years working at the cable newschannel.
The choice of King, a former reporter for the Associated Press who has steadfastly avoided the opinionating many anchors indulge on cable news, answers one of the biggest questions CNN faced when Dobbs' departure was announced.
Given CNN's sagging primetime ratings and the success of rivals featuring more opinionated shows in prime time, some wondered if Dobbs' departure would give the channel a chance to change its middle-of-the-road approach.
(it may also offer a statement on the advantages of mastering new technology early; King distinguished himself during the 2008 elections by nimbly handling CNN's touch-screen video wall display during election returns and political analysis segments.
Scheduled to start early next year, King's show is expected to focus on politics and analysis -- it remains to be seen how this show would be different than the show airing right before it, Wolf Blitzer's Situation Room.
Until King debuts, the channel plans to feature a rotating lineup of anchors at 7 p.m.
And CNN expects to replace King as host of the Sunday State of the Union program, though no name has been released yet.
The speed of the King announcement also hints this was something CNN management may have seen coming; lending credence to news stories saying Dobbs had met with the channel's executives several times.
As Latino groups began to step up their protests against CNN "advocacy anchor" Lou Dobbs, the one time business expert and last remaining anchor from the newschannel's earliest days abruptly announced he was leaving the channel, effective today.
In a long statement, Dobbs told his audience about the move during his 7 p.m. show, saying "some leaders in media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond my role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem-solving, as well as to contribute positively to a better understanding of the great issues of our day. And to continue to do so in the most honest and direct language possible."
This was not the first time Dobbs had left CNN; an anchor at the newschannel since its 1980 inception, he departed for two years in 1999 to join the Web site Space.com. (Citing unnamed sources, the Web site AllYourTV.com says Dobbs is considering a run for political office, perhaps president)
Dobbs has faced criticism from various groups over statements expressed on his CNN show and his radio show, from suggestions that the issue of President Obama's birth in the U.S. may be an open question to his refusal to correct mistaken reporting about illegal immigrants spreading leprosy in America.
Dobbs turned resistance to illegal immigration into a cornerstone of his programs, drawing heated criticism from Latino groups which accused him of demonizing Hispanics and spreading misinformation about the negative impacts of illegal immigrants.
A group called BastaDobbs.com -- which says it is a Latino-led grassroots coalition of several organizations urging CNN to fire Dobbs -- released a statement earlier today announcing a digital "sit-in" on the newschannel's iReport service. In this protest, members would send thousands of anti-Dobbs personal messages into CNN's Web site devoted to citizen journalism. The group had also protested during CNN's launch of its Latino in America series, arguing that the newschannel could not be fair to Latinos if it kept Dobbs on its payroll.
None of this was mentioned directly in statements released by Dobbs and CNN tonight. And despite the anchor's talk of moving on, no specific reason was given for the anchors abrupt departure -- announced without fanfare or a successor named (The New York Times quotes a spokesperson from Fox saying it has not had discussions with Dobbs for the Fox News Channel nor Fox Business Network).
Given the damage Dobbs punditry has done to its brand with Latinos, perhaps CNN will consider replacing him with Rick Sanchez, the former Miami anchor who has turned their 3 p.m. hour into a showcase for his Twitter-fed reporting and occasional opinionating, often on issues affecting Hispanics.
It would certainly be a delicious irony. And there's not nearly enough of that in the media game these days.
I'm not sure what's more amazing: That Fox News exposed a falsehood spread by conservative darling Sarah Palin, or that the Daily Show dug up footage suggesting the channel should be fact checking its own programs, too.
(UPDATE: Sean Hannity admitted on his show Wednesday that he used "incorrect video" in his interview with a lawmaker who attended an anti-health care change rally in the nation's capital last week. What he didn't do, was speak on the effect of what he called an "inadvertent mistake" -- which essentially suggested the rally last week drew crowds the size of a much larger rally in September.)
On Tuesday, the right-leaning cable channel presented a short report on a Palin speech last week where she groused about the phrase "in God we trust" being moved to a subordinate position on the $1 coin, implying that the current Democratic administration must have had something to do with it.
This is the kind of malarkey which normally rockets around the conservative media echo chamber for weeks, fed by pundits who have a vested interest in spreading misinformation. But Fox News offered a brief report echoing a story Saturday in Politico noting the change in the dollar coin was developed and approved under GOP president George W. Bush and reversed by Congress in 2007.
You can debate why Fox News took the time to debunk this relatively unimportant item; it's a handy response to people who accuse the channel of favoring the right, while knocking down a story which ultimately might have made Republicans look worse once the truth was known.
But the Daily Show presented footage Tuesday suggesting that pundit Sean Hannity may have cribbed images of the large Glenn Beck-inspired Sept. 12 rally in Washington D.C. and led his audience to believe it was footage of the much smaller anti-health care change rally held Thursday.
Host Jon Stewart aired a clip from Hannity's interview with a legislator who was at last week's protest, pointing out that the footage of the rally begins with a sparse crowd milling under trees with golden leaves in fall, then seems to show a much bigger crowd standing under green trees.
Comparing Hannity's footage to images of the September protests Beck aired on his show, Stewart said "If I didn't know any better, I would think they just put two different days together and acted like they didn't."
Here's Hannity admitting his "mistake":
Here's the Daily Show's original report, followed by a clip of Fox News taking Palin down a peg:
The Feed is a blog on TV, media and modern life by St. Petersburg Times TV/media critic Eric Deggans. Possibly the most critical guy at the Times, he has served as music, media and TV critic at various times over 10 years.
E-mail Eric Deggans:
deggans@sptimes.com
Get updates from The Feed via Twitter
The Feed is a blog on TV, media and modern life by St. Petersburg Times TV/media critic Eric Deggans. Possibly the most critical guy at the Times, he has served as music, media and TV critic at various times over 10 years.
E-mail Eric Deggans:
Recent Comments