Who Decides What’s News? Saturday, Jul 14 2007

It was two years ago on August 7 that we learned of Peter Jenning’s death. For me, it was a major blow (but not as big as the one that would hit that coming December). This man, journalism public figure, model, was one of my news reporter ideals. His cutting edge work throughout the decades put the issues in front of us and made us think about what they meant. Then he allowed us to put the pieces together for ourselves. He covered the news in the remote areas of the world. He covered the schisms of our social fabric and the tragedies compounded by tragedies.

Jennings was the ABC World News Tonight anchor. But on his death, he was remembered by the media, on rivals CNN, CBS, in Newsweek, and on the BBC, to name a few.

Hearing of his death and short-lived illness on the night of August 7, that I was struck motionless. As the special announcement played out the milestones of the icon’s life, the reasons why it was such a blow became increasingly apparent. It was reporters like Jennings who served as the models of my inquisitiveness, stabs at journalistic integrity, and an insistence on looking at the world and the meaningful issues rather than the tried and trite.

The final blow was learning that Jennings was born on July 29. No wonder! I thought as the pieces fell together. No wonder there are so many similarities, so many common roads and endeavors, the same fire.

So in reviewing Jenning’s life, and the other hallmarks who are, or were, models for me, the question begs asking. In media, who is it who decides what the news is? Is it the Managing Editor, the publisher, the advertisers, or the public? Who decides what is newsworthy and how long is it newsworthy?

In asking these questions, the events surrounding the Paris Hilton detention become striking. The fallout of poor little rich girl having to stay in that horrid jail with all of those jail people. Not able to use nail polish remover. Having to endure a constantly buring overhead light and an unsheathed toilet. House arrest in her 4,000 square foot house would have been much more civilized. But where would the time for contrition and genuine remorse have emerged?

For two weeks, we endured the Paris Hilton comedy as she used the legal system to do whatever she wanted, all the way up to determining that the last court hearing should be done via teleconference. She even doctored up her release after serving a scant two and a half days in jail. And all of this was news — matters of importance to the general public for the sake of their betterment and social welfare.

But the pivotal question looms before us as the Paris falling action subsides. Delgadillo, his governance, and his family have suffered some interesing public revelation while sweet Paris (who he prosecuted to the fullest for serving her full time) sat quietly in her confines. Who determines what is news and how long is it newsworthy?

Perhaps the answer to the questions were answered on June 26 during the Los Angeles County Supervisors Hearing. The area behind (and also in front of) the plexiglass was filled to overflowing with all manner of media. One of the reasons for their presence was the Supervisors’ deliberations concerning closure of the King-Drew Hospital. Another had to do with Sheriff Baca’s handling of the Paris Hilton incarceration.

Cameras were poised. Microphones were wrapped and held to just the right position. Notepads and pens were held at the ready and hasty notes were made about the proceedings. Sheriff Baca entered the auditorium and cameras panned then returned to the focus on the Supervisors and their witnesses.

After a time of sitting in the auditorium, The Sheriff left the room. The media quietly filed out behind him as public testimony regarding the closure of King-Drew Hospital was being offered. A ripple of amazement was quieted in short order as Supervisor Yaroslavsky announced, “Now you see who ranks as far as news coverage. Paris Hilton is being released from jail and the media need to cover that.” The audience was assured that there would be a one or two minute break while the media filed out and the hearings could then resume.

NOTE: Baca’s stress and strain showed through his need to acknowledge each and every person he passed as he made his way to a seat in the auditorium. His condition became acutely obvious as I left the Hall. I doubt that he recognized or even remembered me from the past, yet he had gracious acknowledgements for me. His voice was strained. His eyes seemed to look at the person but they merely saw an image before him as the two attendants ushered him back into the auditorium. He seemed like a person going before a firing squad.

What is newsworthy? Who determines what captures the intellect and attention of the public? That moment in the Board of Supervisors auditorium seemed to answer the questions. The most important issue of the day was the poor little rich girl who gets whatever she wants. The general public’s consciousness and urging toward critical thinking about meaningful issues that affect local as well as global welfare gave sway to whether Paris Hilton lived in a jail cell or walked out of a detention facility.

I look forward to those who follow in Jennings’ footsteps. I crave the days of consuming the news for the value of the information it provides and its informativeness. I yearn for the questions the media will force me to ask and spur me to research. Meanwhile, we have a duty to ourselves and our information driven needs to demand that we receive true news that is full of the information. And we also need to demand that the answers not be spoon fed to us — as though media has the right opinion and is telling us what to think. We need to demand that the facts be laid out in a clear and unbiased manner and allow us to draw our own conclusions.

Who makes the decisions? Those who cause the news wires to survive with our consuming dollars because we who watch the news also drive what is considered “news.”

Leave a Response »

 

Shakespearean Plays Wednesday, Jul 11 2007

Any of you enjoy The Theatre? I know I do. Shakespeare is touted as the master. Yes, he captures the attention and holds it. But as I moved through seeing or reading his plays, whether drama, comedy, or tragedy, there is one thing they all have in common. It’s the same story line. There is the villain (what good story doesn’t have someone to hate?). There is the hero and the heroine who get totally confused and blomoxed by the villain’s machinations. There are the hapless and the stalwart colleagues who move the hero/heroine pawns along on their path to the outcome. And the audience becomes rapt in the horridness of the villain but ever clinging to (usually) him to see what will happen next, how he will wrap the thread of intrigue even tighter about the H&H’s necks.

After a while, it becomes obvious that all of the characters are the puppets of the villain. Even the audience gets threaded into the fabric of the play because they simply cannot tear themselves away. They stay riveted to their seats. They cringe with ire; they hold their breath with anticipation. No matter what, they keep watching and urge others to watch with them. The audience grows.

We’re approaching Fall recruiting conference time. There are some venues that will do what they can to draw attendees based on the high quality information and presenters they will have at their venue. They boast of the great connections you’ll be able to make by coming to their conference and expo.

There are other venues that have been attempting the Shakespearean approach to attracting attendees with a touch of the traditional thrown in for good measure so that the tactic doesn’t blare like a police interrogation room lamp. There’s the ill informed who spouts off all of the time on every subject and rankles the sensibilities of everyone who passes by the name. How they would love to avoid this person. But like the villain in the plays, the person cannot be ignored. There’s just one more look at what they’ve said just to see, perhaps, if they’ve said something that actually makes sense or whether they’ve been consistent and ethical in their stance. There’s the desire to see whether something is said that is not self-effacing in some way.

This latter tactic works. Who says we have to offer quality anything when there’s this Shakespearean play running in the background all of the time. It draws good site traffic. And when conference time comes along, it’s worth it to attend just to see whether all of the players are there and what sort of drama they’ll provide during conference — live and in person.

The trouble is, these are such cheap shots that they should be seen for what they are by the average anyone. The trouble is, they are seen for what they are, even if it is a subconscious recognition. But the purported minor characters are there to spur the action and draw the audience back into the machinations of the play. The arguments are fueled by the ragings and bombastic logic spouted by the minor characters (don’t let their positions fool you; they’re in no way minor characters). And there’s just enough logic that you nod your head and say “Yes, that’s right,” as the conversations and arguments evolve.

These dramas happen in many milleu — the family, workplace, clubs and organizations, online communities. Good leadership will nip it in the bud lest the bile overflows and poisons the environment, turning one upon the other where there could be cooperation and growth. Good leadership will let everyone in on the fact that it’s simply pretend play. Good leadership will not savor the growth and the price that’s paid for it. Strong leadership takes subsuming other things that we think are important in deference to the health of the whole.

Step back for a moment. Ask yourself why are these conversations and arguments happening? If they’re running against the grain of what the site rules discourage, why do these things occur? And if it’s the same, or nearly, characters in nearly every situation, why are they allowed this continuous role? Someone is gaining a tremendous benefit from these dramatizations. And in that case, check the backs of your hands, top of your head, and so on. There may be some strings attached to them. In fact, you just may be one of the puppet characters being manipulated by the play’s villain.

Need some scissors?

Leave a Response »

 

Who Moved My Blog? Sunday, Jul 1 2007

So there I was, racing about doing this and doing that, striving to meet this deadline and that, overcoming what appeared to be insurmountable obstacles and hardships — and doing it! — and all other manner of super-human accomplishments. And then, just as when you’re running at beyond record-breaking speed and trip and fall, I came to a sudden halt. It was like having all the wind sucked out of you. It was like hitting a brick wall. It was like trying to run through a metal restraining wire in the middle of the night. You go nowhere but bend over in half from the abruptness of the stop.

The last time I was at The Desk of Yvonne LaRose, was on May 30 and I’d posted something to do with changes. Then Paris Hilton started with her spoiled brat, priviledged child shenanigans. The ultimate was learning that the very forward-thinking matter of having a court hearing via teleconference was Paris’ idea and not that of the court. It was time to express the outrage at her audacity. Oops! That blog post could not be made. Well, it must be that the hussy, Paris, moved my blog. Hmmmph! How dare she?!? I’ll just give her a piece of my mind, that’s what I’ll do. That is, that’s what I’ll do after I find my blog.

Well, since that date in early June, I’ve attended to the business matters for which I was being held accountable, done my webinar, completed the finishing touches on the wrap-up, thanked numerous people, followed up on pending messages, addressed the County Board of Supervisors regarding the conditions at Harbor General Hospital, and sent inquiries to several places about where I might find my blog.

In response to one inquiry sent to Jobster’s support desk, I received a response saying if there was any further information they could provide, I could feel free to get in touch. There was no answer to the question about the location of the blog. I searched the Recruiting.com website for a name of some human to contact about blogs or a phone number or email to use to make an inquiry. None could be found. I did the same with the Jobster site since Jobster took over Recruiting.com. I had the same results with searching the Jobster site.

It must be that I’m not very good at what I do — research, stealth searches for elusive and arcane information that will unlock the truths of the generations. At least, that’s how this situation feels.

I was warned back in mid-April (I think), that the Recruiting.com subdomain blogs were not going to be supported any more and that I needed to start moving my blog. The message was acknowledged with a response asking for reminders when time was running out and speculating on when the cut-off date would be. There was no response. There were no reminders. But when I made that last post, there was a notice splayed across the entire face of the template. It said something about the upgrades that were being made for the sake of the blogging satisfaction of the constituents. It went on to talk about the servers were going to be moved. Then it instructed that those whose blog was being hosted should use a CNAME tag to redirect the URL but if the blog was a subdomain, the blogger need do nothing. Yes, I’m smart. I sent a note to Support asking what that message meant. I acknowledged that I was a subdomain and asked if I still needed to do the CNAME tag and redirect. If so, I said I needed instructions on how to do that. There was no response.

Could it be that brat Paris posted that warning message just to throw me off guard? Stinker! She’s probably hiding my blog until she can con me out of several million dollars and my undying admiration for her whatever. Nope. She’s not getting it. But in the meantime, there were posts that people were searching for. There were posts that brought readers to the blog from the U.N. There was information that university professors pointed to and recommended their classes consider. There was content that related to some of the business that I needed to complete. There were guest posts that were really outstanding.

This isn’t the first time I’ve had content get zapped. So the effect wasn’t like having polar ice water sprayed in your face in sub-thermal temperatures, making it feel as though you’ve got microscopic pins striking like ouzi bullets. This is definitely not the first time I’ve needed to make a determination about rebuilding and then doing so (what a waste of time moving backward is!). But I’d really like to move forward and stop this foolishness.

What am I going to do? I’ve already taken the second step. The Pundit is here. It will have some of the content from The Desk of Yvonne LaRose. Other parts will pobably be put on my other two blogs. The career and coaching posts will go to The Desk. Case studies, reviews, and maybe things that relate to ethics will go to The Consultant’s Desk. Or maybe things relating to ethics, management, communication, leadership, and the many other issues discussed on The Desk of Yvonne LaRose will come to The Pundit. Or maybe I’ll just put all of that stuff into a book and profit off my laboring and love (such drama!).

Yes, I still know how to laugh at Life’s situations and at myself.

Welcome to The Pundit. We’ll see how the fate of the content from The Desk of Yvonne LaRose evolves. Meanwhile, this is where my “fair comment” house has moved. Enjoy and talk back.

One Response »