Newsroom change

Lxnnight2008450

I only snapped one photo of Bob Priddy in action on election night. Through studio glass (you can see my reflection in this larger image) with producer John Simms in the background. MacBook Pro and video camera are streaming live video to Ustream. Big screen TV’s on the walls, high-speed connection to the Secretary of State’s website with up-to-the-minute returns.

When I joined the company in 1984, Bob was still writing stories on this manual Royal typewriter (below). Audio was captured on reel-to-reel tape recorders and “dubbed” to analog carts. We had a UPI printer spewing out the news (on long rolls of paper), and election returns were phoned in by a reporter sitting in the Secretary of State’s office.

Batteredroyal450

Can’t imagine what we’ll have in four years. Bob Priddy’s memory of those days is better than mine:

“Actually, we were using cassettes, not R2R in ’84. We relied on UPI for election returns with reporters at various gatherings of candidates. We didn’t put anybody in the SOS office until the Presidential primary of ’88, after studying what AP and UPI did in the 86 general election.”

Pseudonymous

I’ve been corresponding with a few political bloggers who I chided for being anonymous. Because, they explained, their ideas are so controversial, so inflammatory, so powerful… they risk their jobs or worse if they sign their names. But –they insist- they aren’t anonymous. They are “pseudonymous.” I had to look it up in the dictionary:

pseudonymous – writing or written under a false name
anonymous – not identified by name, of unknown name

So, if I write something and don’t sign any name to it, that’s anonymous. And if I sign a false name, that’s pseudonymous. Yes? Is this a distinction without a difference? Or, if I sign my letters “The Shadow,” readers won’t know who I am but they’ll know the letter was written by someone who calls himself “The Shadow.” And if I don’t sign the letter at all, the reader will have no way of knowing subsequent letters were written by the same person. Is that it?

I went to two of the smartest people I know for clarification. First, Bob Priddy, a long-time broadcast journalist and author:

“One hides behind a fake name. The other hides behind no name. Steve is a name. Anonymous is a word.

It’s the difference between hiding behind a red curtain or hiding behind a blue curtain. I suppose those who use pen names do so because they don’t want to be anonymous. It’s much more rewarding to hear people discussing who Howard Beale is than it is to hear people discussing who anonymous is because anonymous can be anybody and Howard Beale is somebody. Nobody discusses anonymous. Everybody discusses Howard Beale and therefore the sniper feels some kind of importance. Both are gutless but one is gutless with an ego.

My friend Kay Henderson (also a journalist) wrote this:

“I have never heard or seen the word “pseudonymous” before. Interesting. My first thought was of George Eliot who wrote under the male pseudonym because writing, at the time, was a “male profession.” My second thought was “Primary Colors” was written by “Anonymous” as you’ll recall.

I may be behind the times here, though. Is “Alice Cooper” or “Marilyn Manson” a pseudonym? How about “Madonna” or “Cher” or “Diddy” or “Snoop Dog” or any number of professional athletes who adopt a stage name? Our culture has grown so used to people who adopt another name/character/stage name in public that perhaps it’s not that much of a stretch to expect it to happen on-line.

Is political “speech” subject to different standards than are considered the norm for the rest of the culture?  I will agree with my colleague that the cloak of a pseudonym is too often used by bloggers. But who will be the blogger police? Perhaps it will take something akin to pulling back the curtain and having Dorothy expose The Wizard to change the on-line culture. Perhaps more sites will forbid “anonymous” posting  in the comments sections. I find the requirement of a name, however, laughable in most instances if you read the “names” which are used.”

I suspect we got such passionate response to this because the phantom bloggers would like to be out. No doubt all of their friends know of their secret identities (“That ‘Howard Beale’ guy? That’s me. Seriously.”). Questioning their ethics or courage stings. I’ll try to stop.

Technology in the Missouri Senate

Shields200I got a few minutes with Missouri State Senator Charlie Shields this morning. Senator Shields –the Majority Floor Leader–  was kind enough to let me ask a few questions at a very busy time for the legislature. I wanted his take on how the Senate uses –or doesn’t– use technologies like laptops, the web, smart phones, Blackberry’s, blogs and podcasting.

The House allows laptops in the chamber but the Senate doesn’t. The concern seems to be that senators would be surfing the web or checking email and not paying attention to debate and the business of the senate. Senator Shields does not agree with that position and feels it’s just a matter of time until laptops are allowed.

I asked about Blackberry’s and smart phones, which are allowed. He said you don’t have to look hard to find a Senator checking his email.

The media can have laptops in the press gallery at the press table. I didn’t ask but assume there is wifi access for the media because I could get it in the hallway waiting to talk with the senator.

I asked if any bloggers had requested permission to cover the senate. He said not to his knowledge. I wasn’t entirely clear on his answer to the question, would bloggers be allowed to cover the proceedings. I think both the House and Senate make a pretty clear distinction between the “real” media and bloggers.

Senator Shields was unaware of any of his senate colleagues blogging. It surprises me a bit that some of the more clued-in haven’t discovered the power of this tool.

As for personal tech gadgets, Senator Shields has a Blackberry and an iPod on which he sometimes listens to jazz podcasts and NPR’s Car Talk.

He concluded with the prediction that the role of technology in the Senate will increase dramatically in coming years. No doubt.

Update: Missourinet News Director Bob Priddy –who has been covering the Missouri legislature since the early 70’s– adds and clarifies:

“We actually don’t have a press gallery as the House does. We have a press table which is on the Senate floor.  The senate, of course, has had its sessions on the internet, first on our site, then on others, and then on its own site for many years.

The irony of the idea that Senators will be at their desks checking email or playing games or bidding on ebay is that most senators don’t stay on the floor unless the legislation being considered is really big or unless they have a specific role with any bill.  They can be in their offices checking their email or playing games or shopping on ebay.

The use of blackberries and smart phones on the Senate floor is a mixed blessing.  It does enable the senators to get information from their office or their staff without leaving their desks. But it also enables lobbyists to send them messages from the hallways, giving lobbyists access to the Senate floor although the rules don’t allow them in the chamber in person.  For some folks, that’s not a comfortable relationship but nobody has figured out a way to control that access, nor do they seem to want to.

The use of the computer has helped the amendment process. Senate staff sits at the other table at the front side of the chamber and can prepare amendments on the computer and run them into a printer pretty quickly.  It’s been several years since I’ve seen a Senator write an amendment at the desk. In fact, debate is often slowed or stopped so a Senator can go to the staff table and have the staff write an amendment.

Of course the computer has made it a whole lot easier for the people in the clerk’s office to compile the journal, prepare copies of bills with amendments included in them before the bill goes up for final passage—-and just generally manage the flow of documents that go through the place.”

PS: If you’re wondering why I didn’t just post the audio of the interview… I hit the wrong button on my new fancy-pants digital recorder and erased the interview. Please don’t take my car keys.

Ron Paul: Still a candidate, but no longer a “contender”

A reporter for one of our networks referred to Ron Paul the “former GOP presidential candidate”  in a story we ran on Saturday and posted on our website.

It didn’t take long for Paul supporters to discover the error launch an obviously coordinated email blitz. Some were nicer than others.

This evening Bob Priddy –the news director– posted a response on the network blog. I think he struck precisely the right tone. I’m sure we’ll find out if Ron Paul supporters agree.

But, all in all, this is a good thing. Our story was technically wrong. Ron Paul is not a “former” candidate. And his supporters let us know about, quickly and in larger numbers. And our network corrected the mistake and responded.

Jim Lipsey

Jim Lipsey was one of Learfield’s first employees. He was part of the KLIK gang (Derry Brownfield and Bob Priddy) that helped Clyde Lear get the company up and running.

On Friday we got Clyde, Jim and Bob in a studio to talk about those early days and Jim’s contributions (there were many). Jim will be 87 his next birthday. I want to be him when I grow up. When I joined the company in 1984, Jim showed me the ropes of affiliate relations. It was a privilege to work with him. Here’s 10 minutes from a half-hour chat.

23 Year Pin

My first official day at Learfield Communications was June 4, 1984. I’ve posted on enough anniversaries that I don’t have anything fresh to add, but didn’t want the day to slip by without note.

Learfield PinA surprising number of people who were there on my first day are still with the company: Clyde, Roger, Charlie, Bob Priddy, Derry (no longer technically part of Learfield but always in my head and my heart), Greg, Clarice, Joyce… who am I missing?

The company has grown so rapidly in recent years, it bears little resemblance to the company I started with. But that is as it should be. Like that old Saturday Night Live bit… “Learfield has been berry, berry good to me.”

Thirty years of election coverage

The first election covered by The Missourinet (a network owned by the company I work for) was in 1976. News Director Bob Priddy orchestrated that first election night and every one since. Prior to The Missourinet, radio stations throughout the state focused on local races and relied on the wire services for news and numbers from throughout the state.

The Missourinet brought the sounds of election night from the state capitol and campaign headquarters throughout Missouri to the hometown audiences of our affiliates.

The technology has changed… and is changing… but insight and understanding Missourinet reporters bring to their election night coverage remains the focus of their reporting. Bob reflects on the past 30 years in this 10 minute video.

Found in Bob Priddy’s desk

  • Christopher Garbacz (Professor of Economics @ Mizzou) business card
  • 15 yards of Butler dental floss
  • Iodized salt packet
  • Free medium drink coupon from Hardees (Expiration date Sept. 1996)
  • Cut-up American Express card
  • 3-cent postage stamp
  • Children’s Miracle Network pledge card (dated June 1989)
  • Unused “I voted” sticker
  • Illinois & Baltic Ave stickers from McDonald’s Monopoly game

A) Worst-case survival game pieces; B) Things McGyver needs to make a bomb; C) Things found in Bob Priddy’s desk after he cleaned it out.

This is an inside joke that means zip unless you know Bob Priddy and have seen his desk. Thanks to Andy Rawlings.

Bob Priddy replies:

Any good archaeologist is able to take disparate remains of a culture and weave them into a coherent description of the people who once inhabited an area. The archaeologist is able to determine the approximate age of the inhabitant, the diet, the religious beliefs, and the society of his time. You did not include paper clips, which also were found in abundance and which are a valuable clue. The number of artifacts is also important, but since the site as been disturbed and the paper clips have been removed, an important piece of information will forever be open to speculation. I shall give you a few clews, however, about the person who lived there.

He was a carnivore who did not like bland diets but who took excellent care of his incisors so he could properly tear at the meat that was part of his diet. The latest artifact located is dated September, 1996, indicating that he moved from the area or perhaps died shortly after that (did you check for burial sites?). He loved children, worshipped the God John Maynard Keynes, and felt plastic was Satan’s tool for a corrupt society. Now, you may build the story from there, based on the evidence you have found.

Anniversary of first “right to die” case

December 26, 2005 marks the 15th anniversary of the death of Nancy Cruzan. Nancy Cruzan was a 25-year old southwest Missouri woman who was thrown from her car in 1983 when it flipped over. Paramedics found and revived her at leat 15 minutes after the crash. She never fully regained consciousness but did achieve a status that came to be called a “Persistent Vegetative State.” Five years after her accident, her family concluded she would never return to full consciousness. Thus began a long legal battle to have her feeding tube removed so she would die. The Cruzan case became the first “right to die” case to reach the United States Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 against the family.

Missourinet News Director Bob Priddy interviewed Bill Colby, the Cruzan family lawyer during the ordeal. Runs 30 minutes but it’s damned fine radio. Before the web, an in-depth piece like this would simply have been tucked away in a desk drawer.

Execution journal: Donald Jones

In his capacity as news director for The Missourinet, Bob Priddy has witnessed 15 executions. The most recent was the April 27th execution of Donald Jones, for which Bob produced an “audio journal” that begins as he leaves his motel in Bonne Terre to go to the prison and ends as he prepares to leave the prison about two and a half hours later. Bob telescoped the audio down to about half an hour and some segments have been shifted for context purposes (the reading of the final statement of Donald Jones, for example).

Bob was not allowed to take his recorder to the execution witness area, so he summarizes the events that took place in that approximately 90-minute span. The main voices you will hear are those of Missourinet News Director Bob Priddy, Corrections Department spokesman John Fougere, and Corrections Director Larry Crawford. Voices of various other officers will be heard as part of the process.