Melanie Morgan accuses SF Chronicle of manipulating photo to make Richard Pombo look black

The San Francisco Chronicle has been accused by Melanie Morgan, of ABC Radio Disney on station KSFO 560 AM, of altering photos of Richard Pombo and playing the race card to influence elections.

I sent the letter below to the Chronicle and to Jim Romenesko. I also sent it to some friends who forwarded it onto others in the industry. Although Romenesko ignored it, the Chronicle might want to look into this some more. Sure I'm a tiny blog and what I say is often ignored, but Morgan was on national TV last week and is on the second largest talk radio station in the Bay Area. She calls for journalists to be hanged, she accuses photojournalists of doctoring and shading photos. Management of the journalists and photojournalists need to defend themselves. The LA Times did demanded a correction from Morgan when she claimed they doctored their photos, so why is the Chronicle ignoring her comment? Could it be they don't want to upset the focus of their Chronicle Magazine puff piece?

Maybe I should send this to Michelle Malkin, she loves to hear about photo manipulation and the race card game is right down her alley. Of course when you listen to Morgan's accusation you have to wonder, who has a race problem, here?

Sent October 25, 2006
Jim Romenesko
Poynter Online
Dear Jim:

Yesterday Melanie Morgan of KSFO said that photographer Jamie Rose (or the photo editor at the San Francisco Chronicle) purposely shaded a photograph of California Congressman Richard Pombo to make him look like a black man. (audio link 1:01. Comment at 28 seconds) (link to SF Chronicle article and photos in question)

Morgan submitted no proof for this accusation.

The Chronicle has been accused of altering photos and playing the race card to influence elections. This is a very serious accusation. I hope the Chronicle takes it seriously. The Chronicle considers Morgan important enough to put her on the cover of their magazine, so when she says that the Jamie Rose photo of Richard Pombo "...is shaded to the point where it looks like he is a BLACK MAN." they will probably investigate and see if anything happened.

And if Jamie Rose or his photo editor has shaded the photo then he probably will be suspended or fired. Because that is what newspapers do when they find out that a photographer has manipulated photos for political purposes.

Bloggers have been lionized for catching a Reuter's photographer altering a photo. Photographers have been fired for this kind of offense. Jamie Rose's reputation has been cast in doubt.

But if they find out that nothing was done to the photo and Morgan's accusation, broadcast on the public's airwaves to hundreds of thousands of people in the Bay Area, is defamation, then maybe there should be some consequences to Morgan.

Morgan has a history of accusing photographers of doctoring photos, (see my letter to the LA Times and their demand for a response) but clearly since there were no consequences from her previous accusation she just did it again.

Morgan talked on MSNBC's Hardball about the responsibility of being a journalist as if she still was one. What would happen to a broadcast journalist for ABC Radio (KSFO's parent company) who publicly accused the SF Chronicle of photojournalism misconduct and they were wrong? Would they get reprimanded by their boss? Forced to apologize? Fined? Fired? Sued?

Journalists, photojournalists and their management must stand up to these radio hosts in clearly delineated situations like I have listed or else the rhetoric escalates. Morgan's co-host, Lee Rogers, didn't like what the AP wrote so he called for the AP reporters to commit mass suicide. (audio link)Did anyone at the AP ask for an apology? I contacted the management, they heard the audio clip, but as far as I know nothing happened.

Melanie Morgan called for the hanging death of Bill Keller and journalists at the NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal on public airwaves. She may have qualified her comments on TV or to the Chronicle reporter, but broadcast ON THE AIR she just said, "Get 'em. Hang 'em. (audio link)

When someone calls for the death of journalists on broadcast radio it should mean something. Does the journalist community think, as Morgan seems to, that executing Bill Keller is funny? (Listen as Morgan laughs with Ann Coulter about it)

Is it hilarious to ABC Radio journalists when they hear jokes about Bill Keller being electrocuted on KSFO? (Listen
as Morgan laughs at her co-host's imitation of Keller's death in the electric chair).

Don't like a photo? Let the death threats flow. Listen to another sick joke at KSFO where the punch line is a photographer's assassination (audio link). It must be fine with KSFO/ABC Radio's management since they continue to support these hosts. But is this fine with the Chronicle? I've concluded that the WSJ, who's own Glenn Simpson was sentenced to death by Morgan, must have no problem with it because they have continued to sponsor a segment on Morgan's show.

Finally, I would like to point out an underlying racist attitude in Morgan's comment. I encourage you to listen to the tone of her comment. She practically spits out the words "A BLACK MAN" as if Pombo being black would be a TERRIBLE thing. And that the MOST horrible thing that the Chronicle could do, in it's alleged photo manipulation, would be to turn Pombo into a BLACK MAN. Why? Because people would not vote for a black man over a white man? Because Republicans don't vote for black men? Because a black man would never be a Republican? That certainly sounds like the views of someone prejudiced against black people's ability to govern to me.

I'm sure that Morgan will claim that she are Rogers aren't racist. That they are just joking with their calls for the violent death of journalists and others. That, to give another example, they didn't know that when Lee Rogers talked about
shooting a man between the eyes and torturing him by attaching electrodes to his testicles that they were talking about a black man.

What a proud moment in broadcasting that must have been for Disney. Will KSFO/ABC Radio/Disney management want to proudly proclaim that their radio hosts don't discriminate when calling for the death of others on the air? I'll bet the sale of ABC Radio to Citadel Broadcasting can't come soon enough. Maybe Citadel's chairman and CEO, Farid Suleman, will want to consider KSFO as one of the 11 stations out of 122 he has to cut loose to meet the terms of the purchase of ABC Radio from Disney.

Sincerely,

SB

Frank J. Vega - Publisher and President
Phil Bronstein - Executive Vice President and Editor
Gary L. Anderson - Executive Vice President
John Hare, ABC Radio
Dan Rosenheim, CBS5
ABC Listens, ABC7
KTVU News, 2

We honour their memory and everything they accomplished

Do the these names mean anything to you?
Lieutenant Colonel Du Zhaoyu, Jinan, People's Republic of China
Lieutenant-Commander Jarno Mäkinen, Kaarina, Finland.
Major Paeta Derek Hess-von Kruedener, Canada
Major Hans-Peter Lang, Styria, Austria

They had wives, ex-wives, former girlfriends or boyfriends, parents and children. They were trying to do an important job. Maybe they were idealists, maybe they were cynical realists, but they were far from home on a stated mission of fostering and maintaining peace around the world.

They were all part of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization in South Lebanon whose lives were tragically cut short on July 25.

One of my new best friends is from Canada, I have a real fondness for Canadians in general. The ones I know are funny, brave, smart and honorable. I didn't know Major Paeta Derek Hess-von Kruedener, but if he is anything like my Canadian friends I'd probably like him.

People who bash the UN seem to think people on those missions are some nameless faceless people in blue helmets. The same people who laugh at their death are quick to acknowledge how precious American soldiers are. Can't any of this concern for soldier's lives be extended to people who are on a mission of maintaining peace? Especially for soldiers who's job it is to go where humans have lost their humanity and turned on each other?

Is the UN perfect? No. But does that mean that it is hilarious to laugh at the deaths of their Peacekeepers? Should they become the punchline in a joke? If you knew Paeta Derek Hess-von Kruedener would it upset you if someone joked about his death to 100,000s of thousands of people over broadcast radio? Is it funny to joke about blowing up your home base?

On ABC Radio/Disney station KSFO 560 AM in SF on July 27th Ann Coulter was talking to Lee Rogers, Melanie Morgan and Tom Brenner (whose pseudonym is "Officer Vic") about the bombing in Southern Lebanon.

Ann Coulter: "On the bright side we hit a couple of UN peacekeepers."
Melanie Morgan: laughs
Officer Vic: "Look at those blue helmets go flyin'"
Coulter: "Somebody has to tell Israel about the installation on 42nd street."
Laughter
(Audio link 1.01 clip, comment at 45 sec)

It is widely agreed that Ann Coulter says things that are repellent to decent humans. But when you LAUGH at her obnoxious comments, what does that say about YOUR character? If you were an advertiser would you really want to be associated with someone who says things like this or laughs at the deaths of Peacekeepers?



I'm no News Hour, but I'd like to offer a moment of silence in remembrance for these four men.
Thank you for your service.

( From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, with links to official confirmation documents)
Lieutenant Colonel Du Zhaoyu , 34, from Jinan, People's Republic of China. He had served as secretary to the military attache in the Chinese Embassy in India. He is survived by his wife and a one-year-old son.[8]


Lieutenant-Commander Jarno Mäkinen, 29, from Kaarina, Finland. Lt Cdr Mäkinen was a former unit commander in the Uusimaa Brigade. He was transferred to the UNTSO in November 2005.[9]
Major Paeta Derek Hess-von Kruedener, a member of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. He had previously served in Cyprus, Bosnia and Congo before serving in UNTSO from October 2005.[10]
Major Hans-Peter Lang, 44, from Styria, Austria.[11] He is survived by an 11-year-old son and his 70-year old mother.

Kevin Tillman Watch. Day 3

This great esssay was posted on Oct. 19th. I'm going to keep track of when the radio hosts at KSFO start the smears of Kevin Tillman. Then of course we'll count down to the day thatMelanie Morgan starts her "Kevin you don't speak for me" tour. They there will be the stories about how Kevin is dishonoring his brother's memory and maybe if we are really lucky she will write a book that talks about Kevin's personal life.

After Coulter broke the "last shred of human decency" barrier by going after the 9/11 Widows, pretty much anyone is fair game.

For those of you who haven't read it, check it out.

After Pat’s Birthday

Posted on Oct 19, 2006 . By Kevin Tillman

Editor’s note: Kevin Tillman joined the Army with his brother Pat in 2002, and they served together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pat was killed in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. Kevin, who was discharged in 2005, has written a powerful, must-read document.

It is Pat’s birthday on November 6, and elections are the day after. It gets me thinking about a conversation I had with Pat before we joined the military. He spoke about the risks with signing the papers. How once we committed, we were at the mercy of the American leadership and the American people. How we could be thrown in a direction not of our volition. How fighting as a soldier would leave us without a voice… until we got out.

Much has happened since we handed over our voice:

Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can’t be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.

Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.


Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them. Somehow that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few “bad apples” in the military.

Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It’s interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air as his body comes apart and his skin melts to the seat.

Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.

Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.

Somehow those afraid to fight an illegal invasion decades ago are allowed to send soldiers to die for an illegal invasion they started.

Somehow faking character, virtue and strength is tolerated.

Somehow profiting from tragedy and horror is tolerated.

Somehow the death of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people is tolerated.

Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and The Constitution is tolerated.

Somehow suspension of Habeas Corpus is supposed to keep this country safe.

Somehow torture is tolerated.

Somehow lying is tolerated.

Somehow reason is being discarded for faith, dogma, and nonsense.

Somehow American leadership managed to create a more dangerous world.

Somehow a narrative is more important than reality.

Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.

Somehow the most reasonable, trusted and respected country in the world has become one of the most irrational, belligerent, feared, and distrusted countries in the world.

Somehow being politically informed, diligent, and skeptical has been replaced by apathy through active ignorance.

Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious criminals are still in charge of this country.

Somehow this is tolerated.

Somehow nobody is accountable for this.

In a democracy, the policy of the leaders is the policy of the people. So don’t be shocked when our grandkids bury much of this generation as traitors to the nation, to the world and to humanity. Most likely, they will come to know that “somehow” was nurtured by fear, insecurity and indifference, leaving the country vulnerable to unchecked, unchallenged parasites.

Luckily this country is still a democracy. People still have a voice. People still can take action. It can start after Pat’s birthday.

Hey Hardball! Want Melanie Morgan info? Look over here! Sigh. Goggle must have changed their results algorithm.

I'm pretty sure Google made a semi-big change recently. Once in a while Google makes a major change in their search result algorithm. They also make regular tweaks based on the ways that search engine optimizers (SEOs) game the search engines. Companies who get screwed because they were gaming the system bitch and moan when it happens. "I didn't know that my SEO was using a fake link farm! It's not my fault! I'm going to sue Google!"

However, in the process companies that don't play the SEO game sometimes get banished to the back pages of search results unintentionally. Other people will unintentionally get the benefit of this new algorithm. Today's beneficiary? KSFO radio hosts, especially Melanie Morgan.

Right now I should be getting lots of hits from the book review editors from newspapers and TV producers from various TV shows like Hardball looking to prep their boss for Morgan's Friday appearance. But I'm not. I'm sure the folks at Disney are breathing a sigh of relief. And the Cumberland Press PR people (the wing-nut book publishing front for NewsMax) must just be giddy.

Morgan derided people who wrote to Hardball last time after her comments about Bill Keller. They wanted the producers to know just what kind of person they were giving this national exposure too.

I'm sorry the producers won't find me with a Google search. I could send them some more clips of the disgusting things that Morgan says, so maybe people will remember she's a distinctively mean talk radio shouter. Sure it says "Talk Radio Host" on the chyron under her face on the show, but she still talks about her 30 years as a journalist. I wonder if she is counting the last ten years on talk radio. I sure hope not.

Well if the Hardball producers Roland Woerner or Mamta Trivedi do find me I'd be happy to enlighten them on the obnoxious comments that Ms. Morgan makes on broadcast radio. But sometimes it's not what she says, is it? When someone else jokes about killing and torturing someone, does your laughter count? When you DO NOT denounce a horrific comment on the air, but laugh at it, what does that say about you? Does that make you a fitting guest to pass judgment on the lives of others? Does that make you a "good journalist"?

For example, here is one where Morgan roars in laughter at the bombing death of UN Peacekeepers. (And remember folks, she's a Christian!)

(Audio link--1:07 clip 45 sec in.)
Ann Coulter: "On the bright side we hit a couple of UN peacekeepers." Morgan laughs
Tom Brenner "Officer Vic": "Look at those blue helmets go flyin'"
Coulter "Somebody has to tell Israel about the installation on 42nd street." Laughter

Morgan made the horrific comment. Morgan and Brenner laugh. Coulter makes another horrific comment, they laugh again. So technically Morgan didn't make light of the bombing death of UN peacekeepers and Morgan didn't suggested that the UN be bombed by Israel. But what kind of person thinks that is funny?

No laws were broken here, but agreeing with and laughing with the morally repugnant Ann Coulter should be a warning sign for advertisers. When Morgan agrees with Ann Coulter the odds are that she will also say morally reprehensible things and should NOT represent your products.

Rejected Torture Bill Tag Lines

Top Ten Rejected Bush Administration Tag Lines for the Torture Bill Signing. (As read by people released from Abu Ghraib and Gitmo after it was determined they were wrongly detained:)


10. Torture, it does a Body Good!

9. Torture: "Tastes great! Less killing!"

8. Where do you want to go today? (Rendition version)

7. Torture, I'm loving it!

6. Iraqi blood. Finger lickin' good.

5. One of the world’s largest suppliers of reliable products and services to the oil and gas industry since 1919.
(Oops that's Halliburton's.)

4. Reach out and electrocute someone.

3. Torture thy neighbor.

2. Have it your way --NOT!

And the number one Rejected Bush Administration Tag Lines for the Torture Bill Signing.

1. Torture, Just Do It.


Apologies to David Letterman and everyone being tortured the world over. No apologies to the people who torture and the politicians who enable them.

Humor in Uniform?

I clipped this out last year but didn't post it. I thought maybe next year it won't hit quite as hard.

I was wrong.

Oh and by the way, to me supporting the troops starts with not putting them in harms way unless it is absolutely necessary and making sure they have a plan that isn't based on wishful thinking.

Smoking Gun in Korea. Bush and Condi Knew. Didn't Tell.

Remember all the Hullabaloo about the Smoking Gun in the shape of a mushroom cloud referring to Iraq? Guess what? Wrong country. And, it didn't have to happen this way. Check out this great article: Rolling Blunder, How the Bush administration let North Korea get nukes. By Fred Kaplan It's a bit long but you will feel SMARTER after reading it. (Thanks to Digby for directing me to it.)

On Oct. 4, Kelly flew to Pyongyang to confront North Korean officials with the evidence [that North Korea may have been acquiring centrifuges]. The North Koreans admitted it was true. For almost two weeks, the Bush administration kept this meeting a secret. The U.S. Senate was debating a resolution to give President Bush the authority to go to war in Iraq. The public rationale for war was that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. If it was known that North Korea was also making WMDs--and nuclear weapons, at that--it would have muddied the debate over Iraq. Some would have wondered whether Iraq was the more compelling danger--or asked why Bush saw a need for war against Iraq but not against North Korea. The Senate passed the Iraqi war resolution on Oct. 11.

The Bush administration publicly revealed what it had known for weeks about North Korea's enriched-uranium program on Oct. 17.

Melanie Morgan on Chronicle Magazine Cover

So Melanie Morgan was on the cover of the SF Chronicle Magazine today. I'm busy on other projects but I figured two people would want my take on this article.

Why did Joe Garofoli, of the San Francisco Chronicle not give us some real quotes that reflect WHY people see Melanie Morgan, Lee Rogers, Brian Sussman and Tom Brenner ("Officer Vic") as "hate radio wingnuts"? Maybe he didn't read this article by Joe Conason because he didn't subscribe to Salon. Perhaps he couldn't find my blog using that new fangled Google searchy thing.

Atrios always points out how reporters are afraid of being called liberal so they downplay the actual attitudes and comments of the person they are profiling. I understand profile pieces aren't hard hitting news stories, but even the EDITOR of the San Francisco Chronicle Magazine, Alison Biggar, said that "Joe Garofoli captures this defiant right-wing shouter graciously."

Biggar thinks that her own father who was a "card-carrying member of the Socialist Party but ended up to the right of Ronald Reagan," "was rational and centric compared to KSFO radio host Melanie Morgan." Why did Biggar approve this story and not send Garofoli back to get the actual content that Morgan is shouting that Bigger considered irrational? Was she afraid that Morgan would yell at her like she yelled at Todd Milbourn, the Sacramento Bee writer who wrote about Morgan and Move America Forward, the group that Morgan is a Chairwoman of?

I believe that in the business this is called a PUFF PIECE. The publishers of Morgan's book and the KSFO PR team are giving each other high-fives today. Of course Morgan will be complaining about her photo on the cover and probably about the text as well because it still wasn't puffy enough. (I'll bet you 300 quatloos that she'll be bitching about your article Monday morning, Joe. Drop me a line at spockosemail atsign gmail.com so I can collect Monday night.)

The article doesn't even have the obligatory "she lied, he said" full comparisons that are standard in political reporting these days. With the exception of a Dr. who described her as an "action-seeking gambler" (which sounds so much better than a woman who "dumped her baby with her baby-beating stepson to go gambling") Garofoli doesn't really bother to talk to people who would make it clear WHY she would be controversial at all. He makes her sound rational and those mean liberals at Media Matters are just over reacting.

Maybe Biggar is just trying to avoid Morgan calling for Garofoli to be hanged or doesn't want Morgan to disagree about the various means of execution of newspaper editors as she did with her gal pal Anne Coulter (link). Maybe Biggar was trying to stop followers of Morgan and Coulter from mailing her anthrax. I guess I should forgive them both for fearing for their lives. If so, good luck.

I've been defending editors from these people for months, but from my responses management at the AP and the WSJ seem to be fine with people like Morgan and Rogers calling for the death of their reporters. The AP doesn't see to care and the WSJ continues to be sponsored on the show. Maybe Biggar cares more about her editors than the management at the AP. Nancy Abramson at the WSJ didn't bother to respond to my email where I pointed out Morgan considered Glen Simpson worthy of death too. I would think that after Daniel Pearl was beheaded that the Wall Street Journal would take seriously people calling for their editors to be hanged. Frankly, I hope the reason Biggar didn't tell Garofoli to dig too deep was because she was afraid of Morgan and her followers. These people ARE dangerous. And remember, they will never be happy with any story that reveals the truth about them. So please, please, please be careful with the snail mail you receive. I'm not kidding.

When the Bee did a balanced piece on Move America Forward Morgan flipped out thinking that by feature they meant this kind of Puff Piece. She called the Bee story an attempt to "smear our good name." Why? It pointed out how their political group, Move America Forward, classifies itself as a charity so that contributions are tax- deductible, which should constrain their speech.

Morgan claims that her group is "hyper-vigilant about staying within the confines of the rules and regulations governing 501 (c) 3's" yet for four hours a day five days a week the co-founder and chairwoman of MAF is on KSFO supporting candidates on the radio from her Bully pulpit. I suppose it is easy to separate the co-founder of the group from the person on the radio who talks about the group and what it does and which candidates she supports, and I'm sure that the IRS will let it slide, just like the management, her husband, does. (Hey btw, KSFO, nice trick with the various companies paying Morgan and Swanson to avoid any conflict, I'm sure that works great and is totally legal. )

The fiction in this article is she is just a "Conservative shouter". This is what the sales people at KSFO want you to believe. By not describing what she, Rogers, Sussman and Brenner really talk about Garofoli continues to support the fiction. These people are radical haters who call for the death of newspaper editors, Muslims, and everyone in the Middle East who they think shouldn't exist. Maybe this is the new definition of conservative. Maybe you could at least call them killer conservatives.

Remember, this all takes place on commercially supported broadcast radio. Inciting violence toward others is NOT fine on broadcast radio. As you can hear I have audio clips to help educate people on just how violent and hateful these people are toward others.

Maybe if Garofoli had LISTENED to a few more programs of Morgan, Rogers or Sussman to understand what I'm saying the article would be different. I've got plenty of info on my website if he had bothered to Google it and spent more than a few days listening to their show. Garofoli was looking at what transformed Morgan into who she is today, but he failed to describe the kind of comments that lead Olbermann to call her the "Worst Person in the World" or comments that made her own mother oppose her.

For example, Garofoli characterized MAFs upcoming ad in production as urging "less political correctness in airport screening" -- and how they aren't " shy about reinforcing cultural stereotypes". I love the way that the right uses the line "I'm not being political correct" right before they say some bigoted thing. Morgan's ad is calling for racial profiling at the airport. They have said so several times on their show.

Morgan wants to ratchet up the hate in a totally disingenuous way to make us "safer"in the air (of course Lee Rogers wants all the pilots to have guns). Never mind that multiple experts have talked about the ineffectiveness of racial profiling in airports (vs. something effective like behavioral profiling). When the facts don't back up Morgan she simply says she knows something, "In her heart." I have to wonder what kind of black heart she has. (Oops, that was an opinion on my part. I have never seen Morgan's heart and I can not comment on how black it is or is not.)

I'm sorry you were played Mr. Garofoli. I'm glad that Biggar is trying to protect you and the paper, but believe me when I say they won't appreciate how gentle you were in your story. As Paul Krugman has said many times about the Bush Administration, these people really are radicals, and you gave them cover by not understanding that.

Now in the article Garofoli said "others called for advertiser boycotts.", if I wanted to go after Morgan's and Roger's advertisers you would know about it. Two other readers of this blog have contacted Sussman's advertisers and they have pulled their ads. Aetna is just the latest to yank their ads on his show. Good for you Aetna!

As a matter of fact that gives me an idea. I think I'll start letting the advertisers know what they are getting when they advertise on the Morgan, Rogers and "Officer Vic" program. Maybe if they actually heard what these people are saying they wouldn't be so quick to associate themselves with these hate merchants.

So, a note to everyone who might find this tiny N-tier blog and is interesting in helping contact advertisers so that they know what they are supporting, drop me a note. Or if you have already sent advertisers a letter copy me on your email. If you don't like what Morgan and her c0horts are saying, don't bother to write them, they don't care what you think, but advertisers, well that's another story.

I'm at spockosemail AT gmail.com.

Why Did CBS5 Run This Story?

UPDATE: FRIDAY OCT. 06! Exclusive! Must credit SPOCKO! (I just say that to tweak Drudge, you don't have to credit me.)
Well good for CBS Channel 5 in SF! It appears that they have pulled their story where they revealed the name of one of the pages in the Foley sexual predator case.
I went to the link today and it is NOW password protected. Thank you. And I'm also not going to link to the password protected story because this is the kind of thing that will draw MORE attention to the name. I do hope that they protect it from crawlers and web-bots, because even thought it is "out there", links to the name will boost the credibility of "Wild Bill" and the jerks who link to him like Instapundit.

(Now if I could only get ABC/Disney to fire the hate mongers at KSFO I'll be really happy!)

Dear CBS News Director:

Could you please explain the “news” judgment on running this story?
Cal Student Said To Be Page In Foley Sex Scandal -- (no link provided on purpose)

Do you often disclose the names of juvenile victims of sexual predators? Or do you only do that when they are outed by bloggers? Remember during a prominent rape case TV newscasters ran a Grey Dot over the victim’s face and most responsible papers didn’t run the victim’s name? Did it not occur to you that this case deserves the same care? Or because it was “out there” did you decide to run with the story because it had a “local” angle?

By running this story you are part of the chilling effect for the other pages who might want to come forward. How many other pages will trust news organizations after they see how sloppy ABC was and that competing organizations like yours will run their names if it is “out there”? Furthermore, did YOUR team confirm the name or did you take the word of blogger “Wild Bill”? I believe in the power of “citizen journalism” but you are TV journalists and have a bit more power, reach and presumably more credibility at stake than to trust “Wild Bill” who felt it necessary to ‘out’ the page. (And by the way, do you know what HIS agenda was for this outing?)

I want to see a serious blog post on the thought process you had when you ran this story and how it fits in with your other news reporting guidelines in similar cases. Was it because you felt the public had a “right to know”? Or was it run because you wanted to show that ABC screwed up?

Sincerely,

Mr. Spocko

P.S. I’m using my blog name because if I asked you to protect my identity I don’t feel I could trust you to hold it in confidence.