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!

Mourning family attacks TV photog and reporter

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by spikechiquet, Feb 22, 2011.

  1. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    Hold on there pardner, there's a distinct difference at work. I work for clients that have expressly asked for my assistance. I have never solicited any client. That's the rule.

    Plaintiff's lawyers get recoveries for clients who would otherwise not have the means to pay for competent counsel. I did not say I found newsgathering unseemly, what I find unseemly is thrusting one's self on someone who is grieving and who has no interest in talking. I have to call witnesses every day and one of the first things out is "I understand you have no obligation to talk to me and if you do not want to I respect that."

    A memorial does not mean that's a screaming neon sign to ask me to comment. Calling the publication and saying you're ready to talk is a screaming neon sign to ask me to comment.
     
  2. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    There you go. Pretty easy bright line.
     
  3. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    It looked to me that was exactly what the reporter was doing -- approaching the grieving friends/family and asking if they wanted to talk.

    If we sat around waiting for people to call us before we could start working on a story, we'd have to start advertising on TV.

    "Did your son score 15 points in a high school game last night? Call the Podunk Press. We'll quote him right!"
     
  4. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    With camera rolling? Not the same.
     
  5. schiezainc

    schiezainc Well-Known Member

    Maybe the reporter didn't know anything about the death and wanted to know if everyone was excited about Free Pancake Day.
     
  6. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    The reporter has a job to do, however. He comes back with nothing, how's that going to go?

    Boss: "What do you have from those folks gathering at the spot where the shooting happened this morning?"

    Reporter: "Nothing. They didn't want to talk."

    Boss: "That's too bad. Well, we'll just use the video. Write me up something about the shooting."

    Reporter: "We don't have any video. The family requested that we respect their wishes."

    Boss: "They're on a street corner in front of an IHOP and you don't have any video? Clear out your desk."
     
  7. The problem is they already shot their video. The entire episode started rather slowly, and it stands to reason that the 10 second clip they were going to show in the background was already shot. I wasn't there, but it sounds as if the family asked them, didn't start yelling yet, to leave them alone at the beginning of the whole thing. Honestly, if you want to get any kind of a story outside of the video, use some common sense, realize you got your shot already, drop the camera as they asked as your olive branch, and see if the reporter can get someone to talk to him. They may not, but once you have thoroughly pissed off the family, your chance of getting someone to talk to you are in the viscinity of slim to none anyway. You start standing behind the "we are the media, this is a public spot and we have every right to be here" bullshit, and I'm not talking to you either. Again, they needed to use some common sense.
     
  8. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    That's my point. Job or not, society needs to establish the social norm again that such behavior is unacceptable.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I always hate the "job" justification, as well, for anything that's tough to defend (not that I think this is).

    It comes up a lot on threads like the Virginia lacrosse murder thread, any time criminal defense lawyers are talked about on here.

    "He's just doing his job!"

    That's a cop-out.

    The question is why that job is justified.
     
  10. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    A defense attorney "doing his job" is not a cop out. I agree that the parameters of "what justifies what" needs to be set by society.

    But a defense attorney's duty is to his/her client; there is nothing purer in our society. Why? Because nothing brings better scrutiny to an allegation brought by the government (with vast resources) than a defense team who's only allegiance is to the client. You have to believe in your case even in light of the harshest scrutiny. If not, what does that say about your allegation?

    Here, I'll rail against the reporter and cameraman while also railing against society's failure to bring ridicule on them for such conduct.
     
  11. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    It is a copout - "He's doing his job!" - if you leave it at that. Doing a "job" doesn't inherently give you cover to do anything you please. You explained why a defense attorney's job is justified. That's the next step you have to take, whether you're talking about camera men or lawyers or any other profession.
     
  12. zebracoy

    zebracoy Guest

    I do find it interesting that the guy who filmed the camera crew wasn't ever charged at or insulted. I would imagine both that guy and the TV folks were trying to do the same thing.

    I do not like that they went with the story of their own people being "attacked" over the murder of a guy in the parking lot of an IHOP. If they happened the same day, that's just a bad editorial decision. But again, issues like this constantly remind us that none of us are ever the story, and that nobody cares much about us.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page