Mildred Gaddis - Not you too

**rjk** · July-03-09, 05:21 AM

Originally Posted by RayStar

I wonder how many watch that channel. I have never watched it. I don't agree that the candidates were pulling a fast one. How would they know the rules of the FCC?

About the only thing I know about the FCC is what the letters stand for. Other than that I pretty much draw a blank, however I know that this is something that is very questionable.

Between her TV show and her radio show those two obviously thought that it was well worth it to spend a $1,000. I'm sure that thousand included some positive buzz on her radio program. I like people who give me $1,000, who doesn't.

**Jmil** · July-03-09, 06:15 AM

rjk, according to what I heard Mildred/Steve discuss on her radio show, there were 14 candidates that bought the air time.

The one that called Steve Wilson wanted to buy the air time also, but waited too late, all the spots were filled. She would fit right in with the current council, but hopefully not the next.

Mildred stated her and the TV station had parted ways. The station owner seems a little shifty if you ask me. He needs to man up, admit they fuqked up, promise to do better in the future, and move on.

Anybody that decides not to vote for a candidate simply because they appeared on this show is suspect to me. At such a crucial time we need to do a better job of decision making. I have no intention of voting for Charles Pugh, because I don't think he processes the skill set or temperment required. I have no idea who the other candidates are that taped the show. I believe Gary Brown may have been one. He will receive my vote. He knows the city, the players, the problems and won't lose his mind at the table like so many of our current/past members.

**Bobl** · July-03-09, 08:40 AM

It's everywhere. Is this the future of "journalism"?

LA TIMES:
Washington Post scraps plans for 'salons' after uproar

By Peter Nicholas
July 3, 2009
Reporting from Washington -- The Washington Post's publisher abruptly canceled a series of policy dinners Thursday that were to have been underwritten by lobbyists or corporations willing to pay thousands of dollars to be in the same room as journalists and lawmakers, saying the marketing department had misrepresented the newspaper's intent.

Lawmakers who had been invited said they were not told the events would make money for the newspaper. But the Post had separately sent fliers seeking sponsors who would pay $25,000 for a single "salon" or $250,000 for 11 events.

The concept raised questions about journalistic ethics....

**pffft** · July-03-09, 08:49 AM

No. Note the reaction of the Post exec editor and the newsroom.

"Radio journalism" has always been a dicey concept, if not an oxymoron.

Mista Alan · July-03-09, 10:14 AM

Mildred!

http://www.wxyz.com/news/story/WILSO...ww6BDYs_A.cspx

**carman** · July-03-09, 10:17 AM

Hey Jmil, you said a few posts up, you were enacting the ignore thing. It either isn't working or someone stole your handle. You might want to check into it.

Also in this very unscientific poll here, you have taken a beat down. Gaddis is looking more fraudulent with every moment.

diver1369 · July-03-09, 11:25 AM

I've been a frequent critic of Steve Wilson's work but in this case I believe he did a great job of shining a light on the fraudulent nature of Detroit's so-called community media. Mildred Gaddis is just another player in the pay-for-play political scheme. Money talks, BS walks.

**Steve Wilson** · July-03-09, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by Jmil

rjk, according to what I heard Mildred/Steve discuss on her radio show, there were 14 candidates that bought the air time.

The one that called Steve Wilson wanted to buy the air time also, but waited too late, all the spots were filled. She would fit right in with the current council, but hopefully not the next.

To be clear--and accurate: The candidate who had the courage to blow the whistle on this practice [[Karinda Washington) says statements Mildred is making about her now are not true. She says she never expressed any interest in buying, instead Mildred's radio producer called her 3x "like a bill collector" pressuring her to come up with the cash before the taping began.

According to Washington--and I have no information to the contrary--the only call she made to Gaddis's people was the one I asked her to make so we could independent verify that such a deal was actually being offered.

What we did not have time to get into on the air: When Washington went public and it was made known by Eric Brown on his blog and others, Mildred's radio producer told him he would no longer be allowed to call in to "Inside Detroit." [[Disclosure: Mildred has since rescinded that policy)

Also, when Brown posted Washington's story on John Bennett's website "Detroit Uncovered," formerly "Fire Jerry-O," Bennett yanked the post and blocked Brown's ability to post future guest writiings on the site.

Bennett, who is also a candidate and also appeared on the Gaddis program [[reportedly at no charge before Mildred began her current series), said he thought the posting couold be "slanderous," though he refused to point out anything he thought actually was. He also admitted Mildred is a friend of his. So much for free speech...yeah, yeah, I know it's HIS website and he can publish what he pleases, it's just that it sort of smacks of censorship for his own political gain, wouldn't you say? I hope he reconsiders.

Sorry John...I love your site but I have to call 'em as I see 'em.

Steve Wilson
WXYZ TV

**Brittz** · July-03-09, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by rjk

About the only thing I know about the FCC is what the letters stand for. Other than that I pretty much draw a blank, however I know that this is something that is very questionable.

Between her TV show and her radio show those two obviously thought that it was well worth it to spend a $1,000. I'm sure that thousand included some positive buzz on her radio program. I like people who give me $1,000, who doesn't.

I totally agree with the positive buzz. Now as most candidates will spend more if they plan to advertise in print, being on her tv program was a cheap buy for more material to use in the future.

Mista Alan · July-03-09, 12:50 PM

Detroit News: Gaddis out at WADL TV after reports that council candidates paid to go on air

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090...d-to-go-on-air

**Detwa** · July-03-09, 01:23 PM

I did notice that Eric Brown's write up about this whole thing was taken down! There was nothing slanderous about it, it simply stated what he was told by the woman running for City Council. John Bennett could have invited Mildred to respond to it, but instead he chose to censor it and delete it. Eric was a frequent and popular guest blogger over there so its strange that he hasn't had a comment - I wonder if John also blocked him? He's been getting testy with people complaining on his site about Mildred. Kinda funny since he himself spent the last few years hollering about free speech, yet he's censoring people on his site who speak unkindly about Mildred. I could see if they were just slandering her, but if they're discussing her show as it relates to Detroit, why would he cover that up? Because they're friends, that's why. He's inflicted with the same disease as everyone in city government that Detroit should be getting rid of - that double talk double standard disease.

I have lots of friends and family in Detroit and I will no longer suggest that people vote for him because he's showing his true colors. It's funny how people drop their masks as you get closer to election time! That website has gotten pretty boring anyway, nothing but rehashed summaries of what we've already read in the news. And his own endorsements for election - wonder if they've paid him for those ads? Because I have a hard time believing that a DJ is qualified to sit on the Wayne County Charter Commission. There's no mention in his ad about anything he's done or qualifications that he has for this job, so I wonder if these are just paid ads? Again, they don't say that, it looks like a personal endorsement.

Does anyone have a link to Eric Brown's own blog?

Retroit · July-03-09, 07:46 PM

Excellent job, once again, Steve!

And shame on Charles Pugh. If he doesn't know the laws regulating his profession, why would anyone trust him in the much more challenging office of City Councilmember?

Apparently some people don't understand the concept of Full Disclosure. If the candidates had mentioned that they were paying to be on the show, that would have been acceptable. But to give the impression that you are being given an impartial interview when, in fact, you have paid off the host, well, that is about as objectionable as a City Councilmember taking a bribe from a city contractor.

**trstar** · July-03-09, 09:27 PM

Shouldn't this be a WADL issue? Isn't up to the station, to put the disclaim prior to, and after a paid block of time. "THE FOLLOWING PAID PROGRAM DOES NOT REPRESENT ....."

I think this issues should be pointed out, but it seems really thin to me. The Kwamists are out to make any issue against those who helped bring them down, large as possible.

**Thames** · July-03-09, 09:50 PM

Originally Posted by trstar

Shouldn't this be a WADL issue? Isn't up to the station, to put the disclaim prior to, and after a paid block of time. "THE FOLLOWING PAID PROGRAM DOES NOT REPRESENT ....."

I think this issues should be pointed out, but it seems really thin to me. The Kwamists are out to make any issue against those who helped bring them down, large as possible.

Yeah, whatever. There is plenty of blame to go around. Everyone involved in that has egg on their face, from the station, to Mildred, to the candidates that participated. Not one was forthcoming. I don't trust ANY of them.

**Thames** · July-03-09, 09:58 PM

Sam Riddle said [[I'm paraphrasing) that as soon as one crop of crooks is lead off in handcuffs, the next crop moves up. IMO, he couldn't be more right.

**Thames** · July-03-09, 10:07 PM

One more thing. This should help the candidate research team. Whoever was on Mildred's show gets crossed off the list immediately.

**R8RBOB** · July-03-09, 10:44 PM

Originally Posted by Steve Wilson WXYZ

Also, when Brown posted Washington's story on John Bennett's website "Detroit Uncovered," formerly "Fire Jerry-O," Bennett yanked the post and blocked Brown's ability to post future guest writiings on the site.

Bennett, who is also a candidate and also appeared on the Gaddis program [[reportedly at no charge before Mildred began her current series), said he thought the posting couold be "slanderous," though he refused to point out anything he thought actually was. He also admitted Mildred is a friend of his. So much for free speech...yeah, yeah, I know it's HIS website and he can publish what he pleases, it's just that it sort of smacks of censorship for his own political gain, wouldn't you say? I hope he reconsiders.

Sorry John...I love your site but I have to call 'em as I see 'em.

Steve Wilson
WXYZ TV

I came across John Bennett's site www.firejerryo.com when I was living in California. I have been one of those people who have checked out his site over the years. The stories that posted was so mind-blowing that people like myself had to return to his site to see what else is going bad in Detroit. His site was one of few who really told you who Kwame Kilpatrick really was.

That said, I am very disappointed that Mr. Bennett would attempt to hide insight on what Mildred Gaddis was doing in regards to candidates of City Council. To call comments on Gaddis slanderous is a cop-out since his website was created to call-out the crooks that resides in Detroit. Bennett slandered every city offical in Detroit government and their associates on firejerryo.com and detroituncovered.com and Detroiters welcomed it because the press he was reported on his site, the news would not touch it. Ms. Gaddis is a journalist and she performed an impartial act by having politicians pay her to speak their views without question on her show. That is pay to play because the politician is using a journalist who is suppose to be impartial to endorse them for a $1000 bucks.

Mr. Bennett hurt his creditability when he decided to censor Eric Brown and as a bonus to his creditability he blocks him from posting on his site. He is running for Council and I considered voting for him but his attempt to protect his friend put that vote in doubt. I hope Mr. Bennett address this and correct himself because the primary is in about 1 month.

**Lowell** · July-03-09, 10:45 PM

Uh Steve, did you get my for my invoice for your post above? When can I expect payment?

Sheesh I got it all wrong. What am I doing collecting pennies for clicks on Google ads when I should be charging the big bucks?

Shame on Mildred, very disappointing.

What I have difficulty processing is how Monica, Mildred and others, who are so well off and making the big bucks, go for these chickenfeed payoffs. I am reminded of a Rodney Dangerfield one-liner, "My old man was so stupid he got fired from the bank for stealing pencils."

**Thames** · July-03-09, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by R8RBOB

I came across John Bennett's site www.firejerryo.com when I was living in California. I have been one of those people who have checked out his site over the years. The stories that posted was so mind-blowing that people like myself had to return to his site to see what else is going bad in Detroit. His site was one of few who really told you who Kwame Kilpatrick really was.

That said, I am very disappointed that Mr. Bennett would attempt to hide insight on what Mildred Gaddis was doing in regards to candidates of City Council. To call comments on Gaddis slanderous is a cop-out since his website was created to call-out the crooks that resides in Detroit. Bennett slandered every city offical in Detroit government and their associates on firejerryo.com and detroituncovered.com and Detroiters welcomed it because the press he was reported on his site, the news would not touch it. Ms. Gaddis is a journalist and she performed an impartial act by having politicians pay her to speak their views without question on her show. That is pay to play because the politician is using a journalist who is suppose to be impartial to endorse them for a $1000 bucks.

Mr. Bennett hurt his creditability when he decided to censor Eric Brown and as a bonus to his creditability he blocks him from posting on his site. He is running for Council and I considered voting for him but his attempt to protect his friend put that vote in doubt. I hope Mr. Bennett address this and correct himself because the primary is in about 1 month.

What is he going to address? He will say "I'm sorry" [[I got caught).

Why should he or any of them get a second chance?

Deja vue, all over again.

Enough is enough. Send a message and just say no!

Go ahead and trust these people, I dare you! If any of them win the election, then, YES! Detroiter's get exactly what they deserve.

**R8RBOB** · July-03-09, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by Thames

What is he going to address? He will say "I'm sorry" [[I got caught).

Why should he or any of them get a second chance?

Deja vue, all over again.

Enough is enough. Send a message and just say no!

Go ahead and trust these people, I dare you! If any of them win the election, then, YES! Detroiter's get exactly what they deserve.

Dude, I don't want to hear him say sorry. I would want to hear his reasons for removing a blog entry that calls out the practice of paying to appear on M. Gaddis's tv show. If Gaddis is indeed his friend then he has to speak out on why he had to protect his friend from sharp attacks about this.

**kraig** · July-03-09, 11:26 PM

When we didn't like Kwame, they didn't like Kwame. Because of that, we all gave John Bennett, Mildred Gaddis and Sam Riddle far too much credit. As soon as someone went against one of his allies, John Bennett shut that person down. Doesn't that sound like something Kwame would do?

Mildred kept referring to Eric Brown as Eric from Canton on her radio show. Doesn't that sound like something Barbara Rose Collins would say? Mildred doesn't really have an argument against his point, so she's trying to deflect by wanting him to be viewed as a suburbanite.

Power corrupts.

**Thames** · July-03-09, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by R8RBOB

Dude, I don't want to hear him say sorry. I would want to hear his reasons for removing a blog entry that calls out the practice of paying to appear on M. Gaddis's tv show. If Gaddis is indeed his friend then he has to speak out on why he had to protect his friend from sharp attacks about this.

What difference does it make at this point? He's going to give all kinds of lame ass excuses for why he did it. Or, he will "confess his sin" and "ask for forgiveness". Aren't you sick and tired of either scenario?

All those candidates have done, to this point, is show that they are deceptive and that they show favoritism to their friends.
We've seen enough of that in Detroit government and there it is staring us right in the face AGAIN.

Everyone of them should be kicked to the curb.

Haikoont · July-04-09, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by kraig

Mildred kept referring to Eric Brown as Eric from Canton on her radio show.

You mean Mildred from Southfield kept referring to Eric Brown as Eric from Canton on her radio show.

**Brittz** · July-04-09, 02:13 AM

Originally Posted by trstar

Shouldn't this be a WADL issue? Isn't up to the station, to put the disclaim prior to, and after a paid block of time. "THE FOLLOWING PAID PROGRAM DOES NOT REPRESENT ....."

I think this issues should be pointed out, but it seems really thin to me. The Kwamists are out to make any issue against those who helped bring them down, large as possible.

I agree with this post. The station should be held accountable for this error. Where were the editors?

**carman** · July-04-09, 07:31 AM

I think it was pointed out up the thread that the disclaimer of the content not representing the opinions of the station or its advertisers was done. However, when the guests of a show have paid to appear, it requires an additional disclaimer saying so.