Bad Blood? - Police Vs Media

[ewink]

Thanks for the replies guys (and gals).

Believe it or not a lot of us in the media have the same complaints about our bosses as you have about us. There is too much empasis (sorry I am a terrible speller, which is why I am a photographer and not an English teacher) on being first. Plus of course there is the 'it bleeds it leads' mentality. We're not entirely to blame for that though. People don't watch news to hear how everything was fine today.

I apoligize to all the LEOs who have been unfairly burned by the media. There are tons of journalists out there who really do want to be fair and unbiased. But there are others who just want to be the one to break a big story - regardless of whether or not it's 100% factual.

Johninaustin, I can't reply on the specifics of what you mentioned except for one. I will never, ever put someones life in jeporady for a story. I have no clue what journalist basis a story would have putting a police officers home address on television would serve. That seems out of line in my, and I am sure others in my fields opinion.

Group9: #4 is a good example of why the police should make themselves more availible to the media. Half the time I have to interview some dumbarse witness because the cops won't talk. If I come back from a stabbing or something with nothing - I get chewed out. At 9:15 I don't have time to wait for everything to be wrapped up before I have to head back. This kinda goes along with what lindat2957 said about being busy. I understand that. We all understand busy. But at 10:00 (or 11:00, depending on where you live :D) all the people on that street are going to want to know why there were 14 police cars, two fire trucks and a pair of ambulances on thier block.

Personally, I'm paid by the hour so if I have to sit around for two hours waiting for you to finish your investigation, I could care less. But if you won't talk to me before I have to leave the drunk idiot next door who heard gunshots and saw people running, will.

One LT in my area has told his guys "Let them shoot what they want and tell them what they want to know so they will leave and let us do our job." He's right.

I think I have an advantage over others in my business simply because I wanted to be one of you guys for as long as I remember. I learned as much about police work as a layperson can. I know when to just hang back and watch, and when it seems like a reasonable enough time to bug someone.

lindat2957, one more thing - slanting something in the police's favor is no more right than slanting it the otherway. I agree with you guys that too often we 'colorize' things to make it seem - more extreme - than it actually is. And you're right, it's to drive ratings and readership. But to be fair, from what I have seen that's more the fault of management and corporate media ownership then it is a reporters bias.

Deputy757, most of the local PD's and the SO have policies where the officer on scene (doing the paper) is allowed to at least give the media the meat and potatos of the situation. While I don't know their specific policy, SPD won't allow anyone below SGT go on camera - but I've gotten info from OFC's before. I honestly don't believe they know their policy any better than I do. Their PIO doesn't work outside 9-5 except in huge events so we try to rely on the officer on the scene, the SGT on scene, or if we can find him, the LT shift commander.

Most of what you guys have talked about can't be helped by someone from my level. So I guess I am going to have to accept there will always be a 'confrontational' relationship between us no matter where I end up working after leaving this city. But I hope you guys do understand that we're not all the same, and you don't judge every journalist based on the actions of a few or the decisions of their management. I for one would never stay in front of an emergency vehicle like the idiot did in Deputy757's case. Though, like it or lump it - if you won't tell me what I need to know, I'll bug the hell out fo you till you do. But I'm likely to buy you lunch at Denny's for being a good sport too.

Now, continue to respond, I'm going to bed. :D

Stay safe.

[ewink]

I have been misquoted and only reportede in too many bad situations, or situations easily reported "as" bad to have any trust for a journalist.

Though, even though you are a photographer, you know what we all mean.

I work alone mostly when ever I come in contact with your guys so I have to be a journalist too. I collect the facts and all that. I also read the story before we go to air and if anything looks a foul I let people know.

Again, sorry you've had bad experiences. :( If we ever cross paths I won't take your 'go to hell' personally.

BTW, rep for the avitar.

[ewink]

^^
NM I guess I can't give rep. :( When I can I will.

[lindat2957]

Thanks for the replies guys (and gals).

lindat2957, one more thing - slanting something in the police's favor is no more right than slanting it the otherway.
Stay safe.

I did not write that well enough. All we want is the honest perspective not just the ones that make us look bad. I did not mean to imply that we want the story "slanted" in our favor, but merely not slanted at all would be nice.

Just so you know, for many of us, talking to the media is against the rules. Only someone designated to do so or given permission to do so, may talk to them. So, unfortunately a meal at Dennies would cost a lot on the discipline side of things. Only once was a blanket statement of "officers may talk to the media" given. This was after the death of an officer, and we were permitted to only give our statements of how his death impacted us personally and what we thought of him as a person/officer. So we are also very limited.

[ChesCopPodz]

My personal experience is that I don't mind the media here all that much. We have a favorable public opinion and rarely is something put into a bad light for us. We also have a policy which forbids us from giving statements and the media here knows it so that helps. The cameramen are the ones I like the best though. I have yet to come across one of them that i don't like, same can't be said for all the talking heads though, some here are good but the others I stay away from.

[Ranger__101]

Here's how I feel about the media. -- Note Personal Though --

The media is not in the the business of providing the facts and truth to the public. They are about providing an entertaining story and gaining raitings for their news cast. Why do you think that when the ratings go down the brodcasters end up "leaving for a new opprotunity" or disappearing from the show.

News is now a money makers and when they can get the high ratings during 4 times a year they can charge more for the advertising and claime they have more viewers. I am now to the point that I can tell in what part of Feb, May, Aug, and Nov sweeps week is by the "human interest" and investigative reporting that they are pushing.

As a Law Enforcement office and also in the field of Emergency Management it is difficult to provide information to the media during an event because we are still trying to put the fact together and unless there are enough people on scene that someone can step back and try to put the whole picture together and have a good statement what we would say would not be reflective of the situation and not acurate.

We also know that the media will also ask any one around what they saw and posibally go with the one the air statement of the bystander since that keeps more viewers tuned in than an Officer making a pre-written statement.

There are departments that have great relations with the Media. These friendships didn't happen overnight and the Media and the PR people have gotten together to work out informal agreements and what can be said during events and how the departments would like to be represented in the media. Thet departments don't say "don't do this", but ask things do be done in a general manner.

My other concern with the media is private individuals who are out getting news tapes and stories for themselves and selling it for the highest bidder. They don't get paid by the hour and must make material to sell to the networks and may have lower standards then your reporter from a major media channel.

For any of the media who are reading this the best way to get the information you need for stories and also help the Law Enforcement and Emergency Management agencies is to reach out to them before an event and meet and discuss what information you need for a story and also ask the Law Enforcement and Emergency Managment staff what you can do for them.

[oscarmitre]

As a working copper I found on those few times when I did interact with journalists that they could be a pain until you just told them what they needed to know. As for how a story is portrayed in the various media, well it's not the individual journalists who make up the headlines or edit the tapes (to the best of my knowledge). And as for the media generally - well we need them and they need us. It's good for every employee of the police organisation to get some media training though.

On the other hand when I worked for our Association I had excellent relations with various journalists and their management. We didn't get a free ride and there were times when I had to bite my tongue (especially doing live tv) but I have to say in that time only once did I come up against an unprofessional journalist and he worked me over once, that's the only chance he got.

[Group9]

As someone much smarter than me once pointed out, the news media are not really in the "news" business. They are in the "advertising" business, and putting out news, is just a vehicle to get people to read their advertising.

[S43riff]

. But to be fair, from what I have seen that's more the fault of management and corporate media ownership then it is a reporters bias.

...Oh like a police officer being grilled in the media for following an order?

[Deputy757]

One LT in my area has told his guys "Let them shoot what they want and tell them what they want to know so they will leave and let us do our job." He's right.

He's wrong. As long as the press has as much access to the scene as the general public then they have no reason to complain. Anything more without approval from higher ups, or more importantly, the officer in charge of the investigation, and the average line officer has made a serious boo-boo.

Deputy757, most of the local PD's and the SO have policies where the officer on scene (doing the paper) is allowed to at least give the media the meat and potatos of the situation.
Ours doesn't and neither does any of the departments around us. In fact, the policy expressly forbids any comments to the media unless approved to do so by a commanding officer.

I honestly don't believe they know their policy any better than I do.
You'd be surprised. :D

Though, like it or lump it - if you won't tell me what I need to know, I'll bug the hell out fo you till you do.
No problem...as long as you remember that too much "bugging" may be construed as "interfering" and then lunch may be provided courtesy of the county!

[sgtbear111]

My contacts with the media have been mostly negative. I could divide them into rural and urban sub-categories.

The rural news crews are generally there before the city types, to capture the story in a manner that informs the community. They are often well know to the police on-scene and first names are used. I have been assisted by a news camera when we did not then have the equipment to document a scene. The reporter made a note of the request in the story, and brought some public attention to our lack of equipment as a side-note.

Now, if this is a big event, the city talking heads come out and shoulder the local media aside. What brings the urban jackels is race, blood, some kind of class-warfare issue, or something that will benefit the political agenda of station management. The urban attitude is arrogant, they are there to SELECT the facts to support what they have decided to write, before they get out of the truck. They are avoided and heads are turned as the cameras set up; "here come the sharks".

"Off the record" and "privileged" relationship. The city media claim this as a 'right' to protect their sources or screen the lies they tell. The police may share that 'off the record' relationship with individual reporters. But, burn me once, and every cop in the area will know that reporter and news agency as unworthy of their trust. Individual reporters and officers, may share a cup of fire dept coffee, while standng in the rain at a long term scene, and there is potential for some cooperation, respecting one-another's job and needs. We understand the competition and the deadlines the reporters must endure. We know that their editors and corporate ownership can, and usually do, twist the facts at the upper management level. Information, once given, can be massaged or spun to mean anything. We may hear profuse apologies from young reporters who found their stories clipped and twisted. A reporter will burn their trust forever by letting a news "shark' or 'editor with agenda' know they have some insde perspective. Doing so, they are compelled to give up that info for exploitation. So, a message to young reporters, "off the record" includes your boss and colleagues. Once your trust is broken, best find work in another state, or cover the stock market or garden page. All you will see is the backs of working police officers. Accuracy and fairness is underlying reason why we avoid and distrust the media. Dan Rather is a very good example of the poisoned well the media drinks from.

I have been described as "arrogant...refusing...secretive....uncooperat ive" by a news source for telling an obnoxious reporter there is no damn way I'm gving up the name of an police informant. The editor let it go to print, so goodbye to both of you and your paper too, I don't take your calls anymore.

I got a videotape from a TV news crew on cell phone following a DUI. They filmed the drunken maneuvering, the rollover wreck, the unhurt drunk tossiing the booze into the brush, and flagging a ride. Followed the drunk to an in-patient alcohol treatment center, where they discreetly parked until contacted by police. Two professional witnesses and all on tape. that's factual reporting and good citizenship, and the station mgmt backed them in their actions. Rural TV news crew.

my 2 cents