Update: I spoke by telephone and direct message this evening with April Samp, news director at KGAN/KFXA. She doesn’t think she misrepresented herself in her interview request. I will concede that Twitter doesn’t allow many words for a detailed interview request, so maybe it was more a matter of poor communication rather than misrepresentation (but I’m not hard to reach by email either). I’ll also stress that nothing in her Twitter profile identified the organization that was asking for the interview. She told me that her Twitter stream makes frequent references to KGAN and that she would be easy to find on Google. All true, but when you ask for an interview, the obligation is on you to identify yourself and your purpose. The person asking for an interview shouldn’t have to research to figure out who you are. (Perhaps I should have done some of that research before blogging, though.) April also told me that she responded by BlackBerry to my Twitter message that gave her a couple of possible interview times, saying that they wanted to do the interview at one of the times I suggested. But her Twitter direct message log confirms that the message didn’t go out. And since I never confirmed that we were on for an interview, we never had an interview set, as KGAN reported. So I am comfortable in saying that the original report on KGAN was inaccurate. The story I just watched on the 10 p.m. newscast was at least accurate. So I thank KGAN for correcting the report. But I didn’t hear any acknowledgment that they were wrong in the 6 p.m. newscast or the original web report, so I feel comfortable standing by my original blog post, which follows.
KGAN apparently misrepresented itself to me in an interview request last night and reported falsely about me to the public today.
Here are the details:
I received a direct message on Twitter late Monday evening (Feb. 16) from someone identified on Twitter only as @aprilsamp. The message asked: “Are you available for sit down interview on Tuesday re: future of newspaper biz? If not, can you have someone else do an interview?”
I clicked on @aprilsamp’s Twitter feed and he or she did not identify himself or herself at all as a journalist, only as being from Cedar Rapids. (By coincidence, this morning I posted the handout for my workshop on journalism ethics and social networks. In the handout, I encourage journalists to be transparent, identifying themselves by name and affiliation in their user profiles.) Since @aprilsamp had no identifying information other than a photo of a bridal couple, I had no idea who was asking for an interview or about the context or use of the interview. Still, I am always willing to talk about the future of newspapers and have blogged frequently about it here and written about it in my Gazette column. So I responded early this morning with my willingness and availability to talk in a direct Twitter message: “Yes, I’m available from 1:30 to 2:30 today or after 4:30. Who are you and what is the interview for (publication, broadcast, blog, class)?” Does this appear to you that we had an interview set?
I did not get a response on Twitter from @aprilsamp. Later in the morning, someone named Jamie (I did not get the last name and much of the message was difficult to understand) from KGAN left a message asking for an interview. If Jamie was @aprilsamp, she already knew that I was not available in the morning. It appeared from this message that Jamie was requesting an interview about changes at The Gazette. I would have declined such an interview request because we are still working on plans for the changes. I also would have declined the request if I knew it was from @aprilsamp because the nature of the request had changed.
I did not have time to return the call before my noon live chat on GazetteOnline. On the live chat, someone identifying herself as Jamie Oberg asked six questions about The Gazette. I answered them. I prescreen questions during a live chat, so I could have prevented any of them from appearing on the screen. I answered all questions in the live chat, though.
So here’s what someone who isn’t identified on KGAN’s web site wrote (I did not see the broadcast piece): “We had an interview set with the editor of the Cedar Rapids Gazette. Then he didn’t return our calls for an on-camera interview.” That is false on two counts: We never had an interview set and I did not return one call made when the reporter knew I was not available.
And if you read the KGAN piece and the live chat, you might also notice that the reporter used some statements I made about economic challenges that The Gazette (and lots of businesses) are facing, but neglected to use my answer to another question asking about the KGAN series. In case you missed the live chat, I will repeat that answer here: “I did not watch KGAN, so I won’t comment on that series. But as for the notion that newspapers are dying out: What’s the biggest audience that television gets every year? Super Bowl Sunday, right? Even people who don’t care about football gather around to watch the commercials because this is the biggest audience a TV advertiser can get. Well, The Gazette gets a bigger audience in our core market every day than the Super Bowl. So newspapers aren’t dying out. We’re trying to work out some issues during a time of transition in our industry and during a time of economic difficulty in our country. KGAN and any local TV station would love to have the audience the Gazette has.”
I should add that I’m pleased with the response from KGAN viewers when asked in a poll: Asked “Do you read or even need the local paper any more,” the resounding answer (86 percent when I just checked) was yes.
Postscript: After I posted this, April Samp identified herself in a Twitter direct message as News Director at KGAN/KFXA. She said she would remove the references to our interview from the 10 p.m. newscast. She is not the same person as Jamie Oberg.
Steve:
It is a shame they have to resort to that. Thanks for setting the record straight (as you always do).
LikeLike
Very interesting. I saw some stuff come across my twitter feed that shows some snark towards KGAN and I was curious what it was about. Thanks for the info Mr. Buttry. You an the staff at the Gazette are doing a fine job keep up the good work.
LikeLike
Mr. Buttry,
Please explain. Why would you differentiate between a question from an anonymous member of the public using Twitter and a reporter who represents that same public? Surely you teach your reporters that any electronic communication with a single member of the public is just as “public” as what appears in print. Like it or not, Twitter and other electronic “social communication” is taking on a vital communication role among certain demographics and IS a form of public communication. I don’t understand the logic of filtering your responses depending on the forum.
LikeLike
[…] or not newspapers are really necessary anymore. They even “interviewed” our editor Steve Buttry during his live chat this afternoon. And they put up a Web poll asking people if they read or even […]
LikeLike
Good question, Michael.
Yes, any electronic communication is public or can quickly become public, and anyone, journalist or otherwise, should recognize that. And I publicly acknowledge my willingness to talk about the future of the newspaper business to almost anyone. But the context plays a big part in my willingness to do an interview. But I had a busy day (my message noted only one slot before 4:30 p.m. that was even available, so I wanted to know more about the interview before committing. If this was a student (I do occasional interviews with students), I would have pushed it back into later in the week. If this was a visiting journalist in town for just a day, I would have tried harder to make room. And so on. I needed to know more about the interview request, and every journalist should help any potential source understand the purpose of an interview when making the request.
As I said, I was not ready to discuss changes at The Gazette beyond what Chuck Peters and I have already said publicly (and we have been extraordinarily candid for executives of a company making such changes).
While I can understand the miscommunication in the interview request within the limits of a tweet, I think a journalist has an obligation to identify herself immediately when contacting a source. April Samp has no bio in her Twitter profile (still doesn’t; I just looked), so I think using that professionally to contact someone requesting an interview was wrong. Not as wrong as the false statement that we had an interview set when we never did. But it was wrong.
LikeLike
Wait, do I understand this? You just figured out the name of the person who runs a competing news department in this town? And because you aren’t ready to talk about the Gazette’s business issues with a “professional reporter” it’s OK to talk about it in a public blog? If everyone is a journalist these days thanks to blogs, Twitter, etc, why does someone from a competing “old media” have to play by the King’s rules that you have drawn up? Maybe I missed something, but I don’t think you can put yourself out there for your own PR reasons and then complain when someone asks a tough question. So how about this? Sit down with the reporter and talk about the Gazette’s revenue and circulation problems? Then we’ll check back here and get a real story.
LikeLike
The KGAN web site is still playing this off as though it was an interview opportunity. As of 8:02 am, 18 Feb, the KGAN site (http://www.kgan.com/shared/newsroom/top_stories/videos/kgan_vid_1929.shtml) has verbatim scrapes from the live blog with one key alteration (altered the question source as coming from “KGAN” and Steve’s transcript of the live blog has it as “Jamie Oberg”). This creates a definite illusion (since that’s was it was) that Steve knew he was communicating with a journalist.
Built for breaking rules…I mean news.
LikeLike
Thanks for setting the reccrd straight. I saw parts of this broadcast (6pm) last night and when they mentioned their poll they showed a fuzzy image of the computer screen shot – and yes, 86% of the public relied on their newspaper.
LikeLike
Does Ms Samp think so little of her profession/employer that she hides it from potential interview subjects?
There is a printed document called a telephone book … The Gazette is listed and I’m certain had you identified yourself, your call would have been answered or returned promptly … whether you’re a reporter or a Joe off the street.
Maybe Ms. Samp should start using a more professional form of communication to elicit interviews.
Gotcha TV insults the viewers intelligence. If your only source of news is the TV you’re missing out on the depth and breadth of coverage one can only get from daily news papers.
LikeLike
Sounds like an unfortunate mixup to me. I gotta say, I think the editor of the paper should know the names of the news directors at the local TV news stations (they’re your competition, and also your journalistic counterparts in another medium). I guess you know now 🙂 Carry on with news excellence!
LikeLike
I would guess that a lot of editors don’t learn the names of news directors of all the local TV stations in their first year on the job. Newspapers hardly look at TV stations as competition these days. (I don’t know the KWWL news director either.) As for Joe’s point, we are trying to be open with the public and our employees as we can while we are considering and making changes. But that’s not the same as wanting to do an interview asking questions about decisions we haven’t made yet.
Anyone working as a journalist in any medium should identify himself or herself when making interview requests. Period.
LikeLike
As an editor of a small eastern Iowa newspaper, I completely agree with Steve that if the reporter did not identify herself she was at the very least irresponsible and at the worst deceitful. The first thing I’ll do when I call for a phone interview is identify myself.
The other side of the coin is that I want to know who I’m talking to. Perhaps I am a little paranoid, but I do not respond to anonymous requests (what few I get). Before committing to an interview time, I would have found out who @aprilsamp was, and, like Steve, that name did not resound with me (and I often catch the end of the Channel 2 news before Letterman).
Like Steve, I have been pleased (and a little surprised) by the results of KGAN’s poll. It certainly puts a little extra spring in my step and makes me feel like the work I do is worthwhile.
LikeLike
Steve, as someone who is familiar with the newspaper industry (both dailies and weeklies), I completely side with you on the matter. I followed your live blog and have seen KGAN’s “dying newspaper” series so far this week, and personally I’m offended/entertained by how they’re approaching the topic. Their poll question is clearly worded to sway opinion against newspapers, and I firmly believe it’s merely an attempt to devalue papers and bring more advertising to their station (if you see one of their newer commercials telling people about their upcoming “mix of TV and internet,” that pretty much confirms it for me that this series is more about the station’s interests than it is about informing viewers).
I’m amused that they have tried to misrepresent certain aspects of the newspaper industry in an attempt to make TV look like a more viable option for news and advertising. We all know KCRG’s stance on newspapers since they and the Gazette are under the same ownership. But it’s also interesting to note that KWWL has (I believe) some sort of partnership with the Telegraph-Herald – like KCRG, they understand that a healthy blend of TV, newspapers, radio, internet, and other forms is necessary to keep people informed.
Keep up the great work – I read your blog and Sunday columns on a regular basis and find myself agreeing with quite a few of your opinions on the future of newspapers and other topics.
LikeLike
This all sounds like a big miscommunication to me. But seriously, as a journalist, why would you ever do an interview with someone if you don’t know who they are? Why would they interview you if they aren’t going to publish/broadcast it?
LikeLike
Repeating here: I wouldn’t — and didn’t — do an interview with someone I didn’t know. That’s why the message indicating willingness to do an interview asked who the inquirer was and what sort of an interview we were doing. I have on more than one occasion granted interviews to students (on the same topic, the future of newspapers) who were not planning to publish or broadcast, beyond submitting to an instructor. Of course, I always presume any interview is for the record and subject to publication, but I do want to know the context before agreeing.
LikeLike
This exchange has been very interesting (not always the case with blogs).
My final thought on the subject is this.
It is only 7 hours until my newspaper flies on to my front stoop.
And. Like thousands of others, bare footed, with the first whiffs of fresh coffee prodding me awake I’ll pull off the rubber band and read what’s happening in my community. Most assurdedly I will not agree with everything I read but I am confident that I will get accurate and timely information … With someone’s name attached to that information. Fast doesn’t always mean best.
LikeLike
After watching KGAN’s newspaper report tonight, it seems as though they skewed the story to portray what they believe about the industry and want others to believe. Yes, there was one professor at the U of I who believes that newspapers will die out, but what about the other professors. I wonder if they interviewed other U of I, or UNI, or ISU, or any other college professors who have a positive view of newspapers, but decided to use the clip of the one professor who didn’t. Maybe KGAN sought out a professor to help further their agenda, which is very unethical.
Newspapers will never die out. Steve, I support you and the Gazette. KGAN is only making themselves look bad.
LikeLike
So this explains why they took it as a personal slam that you said more people read the paper than watch the Super Bowl, by dipping back two years to the last time THEY aired the Super Bowl and reporting the figures, then saying more people watch Fox 28 IN GENERAL than read the paper.
LikeLike
Eric, you have identified one of multiple inaccuracies in last night’s newscast. I am too busy to waste any further time trying to deal with KGAN’s inability or unwillingness to report accurately. I will approve comments unless they add more inaccuracy, but I have to say I do not have time to comment further on this issue.
LikeLike
Here’s an idea. Go back to doing interviews the old fashioned way
LikeLike
Steve,
So, why do you and Chuck continue to dodge the question of how many Gazette Communications employees have been laid off?
Just answer the question. It’s that simple.
Please do not delete this comment.
Thanks,
Hal
LikeLike
I don’t speak for Chuck or any other Gazette executives. I answered the question to the extent of my knowledge and responsibility in Tuesday’s live chat: No newsroom employees have been laid off. Beyond that, I don’t know the answer and am not the appropriate person to answer. No dodging. You may not like my answer, but it would be irresponsible for me to attempt to answer when I don’t have either the information or the responsibility. I answer truthfully if I know the truth. If I can’t answer for legal reasons or some other reason, I will say that I can’t answer. If I don’t know the answer, I won’t give you guesses or misinformation.
LikeLike
Amazing – based on this blog it appears that this was a big deal – but I don’t remember anything about this incident being in the Gazette. Generally I watch little TV but does this mean I now need to follow many blogs to find out what is happening ??
LikeLike
Jim, yes, we have far more information and address far more issues online than we have space to address in print, so you will find more information in the blogs than in The Gazette. But no, it wasn’t a big deal. I don’t have time to correct every error made by other media. In fact, KGAN made two more errors in their report the next night. But I didn’t bother to correct them. I didn’t watch the second report. Only one person called my attention to it, which prompted me to read it online. But I decided I had given KGAN far too much attention already. I only addressed this in the first place because I feel passionately about journalism ethics (I teach ethics in seminars around the country and in Canada) and because I wanted to note the poor ethical decisions made by other journalists in direct dealings with me. I write one column a week for The Gazette but I blog more frequently some weeks. This was extra content you get only online.
LikeLike
I should clarify: I didn’t go to much effort to correct the errors in the second KGAN report. I did direct-message April Samp on Twitter, notifying her that the report was erroneous. The direct-messaged back asking if I cared to elaborate. I said not by Twitter (you might recall that part of her excuse for her original failure to identify herself was the 140-character of limitations). I invited her to call or email and I would elaborate. She didn’t and I didn’t pursue the matter further.
LikeLike
So can the twitter junk and do interviews the right way. Jeez this is ridiculous.
LikeLike
[…] use a profile professionally, they should identify themselves by name, position and affiliation. I blogged earlier this year about a journalist in the community who didn’t identify herself (and still doesn’t; I just […]
LikeLike
[…] use a profile professionally, they should identify themselves by name, position and affiliation. I blogged earlier this year about a journalist in the community who didn’t identify herself (now she does). You need to decide how and whether to identify yourself and your business in your […]
LikeLike
[…] We’d certainly address how to verify information found on Twitter. We also would discuss how to assess and decide whether it’s appropriate to voice opinions on Twitter (and other social media) about stories you’re covering. I’d make sure the students understood why they should identify themselves as journalists in social media profiles. […]
LikeLike