I'm not even remotely pretending to have all the answers on this, but I read something this weekend that put the difference between older, broadcast media and the digital/customized media into sharp relief. (I'm going to able a bit on this one, but I promise I'll get there eventually.)

Lieutenant Vernon Hale is the press officer for the Dallas Police Department. We and all of the other "approved" media outlets in town get regular emails from him with updates on major crimes, investigations and DPD business. They're generally no-nonsense and to the point, but manage to feel very authentic and genuine, occasionally betraying a bit of annoyance with the press. I often wonder that we wouldn't sometimes be better informed with verbatim copy-pastes from these emails.

I won't call it outright heartwarming, but I will say that this communication from Lt. Hale on Friday about the accidental death of Victor Lozada in the Clinton motorcade gave me a warm vibe about being part of the press:

"I simply wanted to THANK each and every one of the media outlets today. You all showed a great deal of patience at the beginning of the tragic event. I have watched all of the local footage and you all treated Officer Lozada and his family with a great deal of respect. The stories will make us all proud to be Dallas Police officers and friends of Victor. I hope that we have provided all of the information you need and want. I hope to have a quiet weekend, as I finally leave this office, but if you all need anything within reason, do not hesitate to contact me."

Nice. It was a horrible situation, one that could have lent itself to all kinds of early speculation and rumormongering, and everyone handled it as well as possible.

I didn't feel the same when I got this on Saturday:

"...Apparently, reporters have decided to knock on the door of the Lozada family. The family is still attempting to assemble out of town members and get organized. So, once again I ask that the family be left alone until they are ready. This was obviously a significant loss for the wife and children and they are not prepared to speak at this time. We will likely have a statement from the family on Monday. The time and place have not been decided. The family will have a spokesperson speak on their behalf. As details become available media will be notified."

Now I know that this isn't anything new. But it still galls me. It might not have years ago, because everyone in the auld media, myself included, knows that you have to go get the big scoop, cover the big tragedy, etc.

But over the last couple years, my mindset has changed. Once we conceived of the Pegasus News plan, I've often elevator-speeched it by saying: "The lost dog in your neighborhood matters more to you than the triple homicide on the other side of town." In other words, mundane news that really effects your life is more relevant, if less titillating, than the Big Local Story.

So I, at least, have started measuring news value by its relevance to people's daily lives. That's why I get much more upset when we have a neighborhood without fresh stories or miss out on a concert listing than that we don't have someone on the ground at the manufactured media opportunity du jour.

That's why I am outraged that anyone would knock on the door of this family at this time. How the news of the particulars of their suffering is germane to anyone but the keeper of a ratings book is beyond me. How that will help other locals or improve the state of our democracy is too. So, to my mind, it's far worse than the invasiveness of the report that got Rebecca Aguilar suspended from Fox4. We know the family is grieving, and in this day and age, if they wanted to honor their patriarch by speaking to the press, they could surely find a way to reach someone. Or, they could post to a blog or a MySpace page. But there's no good I can see in knocking on their door.

I certainly watch other media outlets to see what we're missing. (We're still nowhere near being comprehensive, although I hope we get a little closer most days.) Increasingly I see reporting on day six of stories to say that "there's no new developments." Such a waste, when so much goes unreported and unnoticed.

I'm not saying our friends in the traditional media are bad -- they're doing what they've been trained to do: report a finite number of stories such that each will be of interest to the greatest number of people. And I'm sure there was no other new angle on this story by Saturday.

I hope that in a few years, as television and the Interwebs become less distinguishable, that this mode of least-common-denominator reporting will be outdated.

Comments

Scott Doyle Verified

Keep doing what you're doing, Miko. Methinks you're on the right track.

In other words, mundane news that really effects your life is more relevant, if less titillating, than the Big Local Story.

Fact is that relevance isn't always a priority. In a battle of interesting vs. relevant, I'm afraid interesting wins most days. For those of us who hold personal-relevance pretty high in our newsin', you're a godsend. Methinks your troubles lie more with the people being reported to than anything - until they prioritize relevance, you're not going to reach them.

For instance, I would be absolutely giddy if American Idol ratings swiftly plummeted and the show was never aired on television again. Unlikely to happen, considering (for whatever reason) people love the drama of rejection coupled with rags-to-riches success. I don't care one bit who wins that damn competition (unless it's me or someone I know), but ~10% of Americans watched the season finale last year. It absolutely kills me on the inside.

Gotta play the hand you're dealt, Miko! Best of luck!

7 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Rawlins Gilliland Verified

I would eat out of dumpsters behind (bad) restaurants before I would be a blood hound journalist in any media.

The ONLY excuse for this kind of trash behavior is 'it's the new norm'; amoral diminished definitions by which society measures 'character'. (Oh yes; and desperate people reporting to vampire/leach bosses who cannot afford to quit.)

Once you have violated a private person's inner sanctum of public agony, you've lost more than you'll ever be able to gain.

This media/press violation you allude to is an ultimate expression of a distant cousin tangent I touched upon in the commentary you linked to last week... I.E. the gratuitous replayed 911 tapes of recorded horror aired over and over again, (like in Carter Albrecht's tragic death), etc. Meaning someone's death aired publicly..., heard as someone curl's their hair or drives to a meeting. The diminished boundaries beyond which crossing becomes no small part of the residue survivors' suffering, until it is painfully integral to the accident or 'crime' itself.

7 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Nathan Stull Verified

This is one of the reasons I stopped being a reporter for traditional print newspapers. It was my job to be the scumbag trying to get a quote from the family who just underwent a loss. It was my job to photogragh wrecks and disasters that resulted in personal loss as soon as I heard them on the police scanner.

I was torn on doing what my editor told me to do and what felt right to me. I eventually left the news business to avoid an ulcer.

7 months, 2 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Rawlins Gilliland Verified

(Crowd clapping for Nathan Stull)

7 months, 2 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )