Reply #18: "Perceived" is a wiggle word. Be happy! [View All]

[geo]

Hi all,

This is actually a good sign. When journalists use wiggle words like "perceived" they are consciously acknowledging the distinction between perception and reality. This is nothing but good.

I've responded to a lot of media theory and p.r. posts in the last couple days. I spent a couple years editing and writing news for a CNN affiliated news radio station in L.A. and might be able to add some thought and clarity to what actually happens in a newsroom (on average).

I've noticed that main stream media is really begining to cycle election news into their newscasts. One thing I noticed as an editor (and one of the youngest they ever had at that station) is that if I really paid attention I could (at times) break an east coast story faster than mainstream media because most newsdesks are so completely reliant on other media outlets. Two quick examples: JFK Jr's plain goes down and I see it on the mediapage tape. The wall of TVs to my right don't say anything about it. I check the wires; nothing. As I am making a call to verify I see MSNBC break it. I verify it and it's broken in our market. A second example. Phil Hartman murder suicide: Reporters on the scene say there is some chatter that Phil Hartman is shot but nobody is confirming and it L.A. media wasn't getting anywhere fast. Even though we had a firm belief the story was correct we couldn't run it. I am at the end of my shift, and we are getting call after call from other media types asking if we have had any word (we had a cozy relationship with TV news, for the most part) and if memory serves CNN had even called asking if we had anything. So, being off the clock I jump on the computer and access tax assessor records (property profile) for the address in question. Sure enough Phil Hartman is the owner on title. We can now run with the fact a murder suicide happened at Phil Hartman's home, etc. Had I not performed this task off the clock the story would not have broken until later in the day.

A little lengthy, but I think you can see some of what drives coverage just in the little bit I have shared. Newsrooms are largely understaffed, have a keen sense of journalistic integrity, and no matter how badly one wants to break a story, there are certain drivers behind that effort. Main stream media may have its biases at times, and may offer less than stellar coverage, but that's what we get for allowing the airwaves to become increasingly monopolized by large corporations who see the news as the cost and the commercials as the product.

We should be happy they are covering the story, wiggle words and all. It is far less dismissive that what they could be saying. Not that I think the dismissive attitude was ethical either...

Hope that helps! :)

Warmly,

George