HIDDEN CAMERA as part of a Network News Social Experiment?

PART 1 of 4
A few weeks ago I was channel surfing and came across ABC’s 20/20 featuring a twist on the “hidden camera” investigation that I found to be as equally as unethical as any other use of hidden cameras.

ABC News hired actors Nate and Sarah to act out a scenario in which a couple gets into a heated, almost violent, argument in public. This report was dressed up as 20/20 series about ethical dilemmas to determine if people do the right thing.

The irony of this series is in the fact the reporter and producers forgot to consider the ethics of their own behavior in using deception as a tactic in this hidden camera experiment. It was so over the top and clearly unethical from a social science point of view (informed consent of the participants-- they became participants against their will) as well as from the journalism POV.

In fact the Poynter Institute has some strong guidelines about using hidden cameras in journalism and 20/20 failed to meet the burden (just as the network did with the infamous Primetime Live case with Food Lion in the 1990s).

20/20 also attempted to present this story as a social experiment and framed it as an academic exercise to probe society. I suspect most Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at universities would refuse to allow such tactics because hidden cameras are clear violations of informed consent.

From my read of most credible social science approaches to research interviewing and participant observation, getting permission from people after the fact violates the spirit of the informed consent on so many levels (continued in next entry).

HIDDEN CAMERA as part of a Network News Social Experiment?

Part 2 of 4
As a journalist and an college instructor using social science methodology, I also take issue with 20/20's arrogance at framing these reports as "social experiments." The producers and reporter failed to follow any of the practices or conventions of social science research when they ignored issues of confidentiality and informed consent.

Furthermore, they put the subjects and "actors" in this test at risk. I watched and wondered whether any of the subjects on camera would use violence with the actor playing the abuser.

I was also surprised that academics/researchers were interviewed and played along with ABC’s tactics and reviewed the hidden camera video to offer feedback. That just underscores that it's okay to do the wrong thing if your intentions are dressed up as research (and it also can get you on TV).

The reporter included interviews with Professor Richard Gelles, an expert on domestic violence and dean of the University of Pennsylvania's School of Social Policy & Practice.

The 20/20 report showed what appeared to be Gelles viewing the hidden tapes with what I assume were students. However, it’s very possible his interview was recorded under false pretenses and taken out of context. This type of program essentially conducted experiments to see how people would react (a variation on Candid Camera or Scare Tactics) and hoped people would be willing to sign the consent form afterward (continued in next weblog entry).

HIDDEN CAMERA as part of a Network News Social Experiment?

Part 3 of 4
Hidden cameras are used routinely in television news. 20/20's "social experiment" use of hidden cameras is clearly a move in broadcast journalism to do something with hidden cameras that generates compelling video. However, it would seem that while ABC's legal team okayed the story because consent was given (even if it was after the fact) the tactics were viable. Once again the race to win viewers is greater than the potential harm or moral responsibility.


In my reading of academic approaches to social science research, I recall how some researchers have employed deception to gain access to subjects and to observe (the researcher who served as a lookout in public restrooms for married men engaged in public sex, secretly identified them and hunted them down for interviews about the behavior).

However, most social scientists denounce those approaches. Steinar Kvale's 1996 book InterViews : An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing maps out the ethical issues in the seven stages of academic research (the realm ABC's 20/20 attempted to frame this hidden camera con job). Kvale's work and research clearly shows the academic community holds "INFORMED CONSENT" as paramount in any kind of social research, interview or experiment.

I guess the question is do the ends ever justify the means? I would suggest maybe we should reflect on how our peers and the public might see our actions once full disclosure is made. Will transparency help justify your actions?

I know new laws and proposed legislation in California are trying to tighten invasion of privacy issues to prevent entertainment shows from this kind of unethical behavior. But broadcast journalism gets First Amendment protection (continued in next blog entry).

HIDDEN CAMERA as part of a Network News Social Experiment? continued

Part 4 of 4

ABC News Should Stick with NEWS & JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS & ETHIC
ABC & 20/20 clearly will never accept the standard protocols of the academic/research community in conducting "social experiments," therefore these so-called producers & journalists should stick to news.

Once again there are standards, practices and ethics of of a profession to follow, and ABC News is not above those standards and these hidden camera reports are in violation of such standards. Here’s the link and info from the Poynter Institute that I use for my classes. I don’t see how this story meets these criteria.

Justifying Deception/Misrepresentation/Hidden Cameras in Newsgathering? (FROM THE POYNTER INSTITUTE)
(You Must Fulfill All of the Criteria to Justify Your Actions.)

• When the information obtained is of profound importance.
• It must be of vital public interest, such as revealing great "system failure"
• At the top levels, or it must prevent profound harm to individuals.
• When all other alternatives for obtaining the same information have been exhausted.
• When the journalists involved are willing to disclose the nature of the deception and the reason for it.
• When the individuals involved and their news organization apply excellence, through outstanding craftsmanship as well as the commitment of time and funding needed to pursue the story fully.
• When the harm prevented by the information revealed through deception outweighs any harm caused by the act of deception.
• When the journalists involved have conducted a meaningful, collaborative, and deliberative decision-making process on the ethical and legal issues.

Capstone Bloggers, Do You Know the Difference Between DMA & ADI?

Don't confuse Nielsen's DMA with the Direct Marketing Association.

Neilsen Media Research breaks the 210 television markets in the country into Designated Market Areas (DMAs) based on population. Neilsen's DMA list shows Pittsburgh at DMA #22 (when I worked at WPXI it was at at 18). Youngstown comes in at 102. A lot of people working in television mesaure their career goals/success and pay scale/benefits based on the DMAs. DMAs are often seen as the career ladder you climb in the local TV scene.

Arbitron manages the same kind of market ranking system for radio stations, but instead of DMA's you refer to ADIs (Area of Dominant Influence).

I want to stress to my students how important it is to understand these industry terms and not to mix them up in conversation. Such a snafu reflects poorly on your comprehension of how the business works. Using DMA and ADI correctly promotes yourself to potential employers as being industry savvy.

So, when you start developing short and long term career goal statements, make sure you build in something about what DMA or ADI you aspire to break into as an entry level employee out of college and what DMA or ADI you'd like to reach in the next 5-10 years.

While the lists are widely discussed via online resources, they are proprietory information owned by those two companies. However, publications such as the broadcasting yearbook are available-- McGill Library maintains copies of Broadcasting & Cable's Annual Yearbook as a reference resource.

Newsbreakers Break My Balls! (LOL) How do you like that for an over-hyped headline?

Actually, Buck and I appear to be on the same page and the dialogue is healthy and signficant-- go critical theory!

Newsbreaker Buck "Lucky" Owens has left his response to my blog entry/update about his organization. While I'm a big fan, I worry the Newsbreakers' mission and message are unclear and easily upstaged by the stunts.

Buck responded:
A-ha, Professor Weaver, you've fallen into our trap! We've given you a peg by which to write your own interpretation of today's TV news landscape. And by doing that, you've spread media literacy further than if we had attempted to do all the heavy lifting ourselves. Where we have ignored clarity, we've payed close attention to novelty. I submit that this approach has done more to promote a dialogue about the sad state of affairs in today's newsrooms than if we had set out on a more earnest course. If it is true what you say about the dire state of the modern news worker's soul, I offer this: Our work needs no justification other than that which is inherent in the act of live shot sabotage. In other words, if they're all spineless company clones, they're getting what they deserve. I don't happen to think they all are or do. I'll leave you with one vacuous, self-congratulatory closing thought. It was Toto, a mere mut, who pulled back the curtain in the Wizard of Oz.

Buck's quite good at making his case (I bet he gave a wink and let out a chuckle as he wrote his comments).

Instead of walking into a trap, I am a willing participant supporting his imaginative approach to media criticism. Yet I am concerned stunts eclipse the message.

As for all the heavy lifting behind promoting media literacy, I'm fine with it. That's what a know-it-all broadcast journalist now situated in academia likes to do. However I'm also aware that people in the business stopped listening to me (or any other critic) a long time ago.

They exist in a TV newsroom culture where reacting to events with lameness and sameness is the norm and reaffirmed with incestuous regional Emmy and AP Broadcast Awards. The cycle is managed by station executives carrying out the directives of consultants who measure audience reponses to news music and graphics ignoring flash over substance.

Meanwhile, Buck and I have engaged in a significant discussion that I've laid out publicly here on my blog. It's part of my effort to bring attention to the crap that passes for broadcast news (and as Buck has pointed out part of his insideious plan to ensnare me into really do it for him).

But is the TV news audience participating in this dialogue? I'm hoping the audience will take notice and look beyond the Newsbreakers' pranks and see the validity of the critique.

As for Newsbreakers, what's next for the gang? Could we see a reality TV show coming next?

You can reach Lucky Buck at:
Buck_Owens@newsbreakers.org
http://www.newsbreakers.org/

Capstone/2005 Graduate UPDATE #3

KISS & Tell with Laura on the Radio
'05 Westminster grad Laura Krutschnitt (B.A. Broadcast Comm) is coming in loud and clear at KISS-FM (96.1) in Pittsburgh where she's working the board and doing on air announcing. While the hours aren't always full-time, Laura says this is a fantastic chance to get her foot in the door at a large market radio station. She's also checking into opportunities in local radio news these days. She's bumped into '04 Westminster Grad Craig Rechichar who's also doing some work at KISS these days.

Laura keeps her blog up to date, so check in with her and give her some words of encouragement. Laura's also been great at leaving comments on the blogs of this year's grads as well as the incoming capstone students. Thanks, Laura!

Capstone/2005 Graduate UPDATE #2

COUNTRY FRIED MEGAN
'05 Wesminster grad Megan Marshall (B.A. Broadcast Comm) is now a young, hot radio star in Ashland, Ohio, where she has combined her passion for radio and her love of country music at WNCO. Visit her blog and make a comment.

http://meganmarshall05.blogspot.com/

I'm extremely happy to see she's keeping us up to date with her weblog. Megan blogs about her experiences after college and her love for broadcasting.

Capstone/ 2005 Graduate UPDATE #1

PAGING PAT SANDORA

'05 Westminster grad Pat Sandora (B.A. Broadcast Comm) is now settled in NYC ready to begin his new job at NBC. He's made a wonderful effort in keeping us up to date with his weblog.

http://patricksandora.blogspot.com/

I'm very pleased he's blogging about his experience. You can always post a comment. I hope everyone will visit his blog and check in on his progress. Just think, last year at this time he was getting ready for the new season of The County Line. Now he's at Rockefeller Center and could potentially be working with Last Call with Carson Daily or Conan or SNL or the Today show or NBC Nightly News.

I'll post more updates on the BC grads keeping their blogs up to date.

Print Coverage of TV News Pirates

Newsbreakers Get Ink from the NY Times

The New York Times acknowledged Newsbreakers and it’s unique brand of media criticism this week in an article by Broadcasting & Cable’s editor Mark Lasswell with a headline “Media Activists Who Smile and Throw Cheese.” (BTW, what's B&C's editor doing as a freelancer for the NY Times? Is he shopping for a job as the magazine is on it's last legs?)



Does this mean everyone else will run to do a story since it was in the Times? Because it’s not news unless it appears in the NY Times.

Clamor NOT Glamour
Freelance journalist Brandon Swanson went commando with Newsbreakers on a live shot raid and features his account in an article published this month in Clamor magazine. His article “Newsbreakers Brand of Media Criticism” includes some quotes from me.

From the article:

Newsbreakers created a flurry in the blogosphere, from college kids titillated by Invisible Suit Guy to media critics wondering what the group was about.

Brad Weaver, broadcast communications instructor at Westmisnter College in New Wilmington, Pennsylvania, was one of the latter. "They've tapped into the Daily Show kind of thing, " Weaver said. "I love the idea of mocking the news because it's so mockable. There's so much truth in that satire."

Weaver says the Newsbreakers have succeeded in grabbing the public's attention, but questiosn what they're going to do with it, if they're going to use the opportunity to stiumulate the debate and take it in a different direction. "If they're just going to hijack live shots that's cute and novel," Weaver said.

"But are they going to go any further?"

Swanson interviewed me earlier this year after he found my blog and my fondness for what the group was attempting to do as media critics. He was interested in why I thought Hunter Thompson would give his blessing to Newsbreakers.

I guess I was the only someone he could find in academia who would react supportively and hopefully to the Newsbreakers shenanigans.

For the record, while I appreciate the Newbreakers’ methods and madness, I fear the group's message is muddled and unclear. Ordinary citizens and even TV insiders are scratching their heads wondering why they do this.

I was hoping the story would get picked up by something a bit more mainstream (Rolling Stone, TV Guide, Entertainment Weekly, Playboy, Popular Mechanics- LOL).

Clamor is marketed as “the revolution of everyday life.” After visiting the magazine’s website I’m wondering if I’ll end up on some government “watch this freak” list (LOL).

The Clamor article came out well before the NY Times piece.

Attempted Prank Against Pittsburgh’s WPXI
While I was out of town, Newsbreakers attempted to punk WPXI-TV. The PG had a write up about the event characterizing it as unfunny and meaningless.

Instead of disrupting a live shot, a Newsbreaker armed with a camcorder confronted veteran reporter Stu Brown. They asked him why his station only covered crime and death and destruction. The Newsbreaker's web site release included the headline "RANDOM ACTS OF CHAOS DOMINATE LOCAL NEWS; ACCOUNTABILITY SCARCE."

When I defended Brown for only being a foot soldier carrying out the orders of his evil overlords, Newsbreakers “Buck Owens” responded with the following in an e-mail to me:

“I know what you're saying about Stu's role as an employee. Our point is this: Just doing your job is not good enough. Journalists have an ethical duty to advocate for responsible editorial decision making, even if you're the lowest person on the totem pole. In an albeit twisted way, we are trying to inspire people working in TV news to feel empowered to speak up and feel empowered. This the "inside-out" part of our mission."

That's better! This is a clear, meaningful explanation of the Newsbreakers mission. But the problem with the "inside-out" part is the assumption that the people working in TV news are journalists. Are they ethical, hardcore journalism, committed to truth and fairness individuals? I bet they're stuck in a routine and culture of stealing stories out of the newspaper and chasing scanner chatter to fill news holes and what bleeds leads the news?

I seriously doubt if Newbreakers has inspired any TV reporters to stand up to their feeble-minded, paper pushing middle managers and demand a return to ethics and integrity in the newsroom. Despite their claims to be journalists engaged in a noble career, for most it's turned into a job. They're much more consumed with commitment to families, mortgages, medical insurance benefits, etc.

I very concerned that issue of media criticism never comes through the stunts, confrontations and theatrics. I love the novelty and public spectacle of Newsbreakers, but its members must also engage the public and clearly communicate the message. I’m convinced people watching these pranks or viewing the Newsbreakers video clips online don't get it. Are people even bothering with going to the Newsbreakers web site?

The TV news viewers should be the target audience for this media criticism campaign. Promote media literacy and get regular people to recognize the "lameness & sameness" of local news. Promote critical thinking and analysis with the people watching. Get them to recognize how "TV lies" and distorts and fails to serve the community.

That will hit local news operations hard.

One-Man Bands Replace News Crews @ Nashville Station

More VJs More Often
FTVLive & Lost Remote are both reporting that a WKRN in Nashville, TN, (DMA 30) will switch to a staff of all one-man bands next month. FTV calls them one-man bands while Lost Remote promotes the euphemism VJ (video journalist).
Right now WKRN has 13 news crews (reporter/photographer combos) but the GM tells FTV it will jump to 30 VJs next month after everyone is trained with the stations new 30 Sony Z1 cameras (they weigh about 3.5 pounds and the WKRN VJs will hook these cams into Dell laptops for editing).

It appears the reporters will learn to shoot and edit and the photographers will learn how to write and report. WKRN is owned by Young Broadcasting which also owns KRON in San Francisco (DMA 6) which announced it was moving to VJ’s this year.