A Case of the (News) Hiccups

I'm always surprised when one-time newsmakers pop back onto the news radar. I know I really shouldn't be - it happens more than it should - but, for some reason, I am. Part of me says, "Leave Britney these people alone." The other part of me says, "Keep it coming." We like to make celebrities out of everyday people (i.e. Monica Lewinsky, the Gosselins), and the news is just one avenue to make that happen.

The latest newsmaker to come back into the light is "Hiccup Girl," Jennifer Mee (see her story above). I think everyone, myself included, would have thought this girl's 15 minutes ended the second her hiccups stopped. But, that's not the case. Mee was involved with an attempted robbery that turned into a murder in Florida, three years after she first made headlines for her hiccups. Anne Curry's reassurance that everything was still ahead of Mee in the story above seems pretty ironic now.

Would this murder have even made national headlines if not for Mee's case of the hiccups? Probably not. I think it's good that a story like this makes national headlines because it helps people realize the dangers that are out there. On the flipside, it also plays into the "culture of fear" that gives news a bad name.

The Today Show has covered Mee's story almost everyday this week and I think it has fallen short in its coverage. Anytime a murder of an innocent person happens, the victim should be the focus of the story. The reporters use Mee as the center of the stories and spend much of their screen time talking about her hiccups. Hello! That's not the focus. Yes, Mee's hiccups brought her national attention; and, yes, because of that attention this story is being told. But she's not the focus here. The victim and the two men Mee accompanied, and who actually carried out the shooting, are barely mentioned.

Check out Today's coverage of the ongoing story below.

The third story (above) does the best job of including the victim, but his story is buried within the package. Even the reporter seems to know the victim should be the important part of the story, adding that the victim's family hopes he gets as much attention as Mee in his tag. Why doesn't he lead with that?

I watch The Today Show almost every morning. The show likes to do these multi-day continuing stories, but this murder doesn't seem to need as much attention as Today gives it. All three of the packages above tell the same story, with little to no new or added information. If there's no new, "today" (pun intended) angle to a story, then why run it? I'd be interested to see if more of Today's audience feels the way I do. For me, seeing a package about something new trumps seeing (basically) the same package being rerun everyday.

Breaking News > Everything Else

This week turned out to be a very important lesson in breaking news. I was out reporting on a softer story in Fulton, MO. Crews are building the city's first roundabout and, to make drivers more comfortable with the new traffic flow, the Chamber of Commerce planned a practice-roundabout where people will be able to test drive a miniature version of the traffic circle. A local university class also installed a webcam near the construction site so that people can see the construction 24-hours-a-day and become more comfortable with the idea.

When I got back to the station to edit my story, I found out that four victims of a shooting in a neighboring city were at a nearby hospital, and the hospital was on lock-down. The shooter was on the loose, and there was fear that the shooter might show up at the hospital.

I've never seen the newsroom be as busy or see reporters so willing to work. Anyone and everyone that was in the newsroom was pitching in, except for the dayside reporters who were editing their stories from earlier. It was organized chaos, with everyone working as a unit in the "team coverage." Seeing everyone working together to tell the story and get the facts out to our audience was inspiring and made me love this business even more. Even though the story was scary, as journalists we have to remember that our duty is to our audience. They deserve to have this information and, if we don't report it, who will?

Because of the breaking news, my story got pushed from the 5 p.m. newscast, to the 6 p.m., to the 10 p.m. and, finally to the morning show. While I was a little frustrated by this, I knew I had to step back and remember our "watchdog" role. It was much more important for the audience to know the latest about the shooting than to know about Fulton's new roundabout. My story was going to get shown at some point and time didn't really matter. Keeping in mind the journalist's mission and the big picture helps put everything into perspective.

The View Gets Viewed by the Media

I'm really into Hollywood news. I read industry publications, gossip blogs, celebrity magazines, news websites and watch as much as I can on TV every single day. I even keep my own celebrity-focused blog about stories that interest me. That really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, because I want to work in the entertainment news industry. I always find it interesting how one entertainment story can be covered in about a bagillion different ways. Everyone seems to claim they have the exclusive; that they got it first; that they're the only ones who can tell you (fill in the blank). In reality, that's rarely the case.

It's especially interesting when the industry becomes self-reflective, covering events that happen on news/informational shows. On Thursday's episode of ABC's The View, arguably a news source for some, co-hosts Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar stormed off the talk show set after becoming agitated with guest Bill O'Reilly's comments about the possible mosque construction near Ground Zero. Here's the clip:

As soon as this aired, I got a breaking news text alert from E! News and my Twitter feed exploded, with almost every major news organization I follow posting a blurb about the blow-up. It's even one of the first searches in the drop down menu on Google when you start typing "The View" or "Bill O'Reilly." I guess the attention stems from the fact that The View has become a platform for political discussions, with a lot of attention paid to co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck's conservative views compared to the liberal views of (former moderator) Rosie O'Donnell and Joy Behar over the past couple of years. But is it really news? To me, it is - I soak this stuff up because it interests me. Naturally, I turned to all my usual sources to see what exactly happened. The Hollywood Reporter did a quick blurb about the incident, adding this quote from Barbra Walters:

"I want to say something...You have just seen what should not happen. We should be able to have discussions without washing our hands and screaming and walking offstage. I love my colleagues. It should not have happened."

Fox News, where O'Reilly has a show, also posted the quote alongside a transcript of the entire appearance. Fox added even more information - I didn't know that Goldberg and Behar returned to the set. The more I read, the more pieces I was able to put together about exactly what happened.

Deadline.com, one of the best industry-news blogs, just posted the video and asked for reader comments. This is one of the scariest things to do in journalism I think - people can read those comments and take what people say as news, skewing information and starting rumors.

TMZ also covered the event, adding some observations I hadn't made, like how Behar returned to the set, but didn't reclaim her original seat next to O'Reilly. TMZ added an interactive quiz, like their web contributors do with most stories, asking readers "Who comes off worse, O'Reilly or Joy and Whoopi." I like the interactive part, but the quiz definitely doesn't fall into the category of news appropriate.

As far as broadcast goes, E! News Now probably did the best job in covering what happened. They had video of Walter's apology, and focused more on the aftermath than the actual incident.

And, as far as print and digital reporting goes, The New York Times was the most complete in its reporting.

The fact that I had to go to three or more sites to find out exactly what happened is a failure in reporting. I'm not saying people should rely on only one news source, but I would at least expect a news source to tell the full story. Without it, people make assumptions, and more rumors and misinformation are spread. Maybe that's why places like Newsy exist, though they have yet to post anything about the controversial appearance. I was really surprised no one got an O'Reilly soundbite on the experience (maybe he's saving his comments for his show). The View, at least, released a "no comment" statement.

Further Adventures in Babysitting Reporting

This week I learned that anything you do can lead to a story idea. Over the weekend, I volunteered at Boys and Girls Town of Columbia, a local foster home/campus for troubled youth. The group I was with didn't really know what we were going to be doing at the campus, but when we arrived we learned we were getting the grounds ready for Boys and Girls Town's grand opening/open house of its newly renovated campus the following Wednesday. We were invited to attend the open house if we wanted to, and I didn't think much of it at the time. But, when I started to think about story ideas before my shift, I remembered the invitation and decided to pitch the idea at the story meeting.

The result is the story that aired in the 5 o'clock newscast (above). My story aired in the newscasts a-block, but not before a few changes. I had originally edited the piece as a VO-SOT-VO, including a sound bite from Boys and Girls Town's vice president Paula Fleming, but it got cut from the story-heavy show. I was a little bummed that the bite and a little extra information got cut from the show, but I understood why - there were more reporters than usual at the station that day, and it made more sense to shorten my story than to cut someone else's completely. On the bright side, the bite and tag from my original VO-SOT did make it into the web story.

I learned you always have to be prepared to get cut, but try to make your piece as great as possible so that it's the last thing dropped, instead of one of the first. Having a good flow of communication with your producer will help him or her understand your angle better and might give you a better chance of surviving at the station.

The Next Step

Rachael Ray, Journalist?
It seems like more and more people are getting their news from daytime talk shows. At least I know I find myself tuning into a couple minutes a day and getting a peak at what's going on in the world. And more and more daytime talk shows embrace the growing trend. Shows like The Dr. Oz Show and Dr. Phil even cater to specific topics day-in and day-out. People who I wouldn't think to label as "journalists" have become journalists.

I was flipping around the other day and stopped to watch Rachael Ray's show. She was doing a segment on the bed bug epidemic and had "expert" Dr. Ian Smith exploring commonly infested locations. Dr. Smith is also the lead physician on VH1's Celebrity Fit Club, so I don't exactly know what qualifies him to explore bed bugs, which was the first thing that made me nervous about the segment. If we slap "expert" under someone's name, are we supposed to automatically believe everything they say? On a segment as routine as bed bug infestations, maybe it's OK. But Ray brings Dr. Smith back for segment, after segment, after segment about every health crisis hitting America.

CLICK HERE to read the online story / watch part of Ray's Wednesday show

Ray's bed bug story plays into "fear" reporting, blowing a story somewhat out of proportion and making it a scarier topic than it has to be. Yes, bed bugs are an issue, but not everyone will be affected, or infected, by them. As someone studying journalism it's scary to watch scare-tactic reporting like this because millions of people watch daytime shows and get their news this way.

NBC's The Today Show also did a story on bed bugs recently. Theirs is far more informational, and uses the fear viewers may have as a launching point for discussion, instead of a breeding ground for hysteria. There are strong graphics and solid information. Instead of trying to give tips to viewers about how to avoid bed bugs, like in the Rachael Ray segment, we see a humanized story about an exterminator. While there are still some moments of fear-mongering, like the anchor intro, the viewers are respected more than in the Rachael Ray segment because they aren't being walked through steps like they don't have common sense. Instead, they're learning that extermination is key and that being conscious of your surroundings, and not weary, is the best way to avoid the spread of bed bugs.

Wait, I need visuals??
My challenge this week was figuring out how to make a non-visual story visual. I was working on a story about the housing market in Columbia. There had been some recent announcements that the national housing market was on the rise and I wanted to know how Columbia's housing market was doing. Turns out it's doing great. I got interviews with a local realtor and builder who gave me hard facts and plenty of information. And that's where I got stuck.

I had a bunch of numbers - no people, no images and nothing to make the story pop on TV. I started to think in visuals: how could I get people moving in this? How could I make this interested? I somehow landed on the idea of using a for-sale sign as my central character. I incorporated the sign into my opening shot, my stand-up and my close. To get people involved, I went to an open house and moved around as much as I could to get interesting and different shots of the families touring the house. I also had some luck on my side. The one random open house I decided to go to that day happened to be in a very busy neighborhood. Almost every street I turned on had three or four houses for sale. And there were multiple houses under construction, which provided different visuals than just for-sale signs and houses.

I learned you always have to be thinking outside the box. When you don't have much video to work with, you still have to make it work. Writing to static video is harder, but incorporating graphics and having a little fun while you're reporting helps. I always have issues with my stand-ups, because I'm never sure how to make them stand out or be interesting. I'm going to challenge myself a little more to think outside the box. From time to time I check up on former MU broadcast students and I came across Ryan Takeo's stand-up reel. These are the kinds of stand-ups that make stories memorable and make viewers keep tuning back into the news.

Even with informational stories, you can have interesting, visual moments. I just have to keep seeking out inspiration and keep pushing myself to get better and more creative.