Discussion for article #229038
Lady: Media Relations 101 suggests that you should. Just. Shut. Up.
4 Likes
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
jw1
6 Likes
So to report on the riot he went to a different get together that just happened to be nearby, instead of going to the actual riot? Sounds a bit like reporting on a bar fight by going to the coffee shop next store.
3 Likes
AA guidelines.
I think he made her point.
Something about being in a hole and stopping digging comes to mind.
When youâre in a hole, why not keep digging?
The moment she arrived at the idea of grabbing this young man or his microphone, she lost the war for whatever moral authority she was claiming to protect.
Clearly this was a panic driven decision; and while pitiably understandable, it was completely inappropriate.
1 Like
At least she doesnât think much of âFox-news style âreportersââ.
3 Likes
She said that he was assigned that spot. If he went where he wasnât assigned would you still be on his ass or for him?
"Parties around Keene State College, which abuts the festival area, devolved into riots Saturday night that led to destruction of property and arrests. "
He was assigned that spot inside the Pumpkin Festival to cover the Pumpkin Festival, instead he wanted to talk about the riot going on over at the nearby college. If he wanted to cover the riot going on outside the Festival, he should have left the Festival and gone out to where the riot was taking place. Given that he wasnât a prisoner I fail to see why the organizers would object to his leaving the Festival to go else where in order to cover a riot taking place at a nearby location. I can, however, see how they might be concerned that his reporting on the riot from their Festival might lead to people getting the mistaken impression that the riot was taking place at their Festival instead of at a college near their Festival and I can see why they would want to avoid giving that impression. That said they probably could have handled the situation better.
The organizer had a bit of confrontation in her and likely projected that. She also was in denial that it was a pretty damn big riot and it was a part of the over-sized festival that she organized. Her lack of authority and ability to plan were prime causes of the mayhem. That and a bunch of college kids likely highly intoxicated, which she should have expected, and she had an out of control, under planned for situation. She obviously didnât want that reported but did she honestly think that it wasnât going to be noticed?
Trying to blame the messenger did her no favors either. She called him a faux news styled reporter which I guess makes her a braindead teabagger, just to be fair.
How does it matter where he reported from. His physical location only had a few people around, the story was being broadcasted and if he wouldâve been in a cave, the story was getting out all the same? Does a war reporter go right into the heart of the battle or do they stay a safe distance away?
And how could he avoid it really, should he have played stupid and pretended that it wasnât happening? He obviously was close enough to witness what was going on.
You really donât believe that she wouldâve objected when she was plainly threatening, verbally and physically objecting and attempting to minimalize? If Ruth Sterling had her way, there wouldâve been no reporting and just a big rah rah for her event.
Whatever her problem was, she did handle it terribly and she became part of the problem. The festival could use a new organizer and some more security, that is clear.
And per the story, the public access reporter, Jared Goodell, was reading a statement put out by the college President during the live broadcast and Ruth Sterling tried several times to take the mic out of his hand. So he was just doing what he was asked to do during a live event and not attempting to create some false hysteria as Ruth Sterling claimed. She just wanted him gone and silenced.
[quote=âLeftflank, post:14, topic:11889â]
How does it matter where he reported from.
[/quote] It matters if it misleads people into thinking that the rioting is taking place at the location he is reporting from and from the perspective of those organizing the event he was at it matters if it leads people to think it is their event that is spiraling out of control as opposed to events at a nearby college.
[quote]You really donât believe that she wouldâve objected when she was plainly threatening, verbally and physically objecting and attempting to minimalize?"[/quote] Again, on what possible grounds could she object to him leaving the event she is organizing and going somewhere else to report on a story taking place somewhere else?
[quote]
And per the story, the public access reporter, Jared Goodell, was reading a statement put out by the college President during the live broadcast and Ruth Sterling tried several times to take the mic out of his hand. So he was just doing what he was asked to do during a live event and not attempting to create some false hysteria as Ruth Sterling claimed. She just wanted him gone and silenced.
[/quote]What does doing what the college president asked for have to do with anything given he was at an event not put on by the college? The fact that you seem to think that the college where the rioting took place and the Festival in this article, which was put on by the city, have something to do with each other besides taking place in the same geographic area, just seems to justify the event organizers concerns that his reporting on the riot from their event would lead to people mistakenly believing the two are tied together.
She definitely crossed a line by touching him and action needs to be taken on that end, but if peoples inability to grasp that the event he was reporting from isnât the event where the rioting was taking place is anything to go by, his actions seem to have done more to confuse than enlighten. So, Iâm not quite willing to laud him as the martyr for free press journalism he seems to be trying to make himself out to be.
edit:My original comment wasnât meant as a defense of her actions, she went too far when she touched him, but as a critique on his actions. It is possible to think both parties were not in the right. The fact that he was practicing bad journalism doesnât justify her grabbing him, but the fact that she grabbed him also doesnât justify the fact that he was practicing bad journalism and reporting on events taking place at a different location such that you create a false association between those events and the event where you are actually located is bad journalism.
OK then weâll have to agree to disagree. The guy was asked to report and he did. The organizer, Ruth Sterling, turned that reporting into a much bigger deal and made a scene and a fool out of herself I think. Did she quash the report or enhance it, are we talking about it or was it just some local pumpkin festival?
The nearby college event totally got out of control and the college president was right to warn the festival goers considering the proximity. Again, would playing stupid have been a better option?
On what grounds did Ruth Sterling act on attempting to pull the mic out of the guyâs hand? She obviously wasnât concerned with what was proper.
I grasp the two different locations but you wonât acknowledge that one endangered the other and surely one became part of the other to some degree.
Ever seen a fist fight? People flock to watch and see the action, do you think this riot wasnât noticed by the festival goers. Hell, even festivals get a little crazy.
And me nor anyone Iâve seen is lauding the reporter, but I am defending his right to report live as events occurred. Like an earthquake say. You OTOH seem to be against the guy because you just are. If that lady tried to snag something out of your hand, you wouldnât likely react well either. I know I wouldnât.
Your bad journalism is others live reporting and he didnât say that the two locations were associated, you make that leap. You are basically saying that the festival goers were too stupid to not realize that the craziness was happening at the college and not where they were. If people are that dumb, then what is anyone going to do? Good thing the reporter didnât mention Ebola huh, there wouldâve been widespread panic.
Look Iâm not going to defend the way she handled it, Iâve already said I think she did a bad job handling the situation and went too far when she actually laid hands on him. That said I do think if they had just left it at asking him to not use their event as the backdrop for reporting on an unrelated riot I wouldnât have had a problem with that and I still think using their event to report on an unrelated riot was bad form on his part.
Because, Iâve actually been to the locations in question and realize the distances involved. Given where the police established their perimeter and where the Festival was occurring and where the college is Iâm not buying that one endangered the other. They are close, but not what one could describe as in view of each other. Even if one wants to talk about the distance to the police perimeter, which as I understand it was about two blocks from the college, as opposed to the college itself we are still looking at it being a couple of blocks from where the festival he was reporting from was taking place.
[quote=âLeftflank, post:16, topic:11889â]
Your bad journalism is others live reporting and he didnât say that the two locations were associated, you make that leap. You are basically saying that the festival goers were too stupid to not realize that the craziness was happening at the college and not where they were.
[/quote]He isnât reporting to people at the festival though, he is reporting to the audience watching his program. If Iâm having an event at one end of a park and some people at the other side of the park decide to have a Klan rally and a reporter uses my event as the back drop for reporting on the Klan rally that is associating my event with the Klan rally despite the two being unrelated, and it is reasonable for me to object to that reporting on the grounds of the false impression it could give to people who arenât there. Replace Klan rally with riot and you basically have what is going on here, at least in my view.
I have no problem with him reporting live on events as the occur, Iâm saying that if he wants to report live he should report live from the event he is reporting on not live from some event near what he is reporting on or at the very least go somewhere where there is no event so you arenât risking conflating two unrelated events.
But, as you said I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
I do, because we do and to me your logic is becoming circular.