Would you quit?

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

If you had a HUGE story that MGT said no to because it involves a major sales client?
For example...Biggest Home Builder in the area is the main sponsor for an organization. The organization is about to get some 3 million from local taxpayers by county council vote. The organization is shady, and does not provide public service they 'claim' to provide.
This could happen in my area...locals know what's up and are pissed...but I doubt the medium market station will challenge based on a client being the main, and I mean MEGA BUCKS sponsor. Your thoughts?

[Pro]

It happens all of the time. Quit? I wouldn't, unless I was told to do a story slanted in the client's favor. I'd do the story as I saw fit, and if upper management decided to kill it, well, it's their station. I did my job.

[Ping-Pong Ball]

Choose your battles wisely. ;)

[foxravens]

Quit?
Sure, if you have rich parents/spouse and don't have to support yourself.
Otherwise, in the words of the late, great Bear Bryant simply "chew the turd."

It's really that simple.

[vuphinder]

Isn't there some kind of rule or code that journalists are supposed to live by when it comes to exposing corruption on any level? If your management kills the story...tell your competition about it. You won't get the kudos but the story will be told. After all, didn't we get into news to "help the little guy"?

[SpxGrunt]

Originally posted by vuphinder:
Isn't there some kind of rule or code that journalists are supposed to live by when it comes to exposing corruption on any level? If your management kills the story...tell your competition about it. You won't get the kudos but the story will be told. After all, didn't we get into news to "help the little guy"?Excellent points.

[Pro]

Originally posted by vuphinder:
If your management kills the story...tell your competition about it. You won't get the kudos but the story will be told. After all, didn't we get into news to "help the little guy"?You certainly can try, but I daresay that the comepetition would face the same pressures as your station did. But give it a shot.

[Another side]

Holy Christ! Please don't follow Vuphinder's advice. No one likes a traitor.

There are times, I think, when you need to draw the line and walk away over principal. I don't think this is one of them.

Before you're done in this business there are going to be dozens if not hundreds of stories you're going to want to do but can't,and dozens if not hundreds you don't want to do but must.

Budgets matter, income matters, sales matters. There are real jobs at stake when you talk about impacting the budget -- perhaps even yours, when the cuts are ordered.

Part of me believes -- taking your post at face value -- that if management let you write the story you wanted to write, they would reap benefits for it in the long run. Good journalism, usually, wins out.

But (assuming, again, your MEGA bucks advertisor characterization is valid) I also recognize it can take a long time to recoup from the loss of a major advertisor, and depending on your market, your ownership, and the competition it can affect everything from staff size to traveling expenses to the number of SAT shots the desk is permitted to schedule.

Yes, it's disappointing, and yes, you may be right. But you're a grownup, it's not you're call, and you should just sigh and take your lumps. That's what grownups do.

But whatever you decide ... PLEASE don't tell the competition. It's one thing to be dissapointed or angry; it's entirey another to be disloyal. Tell the competition and you won't have to anguish over whether to quit -- you're boss, should he or she find out, will fire you. Or should. I would.

[SpxGrunt]

Where's the loyalty FROM the station? To the viewer? Hardly. It's to the people who are paying them AND may be screwing the public. I'd tell the competition in a heartbeat. What's the old saying about good men doing nothing?

[Another side]

Suit yourself. But don't pretend disloyalty is the mark of a "good man."

[east coast producer]

In this case, based on the facts presented, I would definitely say NO, do NOT quit. At most, respectfully note your ethical objection to your manager, but I'd let this slide. And from the facts presented, I can't really say that it sounds like a BIG story. "Shady" and "illegal" are two different things. And this company is just a sponsor of the organization. TV stations sponsor zillions of stupid events. From the post, there's no indication the company knows or should know what "shady" thing this "organization" is doing.

I know of mid-market stations that did report on really bad things major advertisers were doing. One that comes to mind is WWMT in Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids, market 39 (#39 because it covers a zillion square miles). Years back, like around 2000, their investigative reporter revealed shady or illegal things one car dealership was doing. The GM stood by the news department. The dealership pulled the ads. Several million dollars worth.

At my former station in yet a smaller-than-50 market, the state police, IRS and other agents raided a major car dealership who they accuse of doing some REALLY shady things -- not ripping off the customer -- but ripping off the car manufacturers. They're a big advertiser with my former station. We covered the raid and a few days of follow-up. I don't know if the dealership pulled their advertising, but I do know we covered a very negative story on a big advertiser. The story kind of faded away though. Not because of any pressure from top management, but there just hasn't been any developments released by the agencies that raided the place.

ISTHISTHINGON: I'd let it go. Don't risk your job unless a) you already have one lined up or b) they want to taser you during a lightning storm while you wave golf clubs in the sky while sitting on top of an extended mast for a sweeps stunt.

I'm a member of SPJ, and I believe very much in their code of ethics (http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp). If you refer to the SPJ Ethics Code, I agree with 98% of it -- and strongly. Sometimes, I have to do things that I believe are ethically/morally wrong. Under "Seek Truth and Report It" - the code advises against staging. I KNOW some (probably most) reporters/photographers stage shots for broll. I tell them I don't want them to tell me. Though in doing so, I'm ignoring "Be Accountable": expose unethical practices of others. I guess I'm a hypocritical in that regard, but turning a blind eye to acts that are ethically/morally questionable to me, but not outrageous or unlawful, is for the greater good of my employment and relations with peers and management.

Anyway -- some responses to other posters:

vuphinder: Yes, there is a code. Some of us are members of the Society of Professional Journalists. We agree to abide by the above linked Code of Ethics. However, DISREGARD VUPHINDER'S ADVICE. Telling your competitors about a story almost certainly will violate your terms of employment. You likely have a non-compete and a confidentiality agreement, among other legal documents you've signed. Ethics is one thing, but CONTRACT LAW is another. Your non-compete likely prevents you from accepting employment or RENDERING SERVICES to a competitor. Confidentiality agreement is self-explanatory. Your contract also probably states that the company has a right to terminate you for cause if you act outside of its best interests. It's not in the company's best interest for you to be giving story leads to competitors.

To answer your rhetorical question, we all got into news for one reason or another. For some, the fame, others for altruistic reasons like, as you said, helping the little guy or because they're just curious and creative people (who can't do math or science, so what's left for us to do?). But really, we ALL took a job in tv because we need to earn a living. (As a side note, the "helping the little guy" has its own ethical implications.. we're supposed to be observers, not advocates or activists. Is it ethical for newsrooms with a "consumer unit" to use the weight of the perceived threat of putting the accused business on tv in a bad light so as to resolve the viewer's dispute over a dry cleaning bill?)

AnotherSide: I totally agree with you. In fact, you said it in FAR fewer words than me. smile.gif

SpxGrunt: When we accepted a role as a journalist -- whether you're a producer, reporter, shooter, whatever -- you voluntarily agreed to be an impartial OBSERVER. All of you who are reading this, take out your company handbooks and contracts. You most likely agreed to avoid involvement in politics -- local, state and national, you agreed not to publicly advocate or join protests; and agreed that the company could terminate your employment if you did ANYTHING that would cast them in a bad light or that could lead people to question your and your station's commitment to impartial and fair journalism.

Regarding the quotation attributed to Edmund Burke, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing," well, I don't know what to say. As I said earlier, more facts of what makes the organization the original poster mentioned "shady." I suppose if you felt that strongly about it, you could anonymously advise your state's attorney general's office, the city prosecutor's office, some regulatory agency in your state, the sponsoring company, city council or perhaps some private organization like the BBB.

If you guys are reading this far down in the message -- remember, it's the "ORGANIZATION" that the city's giving the bucks to that is "shady." The home builder/major advertiser isn't involved in said shadiness. It's only relationship with the "organization" is as a sponsor. TV stations sponsor stuff all the time too.

Any first-year PR student could easily fix any perceived image damage to the builder. The home builder simply has a news conf and says he's shocked and saddened to learn that the organization did this and that, that they're dropping their sponsorship of the "shady organization" and donating the money to help orphans or cute puppies and kittens or something. The builder should also mention 9/11 in his news conference if possible.

[ August 02, 2007, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: eastcoast producer ]

[Meow Meow]

So tell your local NEWSPAPER about it.

This actually happened to me. When I was an intern I was working with the investigative unit to produce a story about auto dealerships that engage in illegal "spot financing." I was halfway through writing the story when I found a woman who got totally screwed by our local car dealership. They pretty much tricked her into illegal financing. Actually, what the dealer did was predatory, unethical and totally illegal. I researched a little more and found many other people who were victim of the same scam. I was so excited about the story. I was going to warn people about the f-ed up stuff this dealership was doing. I was all ready to wear a hidden camera and go into battle. This was MY story and as an intern in a major market newsroom I was thrilled to have this chance to prove my self. (Did I ever tell you how much I LOVE investigative journalism???)

The problem? The dealership was a MILLION dollar sponsor of the station.

So we took it to the news director and GM. To my surprise the news director gave the go ahead! He just said NO hidden camera or surprise crap. And to give them a very reasonable opportunity to respond in full. He also asked that we take the focus off the dealership and make it more about the ills of "spot financing" but said we could shoot video of the dealership and mention them as an example. He also okay-ed airing the interviews with victims who named the dealership.

So the moral of the story is: Maybe you can do the story - but focus on the tax dollars and misappropriated funding rather than the Home Buider or even the specfic organization.

If not, call your local newspaper. Let them expose the wrong-doing.

[east coast producer]

Originally posted by Meow Meow:
So tell your local NEWSPAPER about it.That would also violate his non-compete, if he has one. I assume he's a reporter, so I'm sure he does. Consider it's also unethical to undermine your employer, even if you think what they're doing is morally wrong.

Especially if he learned this information about the "shady organization" on the job or from people he developed as contacts as an agent of his employer, it's work product and that work product belongs to the employer.

I still don't get what the story is anyway. A company is sponsoring an "organization" that the original poster and some others in town believe is "shady." I don't understand what the company has to do with the story. If this "organization" is a charity that's funneling money to al Qaeda, the "company" sponsoring the "organization" isn't doing it. See my easy PR fix above.

Like the above poster said, if I was the ND and found out he tipped another station, I would fire him. I'd also fire him for telling the paper.

[ August 02, 2007, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: eastcoast producer ]

[Meow Meow]

Originally posted by eastcoast producer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Meow Meow:
So tell your local NEWSPAPER about it.That would also violate his non-compete, if he has one. I assume he's a reporter, so I'm sure he does. Consider it's also unethical to undermine your employer, even if you think what they're doing is morally wrong.

Especially if he learned this information about the "shady organization" on the job or from people he developed as contacts as an agent of his employer, it's work product and that work product belongs to the employer.

I still don't get what the story is anyway. A company is sponsoring an "organization" that the original poster and some others in town believe is "shady." I don't understand what the company has to do with the story. If this "organization" is a charity that's funneling money to al Qaeda, the "company" sponsoring the "organization" isn't doing it. See my easy PR fix above.

Like the above poster said, if I was the ND and found out he tipped another station, I would fire him. I'd also fire him for telling the paper.</font>[/QUOTE]Newspapers don't count in your non-compete agreement. (in most cases). Non-disclosure agreements might come in to play if you signed one - but your non-compete means nothing in a situation like this.

There is nothing traitorous about tipping off your local newspaper. If your ND doesn't feel like the story is newsworthy, then what's the big deal with passing it on to another investigator? It's not like you are helping another media entity "scoop" you. Your news organization already decided it isn't even news they are willing to cover.

[east coast producer]

First, every contract is different.

Looking at mine, I have an exclusivity agreement that prevents me from aiding any company that's engaged in a similar business (ie, journalism. Especially these days, newspapers and tv are becoming less distinct).

Also, it's probably a work product. He probably learned of it while on the job or through contacts he made through his employment with the broadcaster.

There's no doubt he could do it and not get caught, especially depending on the reporter shield laws in your state. It's a matter of betraying your employer and ignoring the direction of your supervisor not to pursue the story.

(And, btw, apologies to ISTHISTHINGON if you're a girl. I've been saying "he" in reference to you, but I mean it as a generic pronoun. So, no offense intended if you're sporting a pair of boobs!)

[McCovey Cove Returns]

Would I quit? If I pitched the story and got told no, I'd pass on the information and let someone else bust their chops. If things got ugly, I have no problem with quitting. I quit once before when new ownership came in to my station, gutted it, and decided making money was far more important than serving the people who watch us. We had virtually no staff, but were expected to fill the same news hole and cover the same stories as everyone else. this clearly wasn't possible. I won't stand for that. And I won't stand for sales dollars interfering with a news story.

[ August 02, 2007, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: McCovey Cove Returns ]

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

THanks for the input everyone. In this case it's, or will be, very frustrating to turn my head because it's fairly clear that their money is coercing a vote. My contract is up in December....so quiting would be pointless...though I wish my station would grow some balls. Bittersweet= great story but bounced paychecks because major client pulls their ads. graemlins/eusa_doh.gif graemlins/face_banghead.gif

[Meow Meow]

Originally posted by eastcoast producer:
First, every contract is different.

There's no doubt he could do it and not get caught, especially depending on the reporter shield laws in your state. It's a matter of betraying your employer and ignoring the direction of your supervisor not to pursue the story.

I'm not trying to get into an argument here but I just don't see how he is "betraying" his employer. His employer already decided it isn't newsworthy. What do they care if another media entity covers it?

Also, his supervisor didn't tell him to keep quiet, burn his files and never tell a soul. His supervisor just doesn't want to piss off the advertisers. It's not like he/she would be divulging company secrets or leaking a story that the station even cares about.

Either way, unless this story is very important to you I'd let it go. You will live to fight another fight.

[Gil]

Originally posted by eastcoast producer:


I know of mid-market stations that did report on really bad things major advertisers were doing. One that comes to mind is WWMT in Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids, market 39 (#39 because it covers a zillion square miles). Years back, like around 2000, their investigative reporter revealed shady or illegal things one car dealership was doing. The GM stood by the news department. The dealership pulled the ads. Several million dollars worth.

Nice post, but a bit of hyperbole here, I think.

I'd be willing to bet that WWMT has never had any single auto dealer spending "several million dollars" in advertising, unless you are measuring time in decades.

I was the manager of that particular station from 1987 to 1996.

[SpxGrunt]

Great responses, eastcoastproducer. We all need to remember--our goal is journalism. The people we work for---their goal is making money. If I felt strongly that I was being prevented from doing my job as a journalist, I would find another means of getting the story out. Maybe it appears disloyal to my employer, but not to the community I'm supposed to be informing. Of course, I work in sports, so if you want to know who won the game, I can tell you that. ;)

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

Originally posted by eastcoast producer:

(And, btw, apologies to ISTHISTHINGON if you're a girl. I've been saying "he" in reference to you, but I mean it as a generic pronoun. So, no offense intended if you're sporting a pair of boobs!)No boobs here ECP....but a pair of CANNONS on this bod! LOL! I'm a dude.
Again, thanks for the insight guys(and gals)

[kim jung il]

Corruption's Perpetuation ...
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/korea/story/leader/kim.dae.jung/link.kim.jong.il.jpg
...Lies in Silence.

So many social injustice thrive
in the turn of cheek, the blind
eye, the silence of the knowing.

The smaller the incursion, the
more permissive society become.
Until all fear of retribution
out weigh truth and justice. And,
Ultimately? ...this become

"That's the way things are done!, Son!"

Change whole society to sh!t.

[ August 02, 2007, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: kim jung il ]

[Another side]

Originally posted by SpxGrunt:
If I felt strongly that I was being prevented from doing my job as a journalist, I would find another means of getting the story out. Maybe it appears disloyal to my employer, but not to the community I'm supposed to be informing.But it's not about the community. It's about your personal integrity and loyalty to the person who signs your checks.

And it's not about whether your company returns the loyalty (many don't, and I'm aware of that.) It doesn't matter ... it's about you.

Besides, I'm curious. Why would you hand it over to another station (radio or TV) or newspaper, anyway?

So, when a friend says to you, "Wow ... did you see that story on WXXX ..." you can reply, "Yeah ... I had it, but my dumbass boss wouldn't let me run it, so I gave it to them ... don't tell anyone though, because I could get fired."

Do you realize how skanky that sounds?

[The Mockingbird]

Guys. Guys...

If your corrupt ass employers won't do the story, of course you tell the competition about it.

You just do it the smart way. Not the "I'm all defiant I'm gonna stick it to the man ha ha, I immediately went and told my competitors!" way.

Do it the "I went out with some buddies to a bar and accidentally mentioned the story that got killed and all the specific details how to turn the story, but really don't remember any of those details at all later if anyone asks." way.

Just don't be obvious. Don't get caught.
Don't do it on station equipment.
Have plausible deniability.
And if your boss ever asks you about it, deny everything.

[Diplomat]

The only time I ever quit a job was when I worked for a racist, anti-Semitic, anti-woman and anti-a few other things ND. (Sadly, he has been praised on this board as a "good storyteller." He tells stories, all right.)

I made sure I had enough contract work lined up before I walked, though. Then, when he erupted into one of his fits one day, I told him I was history.

Don't just quit on the spur of the moment. Make sure you have a plan for what happens after you leave.

You're often told not to burn bridges and that's usually good advice. In the case of this guy, though, I blew up the bridges. He was given the boot about six months later after others reported similar experiences with him, and later booted at another station. Several years later, I look back and know that I made the right decision and am even more confident of that now.

Much of the advice from preceding posters has been good. Think long and hard before making a decision, though.

[SpxGrunt]

Originally posted by Diplomat:
The only time I ever quit a job was when I worked for a racist, anti-Semitic, anti-woman and anti-a few other things ND. (Sadly, he has been praised on this board as a "good storyteller." He tells stories, all right.)

I made sure I had enough contract work lined up before I walked, though. Then, when he erupted into one of his fits one day, I told him I was history.

Don't just quit on the spur of the moment. Make sure you have a plan for what happens after you leave.

You're often told not to burn bridges and that's usually good advice. In the case of this guy, though, I blew up the bridges. He was given the boot about six months later after others reported similar experiences with him, and later booted at another station. Several years later, I look back and know that I made the right decision and am even more confident of that now.

Much of the advice from preceding posters has been good. Think long and hard before making a decision, though.Why do I keep agreeing with Dip? What's happening to me??? But he's right, I wouldn't do it spur of the moment or to try to prove a point, unless you think the point you're making is worth your entire salary.

[Diplomat]

Spx, you're listening to reason, that's why! :D

[SpxGrunt]

Originally posted by Diplomat:
Spx, you're listening to reason, that's why! :D I'll see you at free-for-all! ;)

[Signature on File]

Was this the story your station wouldn't do?

American Home Mortgage collapses
Pacific Business News (Honolulu) - 1:24 PM HAST Friday, August 3, 2007

American Home Mortgage Corp., a New York-based mortgage lender with five branches in Hawaii, stopped issuing new loans after announcing that it could be forced to liquidate.

The company has closed 256 loans totaling almost $109 million in Hawaii this year, according to Title Guaranty of Hawaii.


American Home's stock plummeted earlier this week after the company announced that it faced increased demands from the secondary market that left it unable to finance its mortgages.

On Thursday, the company announced that it would cut its staff of 7,000 to about 750 and that it would stop processing new loans. The thrift and servicing business continues uninterrupted, according to a news release.

"The market conditions in both the secondary mortgage market as well as the national real estate market have deteriorated to the point that we have no realistic alternative," said Michael Strauss, chief executive officer of American Home.

The fallout extends beyond the mortgage company to its lenders, which include banking mainstays like Bear Stearns, a company that on Friday saw its S&P rating cut.

The news added to a tough trading climate for the financial sector, which has taken a beating in a market defined by credit and real estate concerns.

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
The organization is shady, and does not provide public service they 'claim' to provide.
You can prove this of course?

Please explain.

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

Originally posted by Well Wisher:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
The organization is shady, and does not provide public service they 'claim' to provide.
You can prove this of course?

Please explain.</font>[/QUOTE]Without identifying the organization...I'll try.
Basically this shelter takes in public donations(okay that's fine, by choice), is a non-profit, and only accepts clients from private sector. The complaint I'm getting is that one county has already forked over 1.5 million out of the general fund(taxpayer), and is about to get another 3 million from neighbor county's general fund. The conflict of interest (station client) comes into play because one of the council members works for THAT company.
It's leading most to believe the reason councils are giving away general fund money is generous "contributions" from company(station client) that benefit a few members. I haven't gotten all the facts yet because I was told to stay out it....and haven't pushed the issue yet....but this account is fairly solid(other than me proving station client is paying for a vote).

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Well Wisher:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
The organization is shady, and does not provide public service they 'claim' to provide.
You can prove this of course?

Please explain.</font>[/QUOTE]The complaint I'm getting is that one county has already forked over 1.5 million out of the general fund and is about to get another 3 million from neighbor county's general fund. The conflict of interest comes into play because one of the council members works for THAT company.</font>[/QUOTE]Sounds like you have a source. Give the source the phone number to your local Associated Press. If what you say is true, it'll check out and the story will get told. And that's what is important.

You can also direct your source to the newspaper. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

I wish you well.

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

Yeah....it just sucks to have to tell someone I wish I could but I can't. My credibility takes a shot because I'm the one being asked to speak for the people....and instead of doing so...I've got to pass the buck. graemlins/face_banghead.gif

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
Yeah....it just sucks to have to tell someone I wish I could but I can't. You certainly can. It's a choice that only you are making.

I have passed many stories on to the AP with information when my newsroom wasn't interested in doing a certain story. Of course when they see it on the AP wire, suddenly it becomes a story.

Yeah, I've worked with some real losers.

But in this day of internet, you can create an email account at yahoo or google or MSN and put all that you know into an email and send it to AP or the paper or both.

It's about getting the story told. If you fail to do that, you can't blame anyone else. That's passing the buck, brother.

I wish you well.

[Another side]

Originally posted by Well Wisher:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
Yeah....it just sucks to have to tell someone I wish I could but I can't. You certainly can. It's a choice that only you are making.

I have passed many stories on to the AP with information when my newsroom wasn't interested in doing a certain story. Of course when they see it on the AP wire, suddenly it becomes a story.

Yeah, I've worked with some real losers.

But in this day of internet, you can create an email account at yahoo or google or MSN and put all that you know into an email and send it to AP or the paper or both.

It's about getting the story told. If you fail to do that, you can't blame anyone else. That's passing the buck, brother.

I wish you well.</font>[/QUOTE]It astounds me a thinking human being can write something like that, and I'm not buying it.

I don't think it's about the story at all; I think it's about you wanting to show who's boss by, inexplicably, whining and throwing your Gerber's in the air when you don't get your way.

The ironic part is, after you've taken your tip to the competition in hopes of them thinking your this swell guy interested only in the common good ... they'll be shaking their heads in sympathy and ridiculing you in your absence.

No one likes a traitor ... no one.

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by Another side:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Well Wisher:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
Yeah....it just sucks to have to tell someone I wish I could but I can't. You certainly can. It's a choice that only you are making.

I have passed many stories on to the AP with information when my newsroom wasn't interested in doing a certain story. Of course when they see it on the AP wire, suddenly it becomes a story.

Yeah, I've worked with some real losers.

But in this day of internet, you can create an email account at yahoo or google or MSN and put all that you know into an email and send it to AP or the paper or both.

It's about getting the story told. If you fail to do that, you can't blame anyone else. That's passing the buck, brother.

I wish you well.</font>[/QUOTE]I don't think it's about the story at all; I think it's about you wanting to show who's boss by, inexplicably, whining and throwing your Gerber's in the air when you don't get your way.

No one likes a traitor ... no one.</font>[/QUOTE]Neither does anyone like a stubborn weasle, like yourself. Excuse me, but your priorities are as misplaced as your ego is over sized.

By giving a story that my bosses didn't want to AP, I've betrayed no one. No body. Screw you a$shole.

Did you miss the original posters point? Yes you did. And why? Well, because you have some misguided idea that a reporter MUST NOT AT ANY TIME disagree with his boss because his employer GIVES HIM MONEY. Well, B.S.

The oringinal poster says his employer is corrupt and will not report a legitimate story because it might affect it's own wallet.

A journalist's duty, and I do believe it is a duty, is not to the bottom line of his company. It is to the people in his community. Scoff at that all you want, but I believe it's true. There's a great deal of trust we're dealing with when we report a story. There's an enormous amount of responsibility. I tend to look at our profession as one of a watchdog, not a lapdog.

But you would rather have a corrupt employer muzzle an ethical reporter than have a legitimate story reported.

Well, well, well. Aren't you the bad guy here today. It sounds like I've probably worked for you at some time. Pig headed and over bearing and willing to cover the backside of advertisers?

It takes all kinds, but our duty is to the story.

You can disagree all you want. I wish you well.

[Another side]

Originally posted by Well Wisher:
Neither does anyone like a stubborn weasle, like yourself. Excuse me, but your priorities are as misplaced as your ego is over sized.Ego? How'd my ego get in to it?

By giving a story that my bosses didn't want to AP, I've betrayed no one. No body. Screw you *******.If you really believe that, then tell your boss in a kind, calm voice, up front, if he/she doesn't want the story, that's fine, and you'll give it to the competition because it's an important story to the viewers. See if he feels "betrayed."

And now I'm an *******. A stubborn weasle ******* with an over-sized ego. Well, crap. This is getting depressing.

Did you miss the original posters point? Yes you did. And why? Well, because you have some misguided idea that a reporter MUST NOT AT ANY TIME disagree with his boss because his employer GIVES HIM MONEY. Well, B.S.Damn. When did I say all that?

The oringinal poster says his employer is corrupt and will not report a legitimate story because it might affect it's own wallet.No he didn't. Those are YOUR conclusions.

]A journalist's duty, and I do believe it is a duty, is not to the bottom line of his company.Ergo, when your also-journalist news director's orders run opposed to what you-the-journalist believe, you insist it is appropriate to run behind his/her back to the competition because, you know, your duty is to the audience and not to the also-journalist news director or the scumbag, profit-thirsty station for whom he calls all the shots?

Is it safe to assume that you believe any and all decisions by your news director are really just "talking points" not orders, and therefore subject to your own evaluation and subsequent actions? Or do you pick and choose and allow him/her be the news director only when it suits you?

There's a great deal of trust we're dealing with when we report a story. There's an enormous amount of responsibility. I tend to look at our profession as one of a watchdog, not a lapdog.I agree, but here's where we get crossways: The ultimate decision on whether it's a story belongs with the news director. That's what news director's do. That's their ultimate responsibility. In the end, they're responsible for the stories in the newscast and the ultimate success of the newscast as a whole.

But you would rather have a corrupt employer muzzle an ethical reporter than have a legitimate story reported.I would? Damn, I didn't realize that. Guess I need a good long talking to, huh?

Well, well, well. Aren't you the bad guy here today. It sounds like I've probably worked for you at some time. Pig headed and over bearing and willing to cover the backside of advertisers?I don't know how I became the bad guy here today ... but that's small potatoes, I guess, after also being labeled pig-headed and overbearing, in addition (of course) to being an ******* with an over-sized ego who's -- I damned near forgot one -- also a stubborn weasle.

Damn, again. Now I'm a bad guy who's also a pig-headed stubborn weasle and overbearing ******* with an over-sized ego. I probably should hang myself, but I think I'll try some whiskey first.

It takes all kinds, but our duty is to the story.

You can disagree all you want. I wish you well.You do? Wow ... thanks.

A couple of questions:

Why wouldn't you quit on the spot, rather than work for someone whose decisions and news judgement might interfere with your journalistic integrity? Could it be "the money" that is taking precedence over your principles? The same "money" you need for your life's expenses, but seem to trivialize when it's a focus of those at your station responsible for paying the bills? If the story is more important than the money, why wouldn't you quit and go somewhere else?

If you're right, you're right ... so why wouldn't you tell your boss to his or her face, "With all due respect, I think the story is important to our viewers, and if you won't let me do it, I'm going to alert the competition to it, because my responsibility, ultimately, is to the audience and not our station"? Why sneak around behind his or her back, talk in whispers, place anonymous phone calls? Why not man-up and spell it out for him or her, respectfully and personally?

Could it be "the money" he or she pays you so you can afford rent, put a little gas in the car, eat now and then, buy someone something nice when the urge hits you? The "money" you won't have if, as you obviously expect --otherwise you wouldn't be slithering around behind the ND's back, right? -- he or she would fire you? But why do you care ... if "the story" and not "the money" always comes first in your mind?

Last question: Would you mention in any interview, with any news director, "I got fired from my last job because there was a story I felt was important and when my ND rejected it, I called the shop across the street and gave it to them"? If you would ... great, many kudos. But you better have more than one interview lined up. Would you hire anyone that took a story to the competition because he or she couldn't sell it to his or her own news director?

Would anyone reading this thread?

[Well Wisher]

Hey, your ego is bigger than Elvis' last jumpsuit.

And your arrogance is twice is large.

If I pitch a story to the boss and he passes, there's nothing wrong with throwing it someone else's way. Someone who will appreciate it.

The fact of the matter is, if the boss is right and it's not a story, then nobody else would want it. Right?

If someone else picks it up and runs with it the boss has no complaints against me or anyone else. Another journalist is telling the story.

And your threats about firing someone who had the good sense to pass it along, anonymously if necessary, indicate a severely vindictive and controlling personality. Seek counseling.

And I do wish you well.

[Another side]

You didn't answer the questions.

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by Another side:
You didn't answer the questions.Do you think you're in charge here, or something?

What an ego.

The questions are not close to relevant to the discussion. It's simple underhanded misdirection which you hope to control. What an a$$hole.

1) Why wouldn't you quit on the spot?
Because yes, I need a paycheck to pay the rent, and I'm not that arrogant. Plus the story can be told. If I tell someone else, I've done my duty as a journalist. I need not make any apology.

2) If you're right, you're right ... so why wouldn't you tell your boss to his or her face? If I pitch a story and the boss passes, that's all I need to know. That's all the boss wants to know. We see your vindictive reaction to disagreement. You're all too typical.

3) Would you mention in any interview, with any news director, "I got fired from my last job because there was a story I felt was important and when my ND rejected it, I called the shop across the street and gave it to them"?

No need to. I wouldn't get fired for anonymously informing a real journalist about a good story.

Face it, you're just a tired old man who thinks he can keep real journalists under his bootheel while he enters into corrupt agreements with advertisers. You're a pathetic fraud.

Plus, you didn't answer my question.

If the boss is right and it's NOT a story, then nobody else would want it. Right? Do you usually fire someone for throwing away garbage?

Answer quickly and throughly, and I wish you well.

[Spike]

Originally posted by Another side:
The ultimate decision on whether it's a story belongs with the news director. That's what news director's do. That's their ultimate responsibility. Your entire argument is based on a logical contradiction.

You say the ultimate responsibility of the news director is to decide whether a story is newsworthy. If a news director decides a story isn't newsworthy, then, at least from his perspective, the story can't possibly help his competitor. If it's not a newsworthy story, then it should actually hurt his competitor to run it. Therefore, he shouldn't care at all whether the reporter gives the story to a competitor.

But you also say that giving the story to the competition would be helping them. It would only help them if it's newsworthy. So if the reporter becomes a "traitor" by giving the story to the competition, we must conclude that the story IS newsworthy after all.

Either it's newsworthy or it isn't. But your position rests on the assumption that it is both newsworthy and not newsworthy at the same time, which is impossible. Your argument fails.

Why does it lead to a logical contradiction? Because it's based on faulty premises: that the news director is behaving ethically, and the story has been killed because it isn't newsworthy. It would, in fact, be unethical to kill a legitimate, newsworthy story because the subject of the story is an advertiser. Yes, it happens all the time. It's still unethical behavior.

To accuse a journalist of being a traitor for defying unethical behavior reeks of hypocrisy, because journalism relies in large part on whistle blowers. We don't consider Jeffrey Wigand to be a traitor for turning on the unethical behavior of the tobacco companies. We don't consider Mark Felt to have been a traitor for exposing the Nixon administration. We consider them heroes of a sort, for bringing considerable damage to their employers. Yet, the suggestion that this reporter give a story to the competition won't cause nearly the damage these guys did.

It's that hypocrisy that answers all your silly questions thrown at Well Wisher. The reporter can't do it out in the open because the ND is a hypocrite. There's no legitimate, rational reason for the ND to object to the story going to the competitor; and yet all of us know that he WOULD object, because if it really is a newsworthy story it would expose his own unethical behavior in attempting to kill the story.

It doesn't surprise me that Another Side would cling to a hypocritical point of view and try to defend unethical behavior.

For ISTHISTHINGON?, here's my opinion on what you should do. Don't quit, but start working very hard on getting the hell out and quit when the time is right for you. You shouldn't be punished with poverty for your manager's lack of ethics. But for the sake of your OWN ethics, you need to leave as soon as the time is right. Just keep your head down in the meantime. Another Side said that nobody likes a traitor, but what he really means is that managers don't like squeaky wheels or anyone who questions their decisions, especially when those decisions are unethical.

As for slipping the story to the competition, I have no problem with that at all if you feel the story is truly important and you're not simply doing it for revenge. Either your news director dropped the story because he felt it wasn't newsworthy, in which case he can't possibly believe you would be helping the competition by giving it to them; or he has dropped the story for unethical reasons, in which case he has violated his "ultimate responsibility," as AS put it, and no longer really deserves your loyalty. Either way, I see no significant ethical hurdle.

[ August 05, 2007, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Spike ]

[Another side]

Well, OK, sure.

The question is, If the boss says it's not a story, then no one else would use it, right?

If the ones you snuck away to behind your ND's back agreed with him/her ... then, right, it would not be a story to them.

But I thought this was about a topic which your ND agreed was a story but didn't want you to go with because he was corrupt and covering his ass wch, in turn, permitted you the freedom to sneak over to the competition and give it to them.

Please make up your mind or I will have to geiv you far fewer opportunities to call me names.

[Another side]

Originally posted by Spike:
As for slipping the story to the competition, I have no problem with that at all if you feel the story is truly important and you're not simply doing it for revenge. Either your news director dropped the story because he felt it wasn't newsworthy, in which case he can't possibly believe you would be helping the competition by giving it to them; or he has dropped the story for unethical reasons, in which case he has violated his "ultimate responsibility," as AS put it, and no longer really deserves your loyalty. Either way, I see no significant ethical hurdle.I'm shocked.

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by Spike:
It doesn't surprise me that Another Side would cling to a hypocritical point of view and try to defend unethical behavior.
He's a monumental prick, aint he?

To think that he would advise a young journalist to become part of a conspiracy by intentionally burying a legitimate story, is sick.

Still, I can only wish him well.

[ August 05, 2007, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: Well Wisher ]

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by Another side:
But I thought this was about a topic which your ND agreed was a story but didn't want you to go with because he was corrupt and covering his ass wch, in turn, permitted you the freedom to sneak over to the competition and give it to them.Same thing. He said he didn't want to cover the story, I doubt very much that the ND would be upfront with the real reason, that an advertiser is involved.

ISTHISTHINGON? Can fill us in.

[ August 05, 2007, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Well Wisher ]

[Spike]

Originally posted by Another side:
The question is, If the boss says it's not a story, then no one else would use it, right?

If the ones you snuck away to behind your ND's back agreed with him/her ... then, right, it would not be a story to them.Doesn't matter. If the boss says it isn't newsworthy, he shouldn't care whether other news directors agree. He should have enough news sense on his own to make that decision and have confidence in it. If it's an important story, the incompetence of one news director shouldn't stand in the way of getting it out to the public should another news director disagree with his news judgment.

Originally posted by Another side:
But I thought this was about a topic which your ND agreed was a story but didn't want you to go with because he was corrupt and covering his ass wch, in turn, permitted you the freedom to sneak over to the competition and give it to them.

Please make up your mind or I will have to geiv you far fewer opportunities to call me names.I know you have trouble understanding words, so I'll repeat what I wrote earlier for the benefit of the impaired. There are two possibilities. One is that the news director kills the story because he really doesn't think it's newsworthy. The other is that the news director kills it unethically because it deals with an advertiser. Either way, the ND has relinquished any ownership of the story for his news department and has no legitimate basis to object to it being given to another station.

I suspect most of us here believe that the latter situation is more likely. To that, you answered with the typical excuse, which is what brought me into this discussion in the first place: that the ND had the responsibility of determining what is newsworthy. YOU are the one who substituted the newsworthiness decision for the ethical decision. I've simply shown that in either case, it doesn't matter.

It's funny that you would tell me to make up my mind, when you're the one who can't seem to keep straight whether this is a decision on the newsworthiness of the story or whether the ND is just trying to cover his ass. Or perhaps you were just trying to confuse the two issues, thinking that nobody would catch the paradox your argument implied.

[Another side]

Originally posted by Spike:
It's funny that you would tell me to make up my mind, when you're the one who can't seem to keep straight whether this is a decision on the newsworthiness of the story or whether the ND is just trying to cover his ass. Or perhaps you were just trying to confuse the two issues, thinking that nobody would catch the paradox your argument implied.That comment, as well as that entire post, was for your new runnin' buddie. I would never suggest you have "a mind."

[Well Wisher]

For you youngsters out there reading this very serious thread about a very real ethical dilemma, you can bet on the fact that someday you too will wind up working for someone just like the original poster's news director and or Another Side. They are insidious managers, and they are plenty in number. Kind of like cockroaches. They're conniving businessmen lackeys working inside a newsroom under false pretenses. They piss on journalism and use the newsroom as a sales tool. Sometimes it means kowtowing to an advertiser's express wishes on story selection. And that sometimes means killing a story of public interest because it's detrimental to an advertiser.

If and when you see this behavior in newsroom management, please remember, it does not pay to argue. You will not win. As you can see by Another Side's responses, he's a well mortared brick wall incapable of movement. Ethics mean very little to him than a seldom heard word he tends to ignore when it does arise.

That doesn't mean you should sell your ethics for a job.

If this situation comes up, and it just may, then do what I and others have suggested: take the information to the AP or the newspaper and let them have the story. Don't implicate yourself. Do it anonymously if you have to.

But again, don't get into a job-losing argument with Another Side type managers. They're weasels who will cut you loose and replace you with a fresh-faced kid who'll tremble when spoken to.

Best for you to be smart and be quiet about it and never talk about it. Just get the damn story out, and you can be satisfied that you've done your duty, despite the obstacles.

Do that and you'll still have your both your job and your integrity. And the community will have the story. There's nothing you can do about the Another Sides in this business.

Do the right thing. I wish you well.

[The Mockingbird]

Actually, now that I think about it, depending on what the reporter knows about money going to his station, he might be legally obligated to inform the proper authorities.

As a matter of fact, it's not a bad idea to tell the feds anyway. You've given enough general information that, if this is a big enough story as I think it would be, the ND's gonna figure out how the AP got the story.

Tell the Feds what you know now, and you could theoretically be protected by Whistleblower laws.

Just a thought, I'm not giving legal advice or anything.

[Spike]

Originally posted by The Mockingbird:
Tell the Feds what you know now, and you could theoretically be protected by Whistleblower laws.
But you would still be a traitor. Anybody who defies his employer is a traitor. Nobody likes a traitor.

[The Mockingbird]

graemlins/iloveyou.gif Spike

If you have direct knowledge of a crime being committed at your workplace and don't report it, you could theoretically be an accessory after the fact.

Not suspicions, direct knowledge.

This is why ignorance is bliss.

[+SN]

Originally posted by foxravens:
Quit?
Sure, if you have rich parents/spouse and don't have to support yourself.I guess it depends on how you can rationalize doing a story like that. I’d rather be honest with myself.

Also, be the better person . Become rich yourself and don't rely on parents, spouse, government or anyone else. That is true individual/financial freedom.

[ August 07, 2007, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: +SN ]

[Obewon]

Originally posted by Well Wisher:
For you youngsters out there reading this very serious thread about a very real ethical dilemma, you can bet on the fact that someday you too will wind up working for someone just like the original poster's news director and or Another Side. They are insidious managers, and they are plenty in number. Kind of like cockroaches. They're conniving businessmen lackeys working inside a newsroom under false pretenses. They piss on journalism and use the newsroom as a sales tool. Sometimes it means kowtowing to an advertiser's express wishes on story selection. And that sometimes means killing a story of public interest because it's detrimental to an advertiser.

If and when you see this behavior in newsroom management, please remember, it does not pay to argue. You will not win. As you can see by Another Side's responses, he's a well mortared brick wall incapable of movement. Ethics mean very little to him than a seldom heard word he tends to ignore when it does arise.

That doesn't mean you should sell your ethics for a job.

If this situation comes up, and it just may, then do what I and others have suggested: take the information to the AP or the newspaper and let them have the story. Don't implicate yourself. Do it anonymously if you have to.

But again, don't get into a job-losing argument with Another Side type managers. They're weasels who will cut you loose and replace you with a fresh-faced kid who'll tremble when spoken to.

Best for you to be smart and be quiet about it and never talk about it. Just get the damn story out, and you can be satisfied that you've done your duty, despite the obstacles.

Do that and you'll still have your both your job and your integrity. And the community will have the story. There's nothing you can do about the Another Sides in this business.

Do the right thing. I wish you well.Oh brother, another sanctimonious "journalist" with a capital J.
It must be nice to live in Never Land where everything is black and white. Lucky you.

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

Great points on both sides...just to clear a misunderstanding up. My station has nothing to do with receiving money from anyone involved...except as a legitimate client payment(from an advertiser). Boss says no because of the fear we LOSE the client, and the thousands and thousands we make off them a year. Because the story would be bringing to light a "less than honest" organization...it could hurt their main sponsor(who is one of our main advertisers, thus them yanking their contract with us). From the news angle...it's a story. ND believes it but "hands are tied".

[Well Wisher]

Originally posted by ISTHISTHINGON?:
My station has nothing to do with receiving money from anyone involved...except as a legitimate client payment(from an advertiser).It's all about the money.

Get the story to another outlet, and the sooner the better.