WXYZ TV Irresponsible Reporting About Las Vegas?

I saw a report last evening on WXYZ that I have to question. Like most stations, they feel the need to struggle and strain to try and build a local connection to a national story. In last night's case, Jim Kiertzner and Stephen Clark teamed up to point out similar "soft targets" [[as in Las Vegas) in the Detroit area such as Comerica Park, Hart Plaza, DTE Energy Center, Campus Martius, etc.

After that, they decided they need to tell Detroiters that they shouldn't feel safe in large crowds [[in fact, Jim pointed out that if someone wanted to shoot victims in Hart Plaza, go to the Ren Cen). And, he pointed out all the tall buildings surrounding Campus Martius.

I find this type of combination reporting to both make a local connection and telling viewers they should be scared or concerned [[in fact the word "terrified" was used) is a little irresponsible.

What's next, are they going to tell us what kind of automatic weapon is best for each situation? I find it problematic that they almost explained to someone thaf if you wanted to do the same thing in Detroit as what happened in Las Vegas, here's where you go, and here's where you aim. Pitiful.

That, coupled with the fact that Stephen Clark recently in as much called viewers "liars" with an informal remark by not believing viewers input indicating how they drive when they come up to roundabouts, is starting to turn me off to this station that I've watched for years.

Anybody else catch on to this as well last night?

Local news is awful - I'm surprised they had time to point out all the venues to avoid - must have cut into Bernstein, Morris, Lee, Art Van and Wallside's time. It's the same hype they use when there's a concern for winter weather, or storms. Frighten people enough that they will stay home.

I find the news stations giving airtime to people like Robert Davis, Steve Conn, Sam Riddle, Adolph Mongo, Dawud Walid, and the various "Reverends" [[mainly Bullock, Williams, Shabazz, Rideout) to be far more irresponsible and dangerous.

Local news has been terrible in Detroit since at least the 70’s. Lurid crime, scandal, political false equivalency, paid PR, entertainment, sports, weather. It preys upon fears, and stokes them to keep people glued to the tube. The only news worth watching comes on from 6PM to 7:30 on Channel 56. Everything else just makes people scared and stupid.

They're capable of doing murder and snow and that's it.

Yeah, their coverage of national stories always makes me cringe. Even whenever they try to do local politics they are still completely clueless. They're completely incapable of covering actual things happening.

Spending 5 minutes skimming DetroitYes every day is more informative than spending all day watching local news.

For the life of me why do local stations report NATIONAL news? Don't we already have NATIONAL news broadcast? Don't we also have CNN, MSNBC, etc.? Can't the local news channel lead in and say, "[[network) will have more information on the shootings in Vegas at the bottom of the hour" and let the national news folks pick up the story.

Aren't the best folks to cover the Vegas story folks like, for instance, Brian Williams, or maybe someone local from Vegas, who knows Vegas like the back of his or her hand?

We have some great national reporters be it broadcast network or cable. Why go with an out of towner who doesn't have the resources, stature, etc.?

Not everyone has cable [[believe it or not) in 2017, so that's why local news stations report national stories.

All the local stations here in Las Vegas [[please don't call it "Vegas") kicked over to 24 hour coverage, losing a ton of commercial time. They did a pretty good job, and contributed to network coverage as well. They finally went back to commercials later this morning. As for me, I had to spend time in Valley Hospital, behind UMC hosipital, the last two days as my son was having scheduled surgery. Surprisingly, his procedure was not cancelled, and I spent time with some relatives of GSW victims in the surgery waiting center and such. Amazingly, volunteers were bringing in food and water for those who needed it, contributed by area restaurants and other sources. And, of course, Las Vegas Metro Police SWAT team got into the shooter's room within an hour of the incident and confirmed him with the devil. Blood donors overwhelmed intake sources.

Son came through his surgery just fine, but that's a sidebar. Basically, I can truly say I'm proud to be a Detroiter who is now a Las Vegan. Damn good people out this way, just like in metro Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

Not everyone has cable [[believe it or not) in 2017, so that's why local news stations report national stories.

---

True, but there is national news usually after the local news.

Also the local stations hire people who can't spell to write the captions for photos.

You see it as negative reporting, but as a journalist I see that as news and localizing a national story. Sorry you feel that it's negative but that's the news business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zads07

but that's the news business.

---

And THAT's the problem.

Exactly Meddle. Just report the facts and let people decide for themselves if they would feel unsafe in crowd situations. Don't tell them they should be. Additionally, find a more substantial national/local connection. Interview a local resident who just returned from Las Vegas, was at the shooting, or lives there.

The example of showing how it could happen in Detroit in lieu of that substantial connection is just lazy, in addition to giving a potential copy cat shooter ideas.

I very much dislike when a new organization uses a story to tell us we should be cowering in our own homes, and as noted in an unrelated story, calls their viewers liars. How do they expect to get valid data from viewer surveys [[some new-fangled technology they market as a means to get viewers feelings on topics) if they're going to discount it out-of-the-gate, on air? People will stop calling in if they're going to be told the results are invalid anyway. Laughable.

I'm sure they'll hide behind behind the high ground of "public service" and "public safety", but as stated, I see it as a means to tell us how to live our lives.

Just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meddle

And THAT's the problem.

---

So should every news story be positive and not negative? I'm just trying to understand why people are upset here.

It's already been said, Zads. Just report the facts and let the people decide.

I don't understand this media and journalistic compulsion to intrepret every story for us and tell us how we should feel about it, feel about ourslves, and our own lives [[i.e., saying, in essence, that we should stay hunkered down in our homes and not go to places where large crowds gather in the Detroit area if you want to feel safe).

Let US make that decision, you don't have to make it for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FredGarvin

It's already been said, Zads. Just report the facts and let the people decide.

I don't understand this media and journalistic compulsion to intrepret every story for us and tell us how we should feel about it, feel about ourslves, and our own lives [[i.e., saying, in essence, that we should stay hunkered down in our homes and not go to places where large crowds gather in the Detroit area if you want to feel safe).

Let US make that decision, you don't have to make it for us.

---

I didn't see the piece so I can't speak to those saying people should be scared. If you can find it I'd be happy to analyze it.

But I agree, report the facts and let people decide, that's what news should be, whether it's negative or positive. But overwhelmingly news is typically negative.

I don't know how to retrieve it Zads, but suffice it to say it was the lead story Monday evening on WXYZ, and took up about the first half of the newscast. While I appreciated having the facts about the Las Vegas shooting reported to me, it was pretty much redundant to what was already being reported in the national media by sources such as CNN, Fox News, etc.

The specific part of the report [[as noted in my 1st post) that concerned me was the apparent need to bring this to a local level and specifically point out sites in Detroit where large crowds gather and how easy it could be to affect a similar mass shooting here. And, because of that, we should all question our own safety.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zads07

So should every news story be positive and not negative? I'm just trying to understand why people are upset here.

---

'NEWS' should be factual, unbiased, not slanted or dramatized. The Joe Friday approach, 'just the facts ma'am'. The 'business' is where the problem come in. That's the part that's focused on ratings.

There used to be a time when the local evening news was broken into distinct segments, local stories, national news [[in brief), weather, sports, entertainment and editorial or opinion. Often there was an in-depth section for investigative reports of some kind.

That's all been blurred now and it's all about shock value for ratings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zads07

So should every news story be positive and not negative? I'm just trying to understand why people are upset here.

---

It might have something to do with The Fairness Doctrine, or lack thereof. But you might know more about that than most.

Sensationalized news comes across as distorted. It's no wonder that the "fake news" accusation has taken such a firm grip on the culture.

To get an idea of what has happened to news in the U.S., I like to imagine the preposterous idea of Walter Cronkite being forced into the role of a shock jock. I think everyone would agree that would not end well.

Risk of sniper fire was the reason given for that skyscraper on Park Avenue to be demolished. The building overlooked the outdoor performance space at Lil' C's Arena. Talk of this is nothing new. You may have just not been paying attention.

Homeland Security has been cracking down on urban exploration sites for providing information about access points on abandoned skyscrapers in active city centers. What is worse, many of these skyscrapers also provide access directly into underground utility corridors in the city, where sabotage could really cause some problems.

We want to avoid mass hysteria, but then again, these abandoned buildings are ripe to be used for attacks. Could you imagine what could have happened, all those years the Broderick Tower or Statler was left wide open with its windows already blown out. Commerce Park was right below, and we didn't just have one unsecured building overlooking the park, we had five or six. Then you have the Illitch super lots and stop and go traffic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroitNightLights

Risk of sniper fire was the reason given for that skyscraper on Park Avenue to be demolished. ... We want to avoid mass hysteria, but then again, these abandoned buildings are ripe to be used for attacks. Could you imagine what could have happened, all those years the Broderick Tower or Statler was left wide open with its windows already blown out.

---

It was a BS reason then and it's BS now. I mean, can you imagine what would happen if somebody who lives in the Broderick just snapped tomorrow? Let's tear it down to be sure. Maybe we should force Gilbert to cancel the Hudson's development. Can he guarantee that 300+ renters and their guests will never go crazy and start firing on Campus Martius or Woodward? And the Pontchartrain needs to go yesterday - anybody could rent a room and then fire on Cobo at will.

We can always imagine a worst-case scenario. That doesn't mean such scenarios should have any control over our daily lives. And that's why I agree with the criticism of the news segment. Stoking people with myriad, terrifying, but low-probability ways in which they could die is just inflammatory and serves no purpose. Risk cannot be eliminated. In a lot of circumstances, it cannot even be mitigated without destroying things of great value. Move to a cabin up north, or else suck it up and live your life in defiance of terrorists who would have you do otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Junjie

It was a BS reason then and it's BS now. I mean, can you imagine what would happen if somebody who lives in the Broderick just snapped tomorrow? Let's tear it down to be sure. Maybe we should force Gilbert to cancel the Hudson's development. Can he guarantee that 300+ renters and their guests will never go crazy and start firing on Campus Martius or Woodward? And the Pontchartrain needs to go yesterday - anybody could rent a room and then fire on Cobo at will.

We can always imagine a worst-case scenario. That doesn't mean such scenarios should have any control over our daily lives. And that's why I agree with the criticism of the news segment. Stoking people with myriad, terrifying, but low-probability ways in which they could die is just inflammatory and serves no purpose. Risk cannot be eliminated. In a lot of circumstances, it cannot even be mitigated without destroying things of great value. Move to a cabin up north, or else suck it up and live your life in defiance of terrorists who would have you do otherwise.

---

After everything that has happened, are you telling me this atrocity and your safety won't cross your mind the next time you exit a Detroit baseball game and walk out into Grand Circus Park? I wonder if this will change any of the plans at the Hudson's Tower, Statler Block, and Monroe Block developments. The skyscrapers don't need to go, but sensors that detect broken glass on skyscrapers overlooking prominent public places and event spaces might not be a bad idea. Counter-sniper forces at extra-large events might also not be a bad idea.

I don't support greater gun control methods after what happened in Venezuela. That line of reasoning is just stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

Not everyone has cable [[believe it or not) in 2017, so that's why local news stations report national stories.

---

The peculiar things is that [[and I'm dating myself and showing just how old I am) there was a time where I quite clearly remember [[and my folks watched the 11p. news with religious diligence growing up) the local news devoted equal time to international, national, and local news coverage.

There are a number of reporters I do not care for. Jim Kiertzner is one [[and there was a similar, pudgy one who acted like a weasel and made his reports much in the same manner, but I no longer see him in the WXYZ staff bio); Andrea Isom is another [[over-dramatic voice with a tendency to use biased adjectives and adverbs in her "poetic" delivery; also, she has resorted to something I have always thought of as a horrible trend in the news and is coming back in style, and that is the classic "shove a camera and mic in the face of someone who just lost a family member or their home". Get rid of her, please!).

I should also mention I was no fan of Simon Shaykhet when he first started out [[for much of the same reasons I mention the others), but he has since cooled his heels and has adopted a less sensationalist and more even-headed approach to reporting the news.