My attempted followup with KSTP-TV reporter Jo Ann Bemoras
September 28th, 2006Back about the time when the KSTP-TV story which concerning the Maplewood City Council aired, I became more and more curious about the way TV news is done. I sent the following note to the reporter of that story (after having exchanged emails once before on the topic).
It went unanswered. But given that the Minnesota News Council has upheld a complaint against that very report, I thought I would post that email here, as I still have some of the same wonderings. I thought it was a nice letter. Follow the link to read it.
Hello Mrs. Bemoras,
You were kind enough to respond to an email I sent a few weeks ago where I asked about the folks you interviewed while covering the circus-like Maplewood City Council drama. I noted that one of the folks you interviewed was a gentleman I was familiar with because of my occasional interest in the story.
Since your story, I’ve been really interested in something. More so, since the mayor of Maplewood left a couple of comments on my blog.
But first, let me be really plain that what I’d like to ask has nothing to do with you in particular. I’m wondering about TV news; a world I know absolutely nothing about.
Since your story, every time I’m watching the TV news I have a suspicion that I may not be hearing a very balanced report. NOT because of the oft heard “the media is left wing” idea, but because I imagine myself being in your shoes in that story. I imagine hearing of or being assigned to this weird political story (perhaps based on a tip), going there not really knowing many details or people, and coming back with footage of people looking silly in the administration of their offices and footage of people complaining. The footage of people complaining was most readily available since those who want to complain want to complain.
Those things together make an interesting story. And that’s the end.
But recently one of the council members published a letter to the editor which pretty severely challenged your story, saying:
On July 24, KSTP Channel 5 aired a news story that was false. A Maplewood Planning Commission member was interviewed and stated that city projects are not getting done. The report referenced Gladstone as “stalled” and in “limbo.” On July 10, the “split” council voted 5-0 to start Phase1 of the Gladstone project. On July 17, city staff submitted a $2.5 million grant request to the Met Council for Gladstone. On July 20, a developer announced a proposal to build a 150+ unit Class A development at the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site with $0 public financing. All of this activity occurred in just 10 days.
So I read these things and I think that you didn’t include these things because you simply didn’t know them. And in my mental picture of how it works, how could you?
What’s plaguing me is that I shouldn’t really expect any story to be any more than what it was. How could it be? Quick turnaround, constantly varied topics, and the natural desire to put that which is interesting on the air.
So I guess my question is: am I totally off the mark? Am I too cynical? Or are you chuckling to yourself thinking “welcome to the world, Ken?”
Of course, you needn’t reply, but if you had something to say, I’d love to hear it.
I won’t email you about this again! :)
Thanks and best,
Ken Martin Saint Paul’s luxurious East Side
P. S. I normally will not share details from a response to private email like this in public (like on my blog), but if you feel like you have something to offer or that you’d like to share on the topic, please note if I can or should post your comments.
What do you think about the story in particular or TV news in general?
October 9th, 2006 at 8:26 am
I think you’re figuring it out, Ken. I think all those years of schooling teach us that a “report” should be a certain way. It should be thorough, provide background information and history, opposing views, etc. But news reports usually are not like a term paper or a text book. They’re a brief picture of something that reporter saw and heard on that day. There isn’t much effort to provide background and the WHOLE story, because there isn’t time, and the reporter maybe didn’t know a darn thing about the topic going in. So all he or she has for us is the sound bites.
It’s scary how many mistakes I notice in the paper or on TV when the story is about a topic I have particular knowledge of. If that’s the case, then when I read a story about a topic I know nothing about, how can I trust that story to be accurate? But I tend to assume it is, because I don’t know any different.