 |
This Issue from John Kuczaj:
• Read, Reading, Red
• I Believe I Can Lie...
• Roeper in Feder
• Random Musings
Red, Reading, Red
I have a zillion things to say about the "reds" so I'll try to be brief.
First, it looks like most of the RedEye vending boxes--with the exception of those at or near CTA stations--are now charging 25 cents. Red Streak vending boxes are still not charging, and probably never will (read on). The RedEye is still posting 1 or 2 people handing out free copies at my EL station-Jefferson Park-every morning. Last week as I grabbed my copy, a woman who looked to be in her 40's angrily asked one of the guys why she had to pay for her copy at a newsstand on one day, but they give it out free at the station. I didn't hang around to hear the response (hey, I had to catch a train) but my guess is that the answer she got from the guy wasn't going to satisfy her. Okay, so that woman got in the RedEye habit, now the trick will be to make her pay for something she thinks she deserves for free.
As far as the RedEye goes (and at this point I'll do the disclosure thing: I am employed with a non-publishing unit of Tribune), I'd like to declare it a good thing. I'd like to, but I can't. That's okay, though because if the folks at the RedEye are to be believed, I'm not part of the target audience, so my opinion really doesn't matter. The target audience, according to the RedEye, is 18-34 year-old commuters who DON'T read a paper. So, since I read both the Sun-Times and the Tribune-that doesn't include me. That also doesn't include just about everyone in the media, especially those critics who've panned the tabloid. That having been said, I'm impressed with RedEye in one sense-it seems to have a direction and is slowly formulating its style. That style is still: "Hey, we think you kids are gonna find this cool!" but there's still time to become cool without the overt hipness pandering. The RedEye definitely has it's own voice, while the Red Streak still reads like Sun-Times Jr. with B-grade columns & comics added into the mix. I wonder what an 18-34 year-old who doesn't read a newspaper thinks of the "reds".
That leads me into an interesting panel discussion I saw last Tuesday. It was a luncheon by the Media Research Club of Chicago and the featured topic was "The New News on Newspapers". Michael Cooke, Sun-Times EIC was there as was John O'Laughlin, RedEye GM & Ken DePaola, RedEye VP of Advertising, Marketing & Sales. If you saw Cooke & O'Laughlin's appearance on Chicago Tonight awhile back, then you know what happened. Cooke plays the role of the underdog very effectively, tossing barbs, insinuations and low blows at every opportunity. The RedEye guys, of course, have to stay above the fray else they look real bad. As far as Cooke goes, I'm very shocked that some Hollywood producer hasn't come to Chicago to study his attitude, quick wit and general demeanor. He's hilarious and very entertaining. He's also quite intelligent. The whole discussion basically had Cooke (who really didn't look like he wanted to be there) lobbing grenades at the RedEye guys and then RedEye guys doing their best to dodge them while holding their fire. Cooke's whole point was that this tabloid "war" is a war of attrition, draining the Sun-Times' thin resources while draining some pocket change from the Tribune. The Red Streak was a hastily put together reaction to the RedEye, but the RedEye is an attempt by the Tribune to siphon Sun-Times readers. The RedEye guys toed the line that their tabloid was an attempt at attracting new newspaper reader. Later, one of the RedEye guys let slip that their research showed some RedEye readers would come from Sun-Times circ, but not Tribune. Cooke responded that Sun-Times circ is down only 2,000 since the RedEye debuted (though no one challenged those numbers-wherever they came from). Anyway, it was an interesting exchange and by the end of the discussion, O'Laughlin's face turned a dark shade of red containing himself in not attacking Cooke. My impression is that the Sun-Times will probably never charge for the Red Streak, and will only continue printing it until the RedEye goes away-or Hollinger Int'l. goes under.
I Believe I can Lie...
Robert Feder dropped a bomb on Channel 32 a couple weeks ago thanks to an internal memo leaked by a WFLD staffer with journalistic integrity. The memo outlined how journalists needed to treat R. Kelly a little more carefully in order for WFLD to maintain exclusive access to him. One would hope that news organizations treat all accused criminals with "particular care" until the time they are convicted of their alleged misdeeds. However, Kelly isn't your average-Joe accused criminal, he's a multi-platinum recording artist accused criminal.
Oh, and he's also a "friend" of Robin Robinson. Interesting, no?
Ya know, when she had that exclusive interview with Kelly after his first arrest, I had to wonder how that came about. I didn't think it was due to any journalistic talent, and apparently, my assessment was dead-on. They share the same business manager. The hints of a special relationship between Robinson & Kelly were there during the interview. I mean, that interview made the Diane Sawyer-Michael Jackson/Lisa Marie Presley interview look like a John Burge interrogation. On January 25th, I caught a VH1 special on R. Kelly & the underage allegations. They used a lot of file video. They used the BET interview (probably because it didn't suck) and they used some video from a Chicago TV station - Channel 2. Sure, VH1, BET & Channel 2 are owned by the same corporation, but if there was anything-anything useful in Robinson's interview, VH1 would have no doubt borrowed a clip or two. Guess not.
In the middle of Feder's column, he reports that the VP of News at 32 said that the memo was written by someone in response to "pressure" by Robinson about coverage of the alleged child rapist (statutory).
Pressure?
What, did she threaten to suck even MORE?
Promise to hang around the newsroom?
Sorry, those are low-blows, but then of course, I'm not really talking about a journalist. She's a news reader. A meat puppet. Her bio on the Channel 32 web site mentions winning awards, but nothing specific. I'm racking my brain, but I don't recall any great stories she's covered other than desk duty stuff. I remember when channel 32 news debuted and they announced the anchor team. I thought both her and her Chris Long were from out of town because I hadn't heard of either of them. She came to 32 after being the consumer reporter at Channel 2. I wonder if she's _ever_ done any general assignment stuff...then again she's been reading a Teleprompter for 15 years now, so any previous experience has no doubt atrophied. As far as her anchoring talent goes...15 years with little or no improvement doesn't seem like a badge of honor. Some might be forced out just for the stagnation. She gets a talk show pilot. Yeah, so did Richard Simmons, but then again, he didn't get his friend Robert Kelly to write the theme song. The same guy she wants the staff to give extra-special treatment when writing their stories. Interesting, no?
Robinson tells Feder, "I honestly don't feel I have the access based only on a friendship." Wow. Delusional as well. I'm surprised she didn't ask to define the word "is". Hers was the only interview outside of BET's Ed Gordon and she can't see why? The funniest line was when she said, "I know my stories are better because of the increased access and the trust that he and his people have in me." Uh-huh. Seriously, was her interview picked up by the Fox News Channel (I don't recall that it was, but maybe I missed it)?
The upshot of this whole mess is this:
I cannot trust Channel 32 with unbiased coverage of R. Kelly.
I cannot trust Robin Robinson to have any credibility.
But that's just my opinion. Walter's been lugging her on his back for years, so nothing's different anyway. Let's hope she gets that talk show and has to cut back on her news reading duties. Channel 32 could use a change to an ethical journalist paired with Walter.
Roeper in Feder
In Robert Feder's column Friday January 24th , he mentioned the debut of mediocre Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper as Channel 2's movie reviewer. Roeper made a joke and then talked about the Channel 2 news saying, "...I'm really excited about joining an organization that's committed to delivering the most energized and informed newscasts in town. I feel as if I've signed on with a team that's going to shake things up in Chicago in the months and years to come. This is the place to be."
This is the same Channel 2 that used to be (but no longer is) partnered with the Sun-Times? This is the same Channel 2 whose 10pm newscast gets crushed by the Simpsons in the ratings? I wonder what Channel 32, the current TV News partner of the Sun-Times thinks about Channel 2's energized and informed newscast? Maybe they'll mention it in Advance copy. Maybe Zwecker will say something...whoops...he's at casa de 2 now as well.
Random Musings
On Saturday, Feb 1 when the Space Shuttle broke apart, the networks did a great job of getting on the air quickly-around 8:15-8:45am. After a few hours, it became obvious that the story wasn't going to advance much, yet the nets stayed on the air with the same video looped over & over & over. Fox, NBC & Telemundo stayed with their national feeds until about 5pm when their newscasts started. CBS was lightly criticized by Tom Shales & Steve Johnson for being the first off the air, joining the Bob Hope Pro-Am (with Aaron Brown) at 3pm. I had a feeling that no matter who it was that switched away from the constant coverage, they would be criticized for it. Honestly, I stopped watching the coverage around 1pm, and I think the nets should have all switched back to normal programming earlier, letting the cable news channels handle the wall-to-wall and cutting in with regular updates on the half-hour. I found it interesting that CBS was, as I said, slightly criticized for switching at 3pm, while no one bothered to criticize Univision for switching to a wacky comedy show at 3pm. A live sports event, I can understand. A taped entertainment show? That would deserve criticism. Then again, Spanish TV doesn't count, right?
According to Robert Feder, the last few rating books haven't been very good for WGN Radio (disclosure: I work for Tribune Broadcasting, which owns WGN-AM). I can't say much about the content because I don't listen, though as their current commercial campaign suggests, I will one day wake up and magically "get it." Anyway, Last Monday the 10th, afternoon personality John Williams wrote an opinion piece in the Tribune about how he's not sure what his opinion is about the possible Iraq war. His piece began with: "Get this: I don't know if the United States should invade Iraq--and I'm a talk-show host! Can you imagine? It amazes me too." Now, I'm no expert, but I'm thinking that a radio talk show host who doesn't take an opinion on an issue is...oh, what is the term I'm thinking of...um...oh, yeah..."BORING!" My understanding is that if you have a talk show and you are talking about the most important issue in world events-you should have a definite opinion. Rush, Stern & Mancow all have definite opinions on the air, and you know what-those opinions don't always match their opinions off the air. That's fine! They are radio "personalities" paid to stir up the pot and keep people interested-and listening. They did not build huge audience numbers because they waffled. If you're a radio host, pick a side and go with it, or get out of the biz. That's just my opinion.
Is anyone else surprised that Neil Steinberg didn't pile on Bob Greene after Greene's wife passed away? I honestly expected some really mean, tasteless stuff from little Neil. Nice of him to take the high road.
If you read Blair Kamen's great report way back in January about the inconsistency in Chicago's landmarking of buildings, maybe you also noticed some glaring omissions. Like why it was so damn easy to demolish historic Comiskey Park, demolish & deface most of historic Soldier Field and knock down historic Chicago Stadium while the city is as tenacious as a pit bull to make sure the Cubs don't do a thing to alter Wrigley Field. Couldn't have anything to do with our mayor the Sox fan, huh? Of course, Blair HAD to omit this argument because the company that owns his paper also owns the Cubs and Wrigley Field. I just think it's interesting. I wonder if the mayor of Bensenville has thought of seeking landmark status for parts of O'Hare? Not that landmark status stopped Richie before.
IN THE CURRENT CHICAGO RED FACE:
- Blagojevich revealed to be an android: Quinn in charge!
- Moseley Braun running for President, stands on record
- New Bin Laden tape found on eBay
- U.N. Lunchables
- Cupid linked to al-Quaida
- NHL announces new rules
- Jay Merryman: Forget LeBron, Leftwich is Da Bomb!
- TV Highlights: "Jose Mucho Dinero" premieres
- Cool Again: Duct tape
Check it out at: www.chicagoredface.com.
Chicago Media Examiner e-mail delivery
If you'd like to receive the CME via e-mail, click here to subscribe. Whenever a new issue of the Chicago Media Examiner comes out, it will be e-mailed to you automatically.
Take a look at the new, hip: Chicago Red Face
Take a look at the previous issue: Wednesday, January 18
Take a look at the issue before that: Tuesday, December 31
* Pseudonym
Published biweekly...or so.
Contributions welcome--e-mail an article to the editor
|
|
|
|
