1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Lane Kiffin Pre-Press Conference Drama

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Ric Flair guy, Jan 16, 2010.

  1. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    1) Comparing this to Watergate is the ultimate in hyperbole. 2) With Watergate, the source wasn't the story. The narrative in All The President's Men wasn't "They waited in a room and negotiated with Ron Ziegler over the terms under which Richard Nixon would come out and face them."
     
  2. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Well, it was meant to be hyperbole. It was a joke.
     
  3. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    Those are from published reports or from interviews where they were not there with a camera. They are not from news conferences where someone decides they would rather not have the cameras rolling.

    The "ground rules" are unacceptable, so I'm not going to roll over and then use them as an excuse. I will not let someone at a news conference dictate how I report on that news conference. That is a joke.
     
  4. JJHHI

    JJHHI Member

    The ground rules were bullshit. We can agree on that. But I think it was a bad move to pass up the opportunity to get more information/comment in order to make that point. On that, I think we have to agree to disagree.
     
  5. I Should Coco

    I Should Coco Well-Known Member

    Interesting videotape ... thanks for posting the link.

    This reminds me of the stupidity in some states regarding cameras in courtrooms (although I realize what happens in a courtroom is more important than 30 seconds of Lane Kiffin saying see ya to Vols fans).

    There's often a never-ending maze of hair-splitting over still cameras, video, what portions of a trial can be shot, where cameras can set up inside an/or outside the courthouse building, etc., and I've seen these standards change from judge to judge, from case to case.

    It sucks for all involved.

    Regarding the Kiffin "press conference," I'm with the TV producer. The ground rules were b.s., so he and his crew were right to complain.
     
  6. trench

    trench Member

    I didn't get the sense the guy was just sticking up for himself. I thought he was sticking up for his viewers. Good for him on that. But as noted above, him saying "off camera is equivalent of off record" is bull.
    And at the end of the day, it's Kiffin's show. Public figure in a public building? Yeah, that's true. But it's also true that Kiffin didn't have to do anything. He should have met with the media, but had he not, there are zero consequences for him, at least none that matter to him. He had an agenda to get a message out. It was his way or the highway, quite literally. If everyone in the room had said, "Bud, tell Lane he can do the whole thing on camera or he can just get on the plane without talking at all," the ball would have been back in Kiffin's court and he probably would have walked. There wasn't near enough solidarity in that room to make that happen. But if it had gone down that way, the media would have followed him through the parking lot, TMZ style, all the way to his car door. And that would have been better journalism than getting his 1-minute prepared BS statement read to them. Would it have meant fewer words from Kiffin? Yes. But a better picture of what really went down? Yes again.
     
  7. Fredrick

    Fredrick Well-Known Member

    From what I can gather, Kiffin wasn't going to take questions at all. Am I wrong on this? What the frick were they arguing over? He wasn't going to take questions anyway.
     
  8. BB Bobcat

    BB Bobcat Active Member

    This is a tough one.

    I agree that it sucks for the TV guy, but I think his viewers are better served by hearing and reporting what Kiffin has to say off camera.

    Tell the SID that it's wrong. Tell your viewers Kiffin is a slime who wouldn't face the cameras. Move on.
     
  9. jps

    jps Active Member

    looks like I've got a page and change to catch up on, so maybe this has been hit already. but how in the world is anything unusable for the tv guys here? pretty sure I've already covered that. hell, if you do it the way I suggested, viewers would never even know the difference, for that mater.
     
  10. jps

    jps Active Member

    in any case, kiffin wasn't about the change his mind on what he wanted to happen. so if the tv guy wants to throw a fit, fine. let him walk and tell his viewers that's what he thought was best. but the rest of the media in the room, including tv folks, agreed to get what they could get.
     
  11. alex.riley21

    alex.riley21 Member

    From what I gathered of "the ground rules" there was no video with his image to be taken expect what he wanted BUT the reporters could leave their tape recorders on and record away. If that was true, then why not just run the audio of him talking with file photo or a photo on the screen? You know, like TV does when it has "phone interviews" it tries to use? If the complete audio was up for grabs, then why was a shot of Kiffin in white shirt the big deal.

    I respect him for sticking up for himself and forcing the issue because if it was all off the record stuff for everyone then it's a waste BUT if he could record the audio then he should have considered it.

    But yea, dealing with media relations people is a big pain the bigger the school/ego of that school. No names....
     
  12. JakeandElwood

    JakeandElwood Well-Known Member

    How are the viewers served by getting less information?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page