Kudos to WROC For In-Depth Reporting on City Assault

[dampier]

Substantial thumbs-up to WROC-TV news for being the lead on covering a story that, based on the allegations alone, would seem to warrant considerably more press attention than it has gotten from its television news competitors.

An anti-gay bias crime in early June with everything you'd want in a good news story managed to get substantial attention from only one TV news outlet - Channel 8:

- Two incidents involving an attack on city residents, including two US Marines
- A slow police response
- At least one officer who allegedly spent his time at the incident making his own anti-gay slurs
- Police officers who never bothered to even take down the names of suspects who were readily identified by victims
- Three of the four VICTIMS were arrested and charged with crimes while those who committed assault were let go
- At least one victim alleged she was assaulted by an officer
- A major Internal Affairs investigation
- A break in the case last night which has led police to identify suspects

Sounds like something to spend some time on (perhaps cutting back a tad on silly stories about a minor fracas at the Liberty Pole involving school kids, an RTS bus and a wood chipper -- thanks WHAM for getting that wood chipper angle! - or the iTeam followup on the Fairport financial guy who may be too nuts to stand trial), but not if you were watching 10 or 13. Mayor Duffy, or at least someone on his staff, watches Channel 8, because he learned of this mess from WROC and he has publicly praised their coverage.

WROC gets a lot of criticism in here, but their news team certainly deserves praise for remembering what news is, and being willing to cover stories that impact on everyone in this community, because Wegmans handwringing over the darling event of the suburban set - the LPGA is news, but so is a city assault that ends up with the victims under arrest, the suspects allowed to run free, and Internal Affairs having to devote 24/7 to an obvious case of dropping the ball by the RPD. The local TV news shouldn't be following RPD's lead in dropping the ball as well.

 

[tvfun]

Everyone gets an exclusive once in a while but don't attack the rest of the market for failing to do their jobs. 13, 10 and R News all reported on the story. If you're giving out props and praise to only 8, you need to consider the Library Porn story ITeam 10 broke and Maggie Brooks giving Brett Davidsen all the credit for uncovering this story and changing the ways things are done in the Monroe County library system, where was 8 then ? The Livingston County Rapist story Kyle Clark and 13 broke, where was 8 then ? The Rush Henrietta Teacher arrested that ITeam 10 broke, where was 8 then ? The Charlotte Pier story 10 broke. Where was 8 then ? Are these not community impact stories ? Did 8 fail to serve the viewing community by not covering these stories as in-depth as 10 and 13 ? Obvioulsy you like 8 and watch them but failing to see the big picture is your problem. So kudos to you and your in-depth inaccuracy.

 

[dampier]

Everyone gets an exclusive once in a while but don't attack the rest of the market for failing to do their jobs.

This was hardly an "exclusive." One of the victims called every TV station in town with the same story. Only WROC considered it worthy to follow-up. And I didn't say the stations "failed to do their jobs," they just didn't care enough about the story to devote any significant attention to it. The station that did deserves praise.

13, 10 and R News all reported on the story.

I am not familiar with R News coverage, but 13 and 10 gave it passing mentions at best. Web users will have a hard time finding anything more than a few sentences on either website as well.

If you're giving out props and praise to only 8, you need to consider the Library Porn story ITeam 10 broke and Maggie Brooks giving Brett Davidsen all the credit for uncovering this story and changing the ways things are done in the Monroe County library system, where was 8 then ?

You mean the hand-fed Maggie Brooks re-election campaign fodder? I'm not surprised she would give 10 plenty of credit for that. And WROC and WHAM gave this story FAR more attention than 10 and 13 bothered with the story I brought up. WROC had an "exclusive" only because the other stations took a pass at giving this story substantial attention. Victim calls in story to three stations in town, one calls him back. I'm not talking about exclusives, I'm talking about basic coverage.

Are these not community impact stories ? Did 8 fail to serve the viewing community by not covering these stories as in-depth as 10 and 13 ? Obvioulsy you like 8 and watch them but failing to see the big picture is your problem. So kudos to you and your in-depth inaccuracy.

I didn't know there would be a pretzel-twisting demonstration right here in the forum! I didn't think a pretzel could bend that way!

You are arguing with yourself on most of these points. Only you are using the "exclusive" angle and trying to reframe this into which stations broke what stories. That's your argument, not mine. I am talking only about COVERAGE of the story. And if you are suggesting that 8 didn't cover any of the stories you mentioned, you'd be wrong about that as well.

I watch newscasts from all three stations and personally I spend most of my time with WHAM, so your other assertion isn't right either. But when a station does something right, we should be just as willing to credit it as we are to criticize it when they do something wrong.

 

[rocktv]

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps 10 and 13 did call the victims back, but the victims chose to only tell their story to 8? Or perhaps 10 and 13 found credibility problems with the victims, or wanted to take their time to investigate before putting those allegations on the air? Unless you work at R News, 10, or 13, you have no idea what went on in those newsrooms in regards to that story.

 

[dustintv]

I heard about the story, but I didn't watch WROC's coverage. If they carried excellent coverage over the story then they certainly deserve the credit. Unfortunately it seems that even when someone/something/etc. actually puts effort into something for once, there will alway be someone whos refuses to acknowledge or give credit much like a couple posters in this thread.

 

[rocktv]

Yes kudos to 8. I can't help but notice the original poster seems to have taken sides on the story before the police have finished their internal investigation- isn't that a no-no? Do you believe everything you hear?

 

[dampier]

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps 10 and 13 did call the victims back, but the victims chose to only tell their story to 8? Or perhaps 10 and 13 found credibility problems with the victims, or wanted to take their time to investigate before putting those allegations on the air? Unless you work at R News, 10, or 13, you have no idea what went on in those newsrooms in regards to that story.

1) The victims did not promise an exclusive to channel 8, nor did they get called back. It's one of the reasons the Gay Alliance is not impressed with the coverage this story got in some media circles. And if you wanted to spread your story far and wide and had 8, 10, and 13 to choose from, would -you- or anyone else you know decide channel 8 would be the best place to take that story?

2) If 10 and 13 found credibility problems while the RPD, the mayor's office, and Internal Affairs obviously didn't, perhaps we need to get these folks out of the newsroom and into government to solve all our problems! Of course, you don't really find credibility problems when you don't investigate the story, now do you? It's now been two weeks, BTW. How much more time do you think they'll need on this?

But let's equally consider:

Maybe someone at channel 13 burned their bagel when the call came in and they couldn't report it because they were trying to throw the charred thing out the door, and in the process let a pesky squirrel in and it tore up the newsroom, and then they lost the phone number, and then the secretary had a vision that if they ran with the story, it could trigger a groundswell of support to put Bowling for Dollars back on the air. Channel 10 has experience with burning food in the microwave, so no need to go there with them. Maybe they just had a bad day.

Well, that's enough time at the SpecUplex newsdesk for me. How about you?

Yes kudos to 8. I can't help but notice the original poster seems to have taken sides on the story before the police have finished their internal investigation- isn't that a no-no? Do you believe everything you hear?

Actually, the only strong side I've taken on this is that Channel 8 deserves credit for covering this story with the importance it deserves (arresting the victims of the crime while not even taking the names of those accused by witnesses of committing the crime does it for me right there), while other local stations paid little attention to this. And since when is it the media's job to not report the story until an investigation is completed? If that was true, we'd never know the name Raymond Graves. Someone better get Floyd the Food Guy to beef up his reports, because the news hole for summer BBQ tips has just gotten much, much larger!

Seriously, the most important thing that you should take from all of this is that WROC deserves credit for spending time and resources on a story that impacts on anyone who lives in this part of the city, and it shined a light on a potential problem with the RPD's ability to respond to that crime. And somehow I'll bet the next time someone talks about county-wide policing, I doubt the folks in the suburbs will be as forgiving about RPD's responsiveness.

 

[rocktv]

Phillip: You are seriously misinformed. The victims have refused to do any interviews with other outlets. The Gay Alliance and their attorneys have told them to shut up. No victims, we lose interest. Also the internal affairs investigation is not over. Do you have info that no one else does. By law, the RPD can't release the contents. So we'll never know what really happened.

 

[rocktv]

Phillip: One other thing. Of course Channel 8 and any news outlet that breaks a significant story deserves credit. But you don't need it for validation that you did a good job. People know. They noticed. And in this town no one will stroke your ego for it.

 

[dampier]

Phillip: You are seriously misinformed. The victims have refused to do any interviews with other outlets. The Gay Alliance and their attorneys have told them to shut up.

Completely untrue. Not one thing you've written in this quotation is factually accurate at all. Up is not down. Right is not left.

In fact, the -only- people that have asked the victims to tell their story FIRST to them has been the RPD Internal Affairs Division. The Gay Alliance has not discouraged the victims from speaking out at all. In fact, that runs absolutely contrary to their preference that this story get wider coverage. The logic of calling 8, 10, and 13 and asking them to cover the story and then refusing to do interviews with them is silly as well. One victim, a US Marine, has requested that he appear in silhouette in any televised interviews, something WROC granted, for privacy reasons.

The story has now moved beyond the victims and into the politics of the RPD and their response in any event.

 

[Sxottlan]

I almost think I have noticed an uptick in the quality over at 8 the last couple weeks. Could be just the few minutes I've seen, but their coverage appears to have improved a bit lately.

Phillip: You are seriously misinformed. The victims have refused to do any interviews with other outlets. The Gay Alliance and their attorneys have told them to shut up.

Completely untrue. Not one thing you've written in this quotation is factually accurate at all. Up is not down. Right is not left.

Well, I believe we tried to contact them through an acquaintance several times the Monday after 8 broke the story. No one ever called back. So we had to put the reporter on something else. Take that for what you will.

And I don't recall hearing that anyone ever called into the newsroom with the story, but I'm not there all the time so it's possible.

 

[RochWatch]

I remained silent about this issue until I had a chance to find out a bit more information.

It is my understanding from sources at different news organizations that the alleged victims DID in fact contact all of the stations. I also know that attempts were made by more than one station to contact said victims. As I understand it, and this has been confirmed by more than one person at more than one news outlet, the victims in fact did refuse to talk to anyone other than channel 8. In fact, from what I was told, the victims said to one of these organizations that they were afraid to go on camera and talk about the incident; and this was AFTER they had already spoken to channel 8.

Yes, channel 8 deserves some kudos for breaking the story; however, sometimes there is more to a situation than just laziness or lack of caring. And before you all jump all over me, I am not an employee of 13 or 10 trying to save face here, I just didn't like the idea that someone refuses to listen to what others have to say. I had thought the point of journalism was to find out all the information, even if it is NOT what we want to hear.

 

[dampier]

It is my understanding from sources at different news organizations that the alleged victims DID in fact contact all of the stations. I also know that attempts were made by more than one station to contact said victims. As I understand it, and this has been confirmed by more than one person at more than one news outlet, the victims in fact did refuse to talk to anyone other than channel 8. In fact, from what I was told, the victims said to one of these organizations that they were afraid to go on camera and talk about the incident; and this was AFTER they had already spoken to channel 8.

Yes, channel 8 deserves some kudos for breaking the story; however, sometimes there is more to a situation than just laziness or lack of caring. And before you all jump all over me, I am not an employee of 13 or 10 trying to save face here, I just didn't like the idea that someone refuses to listen to what others have to say. I had thought the point of journalism was to find out all the information, even if it is NOT what we want to hear.

There was only one issue that was insisted on when it came to being interviewed - the victims wanted to stay anonymous and either off-camera or in silhouette. The reason for this is privacy and also, in the case of the active military, regardless of the fact they are heterosexual, being associated with a gay hate crime as a victim is reason enough to effectively jettison you out. Not all of the victims were gay. I'm not surprised to hear "they won't talk to us" being used after two weeks have gone by.

I think I've made my greater point on this issue. The Gay Alliance has a public gathering scheduled for the 19th to discuss a lot of these issues. We'll see if that gets any coverage.

 

[rocktv]

Again Phillip, you are clueless. The Gay Alliance would not let media into the "public gathering" on the 19th. And the alleged victims decided not to talk to any other stations the very day 8 did the first story.

 

[tvnewswatcher]

It seems to me that a lot of outlets are hanging their hats on saying, "As (insert station here) FIRST reported on our website..." or "As we were first to break this story on our website...". The whole medium on television news has changed. It used to be that everyone would high-five eachother at 5 & 6 when a story broke, nowadays it seems, proof of performance is gauged by how quickly someone writes the story online and posts it. In this new age of computer use, I think that the days of the "exclusive" banners or "seen only" banners during newscasts may become moot. A station's POP will now be monitored on its web content, which sadly, is substandard at many of the outlets in town.

 

[Kohoutek]

It seems to me that a lot of outlets are hanging their hats on saying, "As (insert station here) FIRST reported on our website..." or "As we were first to break this story on our website...". The whole medium on television news has changed. It used to be that everyone would high-five eachother at 5 & 6 when a story broke, nowadays it seems, proof of performance is gauged by how quickly someone writes the story online and posts it. In this new age of computer use, I think that the days of the "exclusive" banners or "seen only" banners during newscasts may become moot. A station's POP will now be monitored on its web content, which sadly, is substandard at many of the outlets in town.

I believe the recent trend of stations saying "as FIRST reported on our web site.." (In ROCHESTER, anyway) can be directly attributed to the propensity of the D&C to do that.
The paper has been doing it for quite some time (Just look and you'll see next to certain stories a seperate boxed headline that says "we broke this story on democratandchronicle.com")
I think after seeing this time and time again the people at the TV stations merely said, "...well,..if they're going to pull this s**t, .. then so should we)