• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Phoenix New Times best of 2009 TV reporter is

He's the man in the Valley and has been since the mid 90's. We're very lucky to have a person of his talent, work ethic and determination working in this town. I consider myself lucky to work with him.
 
Mike Watkiss? Seriously? Oh yeah, this is The New Times after all, which could easily be confused with High Times.
 
dhett said:
Mike Watkiss? Seriously? Oh yeah, this is The New Times after all, which could easily be confused with High Times.
Click to expand...

I guess some people have no clue. If you have ever watched Mike or worked with him you would know. Also, some of the best investigative journalism in town is coming out of the New Times.
 
fenix said:
dhett said:
Mike Watkiss? Seriously? Oh yeah, this is The New Times after all, which could easily be confused with High Times.
Click to expand...

I guess some people have no clue. If you have ever watched Mike or worked with him you would know. Also, some of the best investigative journalism in town is coming out of the New Times.
Click to expand...

I guess some people think that if they write "some people", some people won't realize that some people just went ad hominem.

I have watched Mike Watkiss. He should write a personal thank you letter to Warren Jeffs and his ilk in Colorado City. As for the Phoenix Enquirer New Times, its journalism standards speak for itself.
 
Okay, step away from the keyboard and take a breather! The OP noted that Mike Watkiss won the New Times award for best reporter and said that it was "totally deserved and earned". The second poster agreed and said that Mike "was the man in the Valley".
Then, the third poster disagreed and slammed The New Times.

Rather than slamming each other and The New Times, why don't we have a discussion about Mike Watkiss' merits and weak points? Or, has civil discourse lost its place in this country?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom