Benz There. Done That.

News Ate

Another “Big J” broadcast journalist is exiting an Austin news channel. Kevin Benz was at Time Warner Cable’s (TWC) News 8 from the beginning. In less than a year, he ascended from assistant news director to news director.

“Twelve years is a long time,” Benz says. “I am leaving a great company, a great TV station, and an even greater bunch of people. I am so proud to say I worked with them. Launching a TV station is not for the faint of heart but that's what we did in 1999 and the result is something I am most proud of.”

“I can’t say that it was my idea [leaving News 8], but the timing was right,” Benz told me. Benz’s departure was a mutual decision, sources say.

There was a meeting of “corporate brass” this morning [Monday, November 29, 2010] with Steve Paulus, TWC’s senior vice president of news of News 1 in New York City which now oversees News 8. Benz was not invited. Shortly after the meeting, Benz left. The staff was notified in an afternoon meeting.

Newsroom sources say Benz departure can be viewed as news philosophical differences going in opposite directions.

Benz showed class as the News 8 door closed.

“Early next year News 8 will change its name to YNN, [“Your News Now”]. It seems like the right time for me to turn over the leadership reins to someone else and as good a time as any to take on something new. I will rooting for the station from the stands now as it makes its transition,” Benz said. “I’m very comfortable with the outcome.”

Benz, of course, had made News 8 a go-to news medium in many Austin viewers’ minds as a local 24/7 news/weather/sports operation. It was the first of its kind in Austin, and Benz put his hard-core, “Big J” Journalism brand on it. Recognition followed.

“In a very short time News 8 won a National Murrow Award, two Sigma Delta Chi Awards for Journalistic Excellence, three National Walter Cronkite Awards for Excellence in Political Reporting, and was a Finalist for a DuPont - Columbia Award. Our democracy needs more stations like News 8, and journalism needs more dedicated people like those working there,” Benz says.

While the other broadcast news departments in Austin chose to cover so-called routine news events with a pool camera, Benz stood his ground, refusing to join. Thereby, News 8 photojournalists had a different take on local news events if for no other reason they shot their own video. Yes, it could have resulted in cost savings, but Benz wouldn’t have it.

News 8 also relies on the one-man-band approach to TV news—a reporter who shoots, writes, and edits content. Call it “Doing more with less” as I have, but at least one Austin broadcast station is moving in that direction. If you hear the phrase “multi-platform”, think one-man-band. Those “platforms” nowadays are many, including posting stories to the Internet and social media.

During the past year, News 8 has been without a general manager, and Benz had been acting GM as well as news director. Also, however, during the past year since the beginning of the oversight of News 1, Austin’s News 8 has been under scrutiny.

In the meantime, the news channel recently completed major upgrades to its facilities just north of the State Capitol, something Benz oversaw with pride. Benz insists that the upgrades are evidence that journalistic excellence will continue.

“News 8 matters,” Benz declares. “It matters to Central Texas and it matters to journalism and Time Warner Cable gets it. They understand the importance of doing relevant, responsible journalism that improves our community, and I honor them for that.”

Michael Pearson is the interim News Director.

For his part Benz says journalism is still a huge part of his life.

“As Chair-elect of RTDNA (The Radio, Television, Digital News Association) I am charged with leading the planning for the National Excellence in Journalism Convention next year. I also serve on the Board and do training for the Carole Kneeland Project for Responsible Journalism which is based here in Austin. Those projects will begin taking up significant amounts of time for me and I'm excited about them.” Benz says.

Benz says this is the third time that he has re-invented himself, and each re-invention has been better than the last.

The TV news business is like that. Change. Constant change or eventual change. That’s probably applicable to life in general.

© Jim McNabb, 2010

Some Want to Bust Me!

Scarborough Busted Now

Now, MSNBC’s Joe “Morning Joe” Scarborough is on a two-day suspension for making political contributions to Republican candidates in past years. Just like Keith Olbermann before him, the former newspaper man and congressman-turned-TV-morning show host will be back on the air Wednesday, November 24, 2010.

There was much comment at the time about whether Olbermann is a journalist, a commentator, a host or what? I even mused that maybe Mr. Olbermann should return to sports at ESPN.

Then, I remembered the words of the long-time and long-ago sports director at KTBC TV in the CBS days. Phil Miller weighed in on a newsroom debate one night say, “Sports IS news”. He was and is right. How many times has Mack Brown appeared on the front page of the Austin American-Statesman this fall? How many times, has the sports anchor appeared in the first news segment as will as during sports?

Sports reporters and anchors have been involved in the reporting of major news events, such as Charles Whitman’s fuselage from the UT Tower in 1966 or the Munich massacre at the 1972 Olympics reported by Jim McKay.

Most sports reporters and anchors receive the same Journalism training as those who focus on “hard” news. Both Olberman and Scarborough should have known better. As one writer to the newsmcnabb blog put it, “Rules are rules.”

Interestingly, several others, however, took Olbermann’s side. I assume that they would take Scarborough’s side too.

“WRONG, JIM.” Anonymous posted.

“As a US Citizen, Olbermann has every right to give what he wants to give to a political campaign, and without having to ask permission from his corporate overlords.

“Get off your journalistic high horse!”

And another anonymous using the same terminology agreed.

“Once again, Mr. McNabb, your double standard is perplexing,” wrote Anonymous #2. “ You - the self-proclaimed, self-appointed local "watchdog" of all things pure in journalism - apparently still consider yourself a journalist...and yet you have held events/fundraisers at your home for candidates (RE: "Blame Partisan Media," June 10, 2010). There's little difference between you and Olbermann, so get off the high horse. The real question is: Who watches the "watchdog"?”

Yes, I do still consider myself a journalist. I’ve often said, “Once a journalist, always a journalist,” but I am a retired journalist. I no longer work in day-to-day mainstream Journalism. I do teach at the university level on the adjunct faculty at St. Edward’s University, but I am teaching “Presentational Speech”, not journalism. There is a difference.

Further, Anonymous #2 knows that I have indeed worked in politics and participated in political fundraisers since my retirement because I said so in the interest of transparency. It is no secret.

I sometimes wonder if Anonymous must feel some heat from this journalism/media criticism column. Perhaps a good investigative piece might be to search local lists of political contributions for names of working journalists. Some don't use their legal names on the air or in bylines.

Finally, “Who watches the watchdog?” The answer is, you. You and Anonymous.

© Jim McNabb, 2010

Olberman, Leno, O’Reilly—Sadly, All The Same

Olbermann Responds

Keith Olbermann is no better than the people he has ridiculed on Fox, I say with disappointment. Yes, he should, indeed, qualify for his “Worst Persons” acknowledgement.

The BoldProgressives.org released a message tonight, Monday, November 08, 2010 from Olbermann. It answers all questions. He doesn’t get it, and perhaps he should return to sportscasting:

Statement To The Viewers Of Countdown

“I want to sincerely thank you for the honor of your extraordinary and ground-rattling support.

“Your efforts have been integral to the remedying of these recent events, and the results should remind us of the power of individuals spontaneously acting together to correct injustices great or small.

“I also wish to apologize to you viewers for having precipitated such anxiety and unnecessary drama. You should know that I mistakenly violated an inconsistently applied rule – which I previously knew nothing about -- that pertains to the process by which such political contributions are approved by NBC.

“Certainly this mistake merited a form of public acknowledgment and/or internal warning, and an on-air discussion about the merits of limitations on such campaign contributions by all employees of news organizations.

“Instead, after my representative was assured that no suspension was contemplated, I was suspended without a hearing, and learned of that suspension through the media.

“You should also know that I did not attempt to keep any of these political contributions secret; I knew they would be known to you and the rest of the public. [Astounding] I did not make them through a relative, friend, corporation, PAC, or any other intermediary, and I did not blame them on some kind of convenient 'mistake' by their recipients.

“When a website contacted NBC about one of the donations, I immediately volunteered that there were in fact three of them; and contrary to much of the subsequent reporting, I immediately volunteered to explain all this, on-air and off, in the fashion MSNBC desired.

“I genuinely look forward to rejoining you on Countdown on Tuesday, to begin the repayment of your latest display of support and loyalty - support and loyalty that is truly mutual.”

Mr. Olbermann doesn’t apologize for making the contributions. No. He says he “mistakenly violated an ‘inconsistently applied rule…’”

Know that I have been a fan of Countdown. Now, however, its host is admitting more or less that he’s the same as Jay Leno or David Letterman doing a monologue, not NEWS [Editor’s emphasis added] and commentary. Olbermann’s debate about authenticity, transparency, and veracity relies on the vagaries of MSNBC rules.

Sorry, Keith. It’s not about rules. It’s about ethics. It doesn’t matter if Olbermann made the contributions openly. He shouldn’t have made them in the first place.

© Jim McNabb, 2010

Ouch! That Smarts!

Olbermann Will Return

[Editor's Note: The follow is updated information included with details from the previous post.]

MSNBC’s highly rated host Keith Olbermann will return to his program Tuesday, November 9, 2010 with little more than a wrist slap for professional transgressions.

“After several days of deliberation and discussion, I have determined that suspending Keith through and including Monday night's program is an appropriate punishment for his violation of our policy,” said Phil Griffin, MSNBC president. “We look forward to having him back on the air Tuesday night.”

As you may have heard or read, Mr. Olbermann is suspended without pay from his job as host/anchor of “Countdown” on MSNBC indefinitely for making three $2,500 contributions to Democratic Party Congressional candidates during the last election cycle. What was he thinking and when did he stop thinking?

Well, that’s great, but did not Keith Olbermann at some time while earning his Communications Arts degree from Cornell ever take an ethics course? Did not some hoary professor rail against the mere appearance of partiality, political or otherwise? Did not some mentor along the way pull Olbermann aside telling him the dos and don’ts of journalism? Did not Mr. Olbermann have a policy manual placed in his hands at some broadcast outlet detailing unacceptable behavior unbecoming a journalist? Did he forget or did he think that none of this applied to him anymore?

At the local level I’m on record as a watchdog of sorts for journalists that approach the line of impartiality, even if they don’t cross the line. It’s unacceptable.

Regrettably, his colleague and friend Rachel Maddow defended him on the air Friday, November 05, 2010, comparing what happened to him to a long list of Fox News Channel “journalists” who have made contributions and even raised money for their favorite politicians. Ms. Maddow has a PhD, but it isn’t in journalism. I enjoy her show most of the time, and it has journalistic value. She’s wrong on this one. Her analysis does not approach Journalism with a big “J”.

My dad early on cautioned me to never compare myself to anyone else. Ms. Maddow and Mr. Olbermann would do well to not offer a defense of saying, Fox does it. Doesn’t that prove a double standard?

No.

I don’t care what Fox News Channel does. That’s Rupert Murdoch’s business. His rags (with the possible exception of the Wall Street Journal) that some call newspapers and Fox do not set a high standard. I doubt that Mr. Murdoch’s form of media was taught at Cornell either.

Did not Mr. Olbermann know that campaign contributions are a public record? Did he not think that his rather distinctive name might be noticed?

A former Austin news director and friend of mine and I used to have heady discussions about his decision not to vote in primary elections. His contention was that “someone” would see that he’d voted in a particular party primary. Therefore, he must be a member of that party.

My feeling was that being a journalist should not deprive me of the right to vote. I could and should vote in a primary. Just because I voted in a certain party’s primary shouldn’t label me as a member of that party.

We went round and round about it, and I don’t think that it was ever decided one way or another.

Making a political contributions to a candidate or candidates, on the other hand, is different. It’s commitment. It’s taking cold, hard cash out of your pocket and giving it to a campaign. That tarnishes your credibility. Well, it puts you on the same plain as Fox. Does Olbermann really want to be there?

Recently, Olbermann made a good decision. He decided to abandon one of the features in Countdown—“The Worst Persons in the World”. His intentions were noble. He felt that that portion of the program was less than civil, and he wanted to reset the standard.

Well, Mr. Olbermann has reset the standard alright. He, himself, might now qualify as one of his “Worst Persons in the World”.

Showing a lack of understanding of the profession of journalism, BoldProgressives.Org immediately kicked off a campaign to return Olbermann to the air as soon as possible, seeking signatures to a petition to be sent to MSNBC. By mid-day Sunday, November 7, 2010, BoldProgressives touted that more than 250,000 had signed up. Maybe MSNBC president Phil Griffin was impressed, or maybe he made the decision to return Olbermann to the anchor chair because of the important November Sweeps now in progress.

All of us deserve a little grace, even for egregious transgressions. So, I’m glad Olbermann is coming back. I really like his intellect (when he uses it) and wit, but I’ll be very interested to hear what he has to say when he returns.

In the mean time, this should be a lesson to all young people who want to call themselves professional journalists.

Nowadays, the line seems to be blurred between commentator/entertainer/host and journalist. There IS a difference, and I am happy that NBC/MSNBC was quick to recognize that Olbermann had crossed that line and took definitive action even at the outset of a sweeps month. Ms. Maddow might take note too.

© Jim McNabb, 2010

What Was He Thinking and When Did He Stop Thinking

Olbermann Busted

Did not Keith Olbermann at some time while earning his Communications Arts degree from Cornell ever take an ethics course? Did not some hoary professor rail against the mere appearance of partiality, political or otherwise? Did not some mentor along the way pull Olbermann aside telling him the dos and don’ts of journalism? Did not Mr. Olbermann have a policy manual placed in his hands at some broadcast outlet detailing unacceptable behavior unbecoming a journalist? Did he forget or did he think that none of this applied to him anymore?

At the local level I’m on record as a watchdog of sorts for journalists that approach the line of impartiality, even if they don’t cross the line. It’s unacceptable.

As you may have heard or read, Mr. Olbermann is suspended without pay from his job as host/anchor of “Countdown” on MSNBC indefinitely for making three $2,500 contributions to Democratic Party Congressional candidates during the last election cycle. What was he thinking and when did he stop thinking?

Regrettably, his colleague and friend Rachel Maddow defended him on the air Friday, November 05, 2010, comparing what happened to him to a long list of Fox News Channel “journalists” who have made contributions and even raised money for their favorite politicians. Ms. Maddow has a PhD, but it isn’t in journalism. I enjoy her show most of the time, and it has journalistic value. She’s wrong on this one. Her analysis does not approach Journalism with a big “J”.

My dad early on cautioned me to never compare myself to anyone else. Ms. Maddow and Mr. Olbermann would do well to not offer a defense of saying, Fox does it. Doesn’t that prove a double standard?

No.

I don’t care what Fox News Channel does. That’s Rupert Murdoch’s business. His rags (with the possible exception of the Wall Street Journal) that some call newspapers and Fox do not set a high standard. I doubt that Mr. Murdoch’s form of media was taught at Cornell either.

Did not Mr. Olbermann know that campaign contributions are a public record? Did he not think that his rather distinctive name might be noticed?

A former Austin news director and friend of mine and I used to have heady discussions about his decision not to vote in primary elections. His contention was that “someone” would see that he’d voted in a particular party primary. Therefore, he must be a member of that party.

My feeling was that being a journalist should not deprive me of the right to vote. I could and should vote in a primary. Just because I voted in a certain party’s primary shouldn’t label me as a member of that party.

We went round and round about it, and I don’t think that it was ever decided one way or another.

Making a political contributions to a candidate or candidates, on the other hand, is different. It’s commitment. It’s taking cold, hard cash out of your pocket and giving it to a campaign. That tarnishes your credibility. Well, it puts you on the same plain as Fox. Does Olbermann really want to be there?

Recently, Olbermann made a good decision. He decided to abandon one of the features in Countdown—“The Worst Persons in the World”. His intentions were noble. He felt that that portion of the program was less than civil, and he wanted to reset the standard.

Well, Mr. Olbermann has reset the standard alright. He, himself, might now qualify as one of his “Worst Persons in the World”.

I really like his intellect (when he uses it) and wit, but I’ll be very interested to hear what he has to say when he returns.

In the mean time, this should be a lesson to all young people who want to call themselves professional journalists.

Nowadays, the line seems to be blurred between commentator/entertainer/host and journalist. There IS a difference, and I am happy that NBC/MSNBC was quick to recognize that Olbermann had crossed that line and took definitive action even at the outset of a sweeps month. Ms. Maddow might take note too.

© Jim McNabb, 2010

And the Winner Is ...

So, Who Won on TV?

Now that the votes are in, it’s time to consider who did the best job of reporting the election. It must be said that since I only have four TVs, and I can’t watch all stations and some networks all at the same time. So, since KTBC TV (Fox) coverage is at 9 p.m. when things are just heating up in other parts of the nation, KTBC was left out. I’m sure they did a fine job.

Locally, I’m going to give my nod to KXAN TV (NBC) despite some hiccups and one ill-advised decision. (Yeah, I know that some will sneer saying he’s just picking them because he worked there. Remember, I worked, er, everywhere, and I have friends at all stations.) Part of the reason that I picked KXAN is NBC. NBC provided the local station with ample windows for reporting results. KXAN promised to be everywhere in their promos, and they seemed to be everywhere, using several forms of technology throughout the evening reporting local and state election results. KEYE TV (CBS) stuck to programming until its 10 O’clock.

The 6 O’clock dry run with Robert Hadlock and Leslie Cook had a highlight and a low light. The high light was taking advantage of a live report via broadband from Elise Hu of the non-for-profit web portal Texas Tribune. Hu was formerly the capitol reporter for KVUE TV (ABC). She’s a polished pro providing depth to the coverage. The Texas Tribune makes its content available to all at no charge, but this is the first time I’ve seen their content used in broadcast media. Hu identified herself with the Trib, but then did a custom KXAN tag or “sig out” at the end. I generally don’t like broadband coverage except during spot news coverage, but the report from the Trib worked well.

The 6 O’clock low light was an awkward loss of a live shot. Anchor Robert Hadlock read the intro to pitch to Shannon Wolfson at the Bill White election night party in Houston, and poor Mr. Hadlock was left with his face hanging out. Hadlock, also a pro, handled it well and moved on. They were successful in going to the Houston later in the broadcast. Here’s a producer’s rule: Have the talent talking on camera doing a microphone check well before you go to the shot. That way, if there is a problem, the producer can tell the anchor to skip that page, and no one is the wiser.

True, live shots go down unexpectedly, but KXAN has a long, long history of shooting itself in the technical foot. These technical problems are sometimes due to today’s TV production automation, but we’re talking about technical problems over the decades long before today’s automation.

Throughout the evening, KXAN seemed to have more cut-ins and more election reports that the competitors. I didn’t count them or time them. KXAN sometimes would scroll through the races so fast, it was close to impossible to read them. Maybe it was just me trying to watch four TVs at once.

One other thing KXAN did was a live report from their web producer telling what viewers were saying about the election. She handled it well.

It was really hard to decide whether KXAN was better than KVUE because of KXAN’s “issues”. It’s all rather subjective anyway. Yes, KXAN had flaws, but they took some chances. Some worked, some didn’t. I thought about calling it a tie, but I decided that was the “chicken” way out.

The 10 O’clock show—always hectic on election nights—was smooth on KXAN compared to the 6 O’clock, but the producers made one bad decision. They took the live victory speech from Rick Perry off the top instead of giving election results. KEYE-TV (CBS) did the same.

This is where KVUE and KEYE made the right choice. KVUE quickly ran through the “numbers”, giving the audience what it really wants first before going to the governor. "KEYE did the governor’s numbers first, followed by a liveshot from Jason Wheeler," says Suzanne Black, KEYE news director. "We then went back to Ron and Judy who pitched to the Governor’s speech." There is no reason to let the governor run the TV station. Stations can always record the speech from the beginning or join it in progress. The users/viewers/consumers/audience wants to know all of the election results. So, stations should show them off the top of the show with very rare exceptions.

As usual, KVUE’s production anchored by Terri Gruca and Tyler Seiswerda was clean and professional. There were no obvious distractions, although I’m sure that there was chaos behind the scenes. There always is chaos on election night.

KEYE’s Judy Maggio and Ron Oliviera, Austin’s most experienced anchors, did an admirable job with their available resources.

Nationally, as I said, NBC seemed to have the best coverage going “wall-to-wall” before anyone else. ABC started up its coverage a little later. NBC had superior sets and graphics. Those same graphics and reporter resources were utilized by MSNBC—a huge advantage to the cable channel. MSNBC was wall-to-wall all evening long, as was CNN and Fox. MSNBC was the most nimble, interrupting interviews at times to “call” another contest. They had constant results. CNN’s picture was so cluttered, one really needed a 60-inch HD flat screen to read it all. I don’t.

It was MSNBC that took the entire Rand Paul victory speech live. They do that kind of thing often.

Yeah, some people may not like the MSNBC anchors and analysts. Yeah, they can be considered “liberal”, but they also can be considered good journalists and reporters when they’re not giving commentary. So, MSNBC is my choice for best coverage at the national level.

The Washington Post is the hands-down winner for timely alerts calling winners in races nationwide. I thought my phone was going to melt down. It did need a re-charge.

We all do.

© Jim McNabb, 2010