Support for the Media Project comes from the College of St. Rose, Albany, New York,
offering a master of arts and communications to advance careers in media,
PR, and journalism, fuller part-time options, 518-4545143.
From Northeast Public Radio, this is the Media Project, a weekly discussion about issues
confronting the media.
I'll tell you, right, reliably, off the record, about some charming people I have known.
Before I meet politicians and grafters by the score, killers play and fancy,
it's really quite a bore, oh, and least I can make such interesting people.
They wallow in corruption, crime and door, tingling, linked city desk,
full press, full press, extra extra read all about it, it's a mess meets the test,
only Superman meets such interesting people.
It's wonderful, the represent of press.
And the Media Project is underway. Welcome, I'm Ira Fussfeller, the daily
Freeman of Kingston, New York, and Alan Shartak of WAMC is here as is Mike Spain, the
Associate Editor of the Times Union of Albany, and of course that was Pete Seeger playing us in as
he always does, and we have to offer our condolences to Pete who just lost his wife, Toshi,
the other day. Well, Toshi is one of the amazing people that I have ever met in my whole life,
gracious, wonderful. Obviously, a huge part of the legend of Pete Seeger did so much to maintain
his equilibrium, his life, and I could tell you one Toshi story that I really loved. I read a
piece in Hudson Valley magazine in which Pete said that nobody should live in more than two rooms.
That was his philosophy. Nobody should live in more than two rooms. And one night he and a whole
bunch of people came to do a performance at the Mahayee Theatre in Great Bank, and the Shartak's
put them all up. We have a fairly big house. I believe there were 11 people. And I took Toshi and
Pete to their rooms up on the third floor, which has now been rededicated as the Pete Seeger suite,
and I wanted to change it to Pete and Toshi Seeger suite. And Toshi, I think, said, see my discomfort.
Turned around and said to Peter, Peter, this is the house I've always wanted so I could bring
all my relatives here. And I thought that that just showed who she was. Well, that's huge part of it.
And great, great friend of the radio station, of course, as is Pete, and has done and will continue
to do a lot for the station. Can't even believe how good she was and how good he is.
Well, our best to Pete and the family. And we now have to switch to the more mundane and wild
and wacky world of the media and a number of topics that are sort of recurring. But I thought I'd
start with one about our friend. And then again, this station friend, Elliot Spitzer, who, as we speak,
is trying to gather enough signatures on petitions to get himself on the ballot for the primary,
for the controller of New York City, the Democratic primary. And I guess the question I would ask,
we know why Elliot Spitzer, the former governor, had to resign and disgrace. We know why Anthony
Weiner, the candidate for mayor, had to resign and disgrace. Beyond the whole social fabric question
of, is there a comeback in their future? And can they overcome the kind of Mark Sanford just
like Mark Sanford? And they're there unfortunately are any number of other examples. What do you say
unfortunately? Well, it's something I'm going to be honest with you. I'll stop you right now. Maybe it's
the same thing. Even before I get to the media. Well, I have a media question for you. You're really
ticking me off. Oh, okay. And I'll tell you why. You guys are all the same. You say instead of when
Elliot Spitzer had to resign, we all know why he resigned. Why is it necessary to always use the
word disgrace in the sense? Well, they're in lies part of what I was getting at in terms of how
the media is going to deal with Spitzer, presuming he is able to get the signatures to be a candidate
and Weiner going forward. Is every story going to say he resigned and disgrace? Is every story going
to say why he resigned and disgrace? Mike, we got this all titillation. Well, let's let's ask the
expert and print the representative of the largest newspaper. It will be a while before somebody
like Elliot Spitzer is not associated with the word disgrace and scandal and prostitution.
You know, it would have been nice if the only thing we remember him for was being sheriff of
Wall Street who took on the big guys at Wall Street. The rats of Wall Street. The rats if you
want to call them that disgraceful rats of Wall Street. Why do we have to use the word disgrace?
Exactly my point. But what do we remember most about Spitzer? We remember the press conference
where he had his wife standing next to him with that just horrified look on her face as he was
you know just himself wondering what could have been and what might have been. And you know,
the guy is brilliant. He's skilled. He's got a lot of motivation, a lot of energy.
You know, maybe he should be working in the non-profit sector like his wife has. You know,
working where his work will not instantly generate this discussion about his past.
Well, let me take you on to Mr. Mike Smith on that issue. Here's a guy who had the guts to do it.
Nobody had ever done before as Attorney General of New York. He came in and he took on the street
and he made a change forever. Now we get these other guys. We had Andrew Cuomo coming on
pretending he was the sheriff of Wall Street. We got the contemporary governor, you know, the
contemporary Attorney General. Yes, the air nighter man coming on and saying that he's the
sheriff. Basically he's doing the same thing but they didn't do it with the passion Elliott
Spitzer did and those guys if you're ever seen the documentary client knowing they admitted that
they went after. Oh, sure. But again, I'm not done yet. I want to get you back to the meeting.
Part of this is the media project. I want to know. I'm going to go there. Okay, go there. I'm
telling you something. I'm about to tell you something and that is you guys like titillation,
but I'm telling you Michael because I want to answer you directly in terms of what you were saying.
I am telling you that if he's controller to the city of New York, he's going to bring the same
passion, the same kind of thing to this fight as he did as Attorney General. And so for you to
sit there magnanimously or condescendingly and look down on all of us. He has a time to talk
long enough to be back. Man of a sort. Why now? Why now when Anthony Weiner is running for mayor
and then you have Vito Lopez and is he not a disgraced state lawmaker? Yeah, because he never did
what Elliott Spitzer did. I want to get this right. I want to get this back to the media. We're
covering Elliott Spitzer and and our publications and your radio station because it's a New York
City race will probably not use your own people or cover it as heavily as they will in New York City.
But be that as it may should every story about Elliott Spitzer or Anthony Weiner or Mark Sanford
or whomever who has been in this circumstance have this kind of information. Is it is it required?
Is it basic journalism for us to report this each time? What what we would call the newspaper
business be matter at one point? It will not be that much of a story that about their past. You
know, there's there's no formal statute of limitations, but it will it will be gradually work its
way out. It's like Al Franken. How long did it take for Al Franken, the former Saturday night
live comedian? That's different. You know, but no, I mean people will be remembered for their past
until they they have a future that that's right. And that's what Elliott is doing right now. He's
getting back it's getting back into the game. Now let me tell you something. I know that you guys
are a bunch of hypocrites. I know five years is not is not the statute. I know you guys are I know
you guys are a bunch of hypocrites. You know what I'll make people read those columns in the paper.
I mean almost every time I look at that awful rag the New York POST, they they they have a picture
of the madam who's running against him who is also I hate to use these words climbing on his back
for you know trying to get ahead for herself. All right, those words. So I'm just I keep falling
back to what I what I was trained in basic journalism is that there are certain facts that are
required to be in stories and that as the fact becomes older, it's still required to be in a
story, although lesser prominence because that you never presume that people know everything about
the story. It's still it is still part of the story. There may be a time when it is not part of
the story and that will be defined by Spitzer and how successfully is yeah, he's controller and he
goes after Wall Street again and he starts saving the people in New York City money, then they'll
stop doing it. But then it'll have a paragraph in this story that says the first time he did this
had generated the iron of Wall Street who went after him that was good. I promise you that
when Elliott Spitzer passes and let's hope for Elliott Spitzer it's a hundred years from now,
the first paragraph of his obituary is going to say Elliott Spitzer who was elected governor of
New York had to resign and disgrace and then yes or no to whether he made a comeback. It's part
of his history. Well, I want to raise something with you guys. It's very interesting. I heard of a
poll this morning every tabloid the New York Times everybody has been excoriating Spitzer.
Oh, editorial. Yes, including my editorial. Including the Times Union. Okay. I mean it's unanimous
except for the column I'm going to write this week, which is of course going to take a different
point of view. Okay, but your column should be titled to the contrary to the contrary, right?
But I am telling you that it is interesting to me that newspapers whose reputations are lower
than a hounds belly in terms of the public perception of who and what they are. And now we see a poll
showing Elliott Spitzer ahead of his nearest competitor by a lie. Now is that just name recognition
or is that that people say this is unfair? You guys are a bunch of bullies. Don't you think that's
a tremendous story? I read that guy who was ousted as governor because he was caught in a high
price prostitution scandal is able to make a comeback like that. I think that's extraordinary.
And we'll report it. You know, that's our job. But I'm finding interesting about it.
You hypocrites. What I'm finding so interesting about it is that the people aren't buying
your stupid editorials. They are not buying them. They are saying, let's give this.
The only poll is on election. We will look at ourselves in the mirror and we will say,
who does not believe in the concept of redemption from stupidity? And we think that you people,
I mean, what? How many times has the owner, the billionaire owner of the New York POST been married?
And what is caused the breakup of his marriage? And are these things that we see on page? I'm not
excoriating him. I'm just saying, how can we don't cover him on page six? Because he wasn't the
governor of the state of New York. He's not running for control. He's the head of the, you know,
of the American publishing and film and everything else. Some of the book's. Yeah. And some of the
details of that individual, that media mogul named Rupert Murdock have been revealed. You know,
we know about his newer younger wife who went after the guy that threw the pie in his face. But
that's over already. Ultimately, obviously, the people are going to make the decision. And if
that 9% which is a poll that was taken within 48 hours of him announcing, I mean, people could not
have given it a lot of thought I would think. But let's just say for the sake of argument, he wins.
It's still our responsibility to report what his history is all about. In a titillating fashion.
Well, the case of what dedication you're looking at. What a stunning comeback story that will be
in a won't have any context unless we tell it why it is the standard. Are you so capable of
self-protection? Public radio reporting the story. And they're referencing his his comeback and the
reason for the raw and by the way, on this very station where I said which I head. Yeah, they're
doing it. Yeah. And but you're not doing. But you're not telling them they can't do it. You're not
doing it in a titillating fashion. No. And nor is Mike's paper nor is my paper. There are tabloids
that are going to run pictures of the prostitute because it's a good picture to run in a tabloid.
Oh yeah, good picture to run in a tabloid. Well, we think we under all right. Well, I think I'm not
done with you guys on this subject like any me. Well, you'll have to save it for another time
because I want to know what is a journalist is. It's a subject that we've talked about here before.
You're going to leave Elliott Spitzer to go to the subject. Yes, because we're going to say who
we're going to say what a journalist is so that people will know that the journalists who are
writing about Elliott Spitzer are doing so out of the right place. You you buy that and
to the concert. I was talking to a guy just the other night, a major orchestra fellow who has an
administrator and he looked at me and said there is nobody doing the work anymore. In other words,
papers like yours have laid off everybody but the janitor and maybe in some case the janitor.
In your case, Michael, you don't even have a managing editor on your paper anymore. But those
roles are being filled. But if you're trying to make the case that the ranks have been diminished
in the professional media, we wouldn't argue with that. And radio and TV. So, but your point is what?
No, no, my point is this guy was saying who's doing the work? We know that traditionally and by
the way, Americans in a recent poll said we get all our news from television. Well, ladies,
television can get all its news. You're reading in the New York Times one day and the next day.
Everybody else everybody else. Okay, so the question is if they thought the whole thing up,
even NPR does that. Yeah, and the question of who's doing the work speaks to what is a journalist
because what we're seeing is a cottage industry largely on the internet, which affords you the ability
to do it of people who are now reporting or commenting are they journalists? That's the
answer is and I've always said by the way, I'm not saying they're not. I'm just posing the question.
Well, yes, I understand that. But unlike you, I take a position and I stick to it. I'm the
moderator this week. So, so, so I have always said anybody who says there a journalist has to be
regarded as a journalist. Hey, the some call license to be a journalist. Some call in this for the
New York POST comes on and and he goes around and says other people are in journalist shot
talks of professor. He's not a journalist. Well, give me a break. The fact of the matter is if
you're in a rate doing commentary on a radio or doing radio station and if you're writing two
columns a week and if you are running a legislative because that hey, I'm sorry, I'm a journalist.
You don't need to apologize. This fuck what about yeah, let's put up the what are the guy who blogs on
that and sitting in the basement to do, you know, the stereotypical of the guy sitting in his
underwear in the basement and he's writing does he get in his underwear should he get the protection
of the shield laws should he be able to file a freedom of information requests and be treated as a
journalist. There's a fellow at the point of institute for media studies Eric Degins who's
quite thoughtful and he writes about this topic. One of the things he points out is that you can
commit an active journalist without being a professional journalist. An active journalism without
being efficient. Yes, I like that. An active journalist. An active journalist. An example,
somebody driving up the through way and a cloud burst happens. The through way is partly washed out.
They pull out their smart phone. They record this chaos on a little video. They upload it right from
their car out to the internet and other people pick it up. They tweet it so others see it.
Others who follow. 12 million people have now seen it. Right. And and you and the nervous
I would have said that's not even suggest that's not. I don't think he suggested otherwise. But
okay, but he that person has committed an active journalism. They they've told a story.
They've illuminated it at a very important event that other bet others have picked up on. Now,
they may go back to their job as an engineer for GE or a clerk at the state department of what
it and control the next morning. But they committed an active journalism. You know, fantastic. I'm
going to use it. Yeah, I'm going to kill it unashamedly. Well, from from Eric Degins. Does he
you like to stole it? Yeah, he's the word an active journal. Yeah, active journalism. He said,
he said in his in his essay, that's why I think any talk of a shield law for journalists needs to
center on the work done, not the job title. If the point of a shield law is to keep the public as
informed as possible by protecting journalists from prosecution for keeping their sources secret,
it makes sense to extend that privilege to people practicing journalism who otherwise not be
considered members of the club. That's there. So the shield law should protect the law in his
underwear and the basement and the shield law for the uninitiated is a law that will protect
journalists from revealing their sources. And that's of course a big story in light of the Snowden
case and others along the way. Well, you know, I've always been somewhat concerned about this. I
think on the one hand, I can well understand why you want to do that. On the other hand, people
break the law and we as citizens, if we saw it, have a responsibility for saying that, don't we?
If people break the law and we work that. Okay, so let me give you a situation.
All right, ready to play Mike? Hypothetical. Hypothetical. You call me and say, what do you know about
this murder? Go ahead, say that. Hey, Alan, what do you know about this murder? No, I did it.
I'm the one who pulled the trigger. Now the real? Now they come by and they say to you,
and they come by and they say to you, and you write in the paper, by the way, that some guy
and somebody committed the murder committed the murder. Now, obviously you take the most outrageous
example in order to make your point, which is what which is what I'm doing here. Does that reporter
have a responsibility after he said he knew who did the murder for telling who did the murder?
He doesn't cease to be a citizen and he does have an obligation in a capital crime. Even the
shield law does not protect someone in a situation like he described. But let's take a
downhill notch. What about if you tell me what happened at a grand jury that was investigating
the county executive in an unnamed county? It's an I write a story. You've committed a crime.
You're an officer of the court who has inside information that revealed that I've witnessed
you telling me this. I know who you are and I know what crime you committed and the judge calls
me up and says who told you that? And I say I'm not going to tell you I'm protected by the
shield law. Well, you're going to jail and some people have gone to jail right? Exactly. In New
York state, the guy didn't go to jail. That's exactly what happened. And that is our
shield law. We have the toughest shield law in the country. Forty-eight states have shield laws
and and none are are more harder to get around than New York's. So we have that, but not every
state does have that protection and there is no federal shield law. But after this NSA scandal,
to speak, the revelations about the government looking into everything, the Obama administration
is now talking a little more favorably about a shield law. Yeah, well, because also because they're
they're in the hot water. They got it pickle. They're in the hot pickle. But I want to say something
ever since I've been tuned in to the whitey bulge or murder trial. And to this is the gangster
and the boss. And as a banana mafia story, these guys are coming forward. This guy,
but I know guy apparently was the head of the whole thing and was convicted of murders and all
the rest of it. He ratted on the other guys who worked for him, according to the paper this morning.
And as a result of that, he's getting out of jail, even though he killed all those people.
Now, I bet you don't see my point to you. Well, there's certainly an injustice to that.
And maybe to the reporter getting off not having to do that. I think to zero back to where
there's a lot that said you can't talk in a grand jury. Talk about what happened in the grand jury.
There's also a recognition by legislatures all across the country that we are a free society
and information should flow and we're better for it. And when you start to go after the person
who report on it, you basically turn us into the USSR of the previous year. That's right. And
then to zero back where I started the issue of what is considered to be a journalist, that definition
is changing and it's evolving and people need to get used to it because we can't go by the old
rules. And much like Mike and I on our newspapers, you know, we used to say many years ago,
newspapers were the first source of information and then broadcast became the first source of
information. And now to our large extent, it's back to newspapers, but not on print. It's that
handheld device where Mike's newspaper or mine and it's available to the WAMC. Your people can text
a story and immediately the bulletin will go out. We've become, we've become in effect the
associated presence. All of these rules have changed and there's all yes, but for the better or the
worse, I think it remains to be seen. But I do think that as Mike points out, this is a free
society with a free flow of information. But some of it is very bad. And now we go back to,
and we go back to Mike's boss with reader literacy. You do have a Mr Smith. I don't
not sure whether he is. That would be Rex. Yes, but we, but we need to be discerning. I mean,
when you, if Alan Shartuck tweets something, we can fairly well be sure that it's accurate. If
some guy down the street from Alan and great barrington who we don't know tweets something,
we at least ought to be saying, wait a minute, where did he get that information? And that's
another thing that's, well, we have, we have columnists for the sum of the regs who say every week,
I have a source and he's a good one. Or I have a Republican source, I have a Democratic source,
and they don't even name them. Well, that individual who you might be referring to, whoever it is,
you know, I think there's people who have made a decision about the credibility of that person,
and they're informed about that person. And there's a lot of people who have no idea about
the credibility of the individual. It's in the newspaper. It's got to be true. Well, it used to
be you'd open up the opinion page of the Kingston Freeman or the Times Union, and you would read
a commentary and you'd see it in that paper and it would have the credibility of that institution,
and you knew it would have been vetted. Now, all you're doing is getting a link to it on
somebody's Facebook page. I think Walter Winchell in the good old days destroy a lot of careers that
didn't deserve to be destroyed. More so, maybe than current day journalists. That's right. Yeah,
that was advocacy journalism and point of view journalism. I think that's coming back into it.
Well, if this doesn't, if this doesn't make you depressed for those of us who are not in TV,
the latest Gallup poll says 55% of Americans say TV is their main source of news, 21%
cited the internet and 9% cited print. Now, where did the TV and the internet get much of their
news? Well, no, we know where they get the news. They get it from the newspapers, but many,
but people report. But we do also know an interesting thing and that is fewer people watching television.
A lot fewer people are watching the network news and the local news, I believe I'm right about that.
Well, they, but news TV is apparently still doing well financial. I was going to say, though,
that 21% who cited the internet, how much of the internet from which they're getting the news
is internet content that we are putting up ourselves. Sure. In other words, it's not the time
union in print, but it's the time union, which is the dominant online news source in the capital
district. And then all the aggregators. Yeah. Who all link back to us. All come back and they
grab everything that they can and they eat it voraciously. Since we're on TV, though,
you know, there's reports now that television, local television is making a big comeback on
the profit side. Right. And that sort of raises the question whether the FCC, the Federal
Communications Commission will compel these stations to invest more into local programs.
At WWWOR in New Jersey, they wouldn't renew the license, but what they did do is not take it away.
So we'll see what happens with that one. Right. WWWOR had pretty much cut back on their
coverage of the state of New Jersey, which doesn't have a television station that gets
most of it from the Philadelphia market or from the New York market. But we have to go now.
So we're going to call it there. We're tired of arguing Alan. Once again, took the contrary
position and once again was outnumbered by the rest of us. Yeah. By you organizational.
Do the one. All right. Well, I'm Ira Fussfeld from the Daily Freeman of Kingston. Along with Alan,
Shark, Talk of WAMC and Mike Spain at the Times Union of Albany. Thanks for tuning into the media
project and we'll talk to you next week.
