Off the Record

Let the sun shine

What's good for the goose is not necessarily what the gander wants to do. In an interesting twist, the University of Missouri system, the same system that has one of the top journalism schools in the country, has been ordered by a judge to pay more than $75,000 in legal fees and expenses for violating open records laws.

In October, Judge Frank Conley ordered the university system to pay $75,000 in legal fees and $2,806 in expenses to the Kansas City Star for not turning over internal audit documents, according to the Missouri Press Association. The university system's lawyers maintained that the files did not fall under Missouri Sunshine Law open records rules.

The legal fee is the largest ever levied under Missouri's Sunshine Law, according to Jean Maneke, legal consultant for the Missouri Press Association. The Star had asked for $126,000 in the suit that was originally filed in 1998.

Conley ruled in September that the audits are public records, indicating that the University of Missouri system is indeed a public governmental body. The ruling reverses a Western District Court of Appeals ruling from 1983 in a lawsuit filed by the Columbia Daily Tribune.

Sam Colville, an attorney for the Star, said that university employees and administrators violated the law and that intentional tactics used by the system increased the cost of the lawsuit.
The University of Missouri system has an opportunity to appeal the ruling.
-Tammy Merrett

Sex and violence

Block that metaphor! Maybe the recent Victoria's Secret fashion show on CBS was a distraction to copy editors everywhere, but it certainly seemed to confuse Michael J. Copps, a member of the Federal Trade Commission and the Associated Press reporter who wrote the story.

Obviously, Copps thinks that sex equals violence and that Victoria's Secret is not a real secret, but after the show and during the furor, he brought out all his sports knowledge, and was quoted as saying, "It's time for us to step up to the plate and tackle the wanton violence our kids are served up every day." Now, if he could keep his shoulder to the wheel, his nose to the grindstone and his ear to the ground, all would go swiftly and easily.
-Joe Pollack

Letters
Have someone else call back

SJR: I read the November edition of the Review and noticed Tripp Frohlichstein's update about the Elliott Davis saga. Frohlichstein says that I didn't mean it when I said I'd talk to Mr. Davis. That is not correct. I did mean it.

What has happened is that Mr. Davis has continued his unprofessionalism. Just this month, he again confronted me at a public meeting as the meeting was beginning with camera and microphone on and no warning about the subject matter.

I have changed my position and now advise that I will be happy to talk to anyone from KTVI (Channel 2), but not Mr. Davis. His unprofessionalism, lack of ethics and rudeness should not be rewarded. Channel 2 can still get the interview by simply having someone else call.

John Baricevic
Chairman,
St. Clair County Board

Early Edition: Lost vision
By Ed Bishop

Older St. Louisans remember that during the 1940s, '50s and '60s, American presidents read the editorial page of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch religiously. It was one of the places where emerging liberal ideas were elegantly articulated. The Post is remembered in journalistic circles today because of that. It's what great editorial pages do.

The Post editorial page no longer fulfills that function.

It seems the page no longer knows what its function is.

For more than 20 years, liberals in the United States have had no overarching, organizing idea. It used to be economic justice-that pulled everything together. Now, the left's efforts are scattered in stopping drilling here and clear-cutting there, in keeping church and state separated, in abortion rights and gun control and healthcare and a dozen other things that are seemingly unrelated. It's easy for Republicans to pick these issues off one at a time.

Besides, Republicans have an overarching idea-the American dream of individualism. It encompasses everything from taxes to gun control to environmental policy. And the idea is flexible enough to allow things like school vouchers and tort reform to be included. The idea's other great asset is that it's closely related to patriotism. For example, the American military establishment is firmly Republican. There used to be generals who were Democrats. No more.

It's foolish to think that some man or woman running for Congress in Missouri is going to come up with an overarching idea on his or her own for the Democrats. Politicians play a role, of course. These ideas are mainly grass-roots, bubbling below the surface in local constituencies. But, the articulation of the ideas must be institutional. And, one of the institutions that plays an important role in honing great political ideas is journalism.

Journalists aren't part of the intellectual class because they can report ball scores accurately or cover teachers' strikes. They are part of the intellectual class because they have dug up the facts, see the patterns, and then turn all that stuff into flash-of-recognition concepts.

In short, it's the Post editorial page's function to articulate the liberal position. Because of its history, anything else would mark a significant change in American journalism.

After the last election, commentators, both left and right, said the same thing, almost in the same words-the Democrats had no message; they didn't stand for anything. More than a little of the historical blame for this lack of a clear, unifying liberal message can be laid at the feet of the editorial page of the Post-Dispatch. Somewhere along the way it lost the understanding that its function is to clearly articulate the dreams of more than half of the American electorate.

The tone of this once-great page has been wishy-washy for years. Half the time a reader can't tell where the editorial writers stand. And, when a position is discernible, the editorials are filled with second-guessing and punch-pulling. Muscular and insightful they're not.

If Democrats are waiting for the Post to articulate the left's organizing idea, they might as well wait for frost warnings in the Congo.

In fact, the Post's editorial page is running away from its liberal heritage as fast as the delivery trucks can carry it. As the Post's endorsements in the last election indicate, and as Post editors admit, the newspaper doesn't really want to be considered a liberal newspaper any more. I mean endorsing a Todd Akin or a Kenny Hulshof is an affront to every person who believes in women's rights or the American system of justice. Don't these editorial writers read their own newspaper. (The Post has reported that at least two prisoners on death row have been given new trials because of prosecutorial misconduct on the part of Hulshof.)

The editors made those endorsements to show readers that the page is not allied to any political party. Post editors say the shift is based on a renewed effort to live up to the "drastically independent" phrase in the Pulitzer platform. That's awfully convenient.

One actually gets the impression the editorial and op-ed pages of the Post are now something close to marketing tools. Appease all those readers who think the Post is too liberal, and get the circulation up.

And if that's true, the Post is actually dead as an independent voice. Words like "independent" and "balanced" and "fair" become talking points for public consumption-like the way the Fox News Network uses them-rather than living concepts on which you stake your journalistic soul.

Channels:

The Julius effect
By Tripp Frohlichstein

Call it the Julius effect. For the first time since 1999, KMOV (Channel 4) was almost number one in news at 10 p.m. November 1999 was somewhat of an aberration, another personality-related move. The station brought its popular weathercaster, Trish Brown, back on the air for a series of special reports. Channel 4 hasn't won the 10 p.m. news race cleanly since the mid-1980s.

Clearly, Hunter has drawing power. In his final month, the station featured his career in some capacity every weekday night. Whether it was about his many presidential interviews, words from former colleagues such as Herb Humphries and Steve Schiff, bloopers, or simply his fondest memories, viewers tuned in.

The "Julius effect" is further illustrated by insignificant ratings movement for Channel 4 at 5 and 6 p.m. Only at 10 p.m. did the station's ratings rise dramatically for his month-long goodbye.

In the 12 years or so that I worked with Hunter, I have a variety of memories, most of them pleasant. Although he disapproves of my work as a critic (he never liked critics-he hated St. Louis Post-Dispatch critic Eric Mink), this article is about the good things Hunter has done.

I remember his days as a go get 'em reporter. Unlike some anchors, he wanted to report as well. He did an excellent job. He was confident, when he interviewed presidents, that he was asking the questions viewers wanted to know the answers to. When he covered major events, he focused on things he believed were most relevant to viewers. When he covered breaking stories, he knew how to get important information quickly to pass it on to his viewers.

Hunter was also concerned about the writing of stories. He spent much time editing copy, along with making sure the many stories he wrote packed the right punch.

His books on St. Louis are well written and worth reading.

He was a dedicated individual who cared about the people who watched him.

Like him or not, you have to admire Julius Hunter. Not many anchors in the country can match his longevity in one city-he was at KSDK (Channel 5) before joining Channel 4. He was unquestionably a motivation for many to watch Channel 4. His real impact will be judged in future months as we compare ratings for Channel 4 while he was on the air and after his departure. But no matter what they show, he is clearly the reason Channel 4 was successful in November 2002.

When I discussed the November success of Channel 4 with former colleague Herb Humphries, he noted, "I might add that the 'Julius effect' was extraordinarily significant in every facet of Channel 4 News. From the time he first took the weekend anchor's chair until he departed the station, Julius Hunter was the dominant factor in the news operation. He will be sorely missed."

Hunter now becomes a vice president at Saint Louis University.

ooo

There are several stories to tell when looking at the November Nielsen ratings. People tuned in to Channel 4 at 10 p.m. to see Julius Hunter's final month and viewers turned to KTVI (Channel 2) at 9 p.m. in record numbers while Channel 5 saw its 5 p.m. audience get a big boost. But, unlike in past columns, Channel 5 was not dominant in all the major news broadcast time periods.

At 10 p.m., Channel 4 closed within a scant two-tenths of a ratings point of Channel 5. Given the margin of error, it is quite possible that Channel 4 won the important 10 p.m. news race. Last November, Channel 5 boasted a 7.6 point margin of victory so the "Julius effect" appears to have been extraordinarily significant.

Channel 4 management, however, suggests it is far more than Julius Hunter's swan song bringing viewers in. Management notes that the station closed the gap between itself and Channel 5 in October as well-a time prior to the Hunter goodbye month.

"It's exciting to see the hard work of our news staff acknowledged by St. Louis evening news viewers," said Channel 4 President and General Manager Allan Cohen.

Channel 4 is also benefiting from a stronger CBS prime time line-up while Channel 5 is being hurt by a weaker NBC.

In St. Louis (and many other cities), news ratings can be significantly helped or hurt by the show on just prior to the news. People often simply keep the tube on the same station as programming goes from network shows to local news.

Channel 4 might have won the 10 p.m. race as it protested a move by Channel 5 when the station went up against the Rams' Monday night game against Chicago. Channel 5 shortened its news and ran some other previously-aired material. By calling it something other than a normal newscast, Channel 5 successfully eliminated it from the ratings averages. Channel 4 management says that, had it been included, Channel 4 would have claimed a victory at 10 p.m.

This attempt to get certain newscasts not to count against specific strong programs is a tactic used by several stations here and in other cities.

Although there may be factors other than Hunter, ratings after his departure for Channel 4 dropped quite a bit while Channel 5 regained strength. Looking at the four weekdays after Thanksgiving would cause one to believe in the "Julius effect."

ooo

Channel 2 is boasting in its news release, "At 9:00 p.m., Channel 2 News delivered its first ever eight rating, putting it sixth in the country for prime time news and second in the Central Time Zone."

It is a fair statement from general manager Spencer Koch as he says, "Fox 2 is now considered by the viewers to be a main media force in St. Louis.

"Aggregate ratings for 10 p.m. news are declining, while ratings for 9 p.m. news are growing. Certainly, viewers are forming new habits in a very fluid market. Four years ago, there were four stations carrying news at 10 p.m., today there are only two-and ratings have decreased by more than 20 percent. In the same period, 9 p.m. news viewing has nearly doubled and Fox 2 has 80 percent of that 9 p.m. audience," says Koch.

Channel 2 is also bragging that its morning ratings are up. The station notes it got its first "5" rating at 6 a.m. and has moved ahead of Channel 4 from 5 a.m. to 9 a.m. Channel 5, however, still dominates the morning news audience with its local news and the "Today Show."

Channel 5, watching the "Julius effect" take a big bite of its 10 p.m. ratings, focused elsewhere. Lynn Beall, president and general manager of Channel 5 says, "It was a actually a very strong book for us, specifically in the earlier shows. Late news was much more competitive than usual, with the departure of Channel 4's Julius Hunter."

Channel 5 gained more than two ratings points at 5 p.m. while the numbers for Channel 2 were off nearly a full point. Channel 4 showed no movement.

A ratings point is equivalent to 11,713 area households while a share point is the percent of homes watching a specific program during a specific time period compared to all homes watching television during that time period. Ratings are for Monday through Friday unless otherwise noted. Also included is a five-year look at late news ratings.

Sports Media
Questions for the Rams
By Joe Pollack

There's more hand-flapping going on in St. Louis now than in the days when the kids were doing the hand jive in "Grease" and enough jaw-flapping to drown out those who would prefer to talk about a new stadium and who will pay for it.

The only satisfaction I have is that on the day that the controversy heated up, it was someone else's Football Cardinals who were hammered, 49-0, by the Chiefs. It's only a small consolation, but I didn't have to go on KMOX radio-the way I used to-and try to convince people that we were just a couple of plays, and a couple of players, out of contention, and besides, we were entertaining, and you never had to worry about us covering the spread, and so what if we were about to raise ticket prices. It was only a small amount.

The greatest compliment I would receive was when someone snarled, "You talked for half an hour and never said a word."

Right from the start of the game against the Eagles, it was easy to see that Kurt Warner was having trouble handling the ball. Old bruises and injuries seemed almost enough explanation. He could not throw deep, and he was not accurate on his shorter throws. His wide receivers, Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt, didn't help him much, either. They should have been fighting for extra yardage, not diving like pro wrestlers the moment they were touched by someone in another color of jersey.

The offensive line was in deplorable physical condition, and played deplorably, too. And through all this, the Rams still only lost by a touchdown. The game could have gone to the Rams at any time during the afternoon.

That's the first reason that Mike Martz, who made all his usual game-day mistakes on the sidelines, didn't change quarterbacks, and I think it's a valid reason. Even with just half a Warner, the Rams were in the game to the very end.

Of course, Warner was in pain, but quarterbacks always are, and at the three-quarter mark of an NFL season, so are most other players. I'm certain that Warner minimized the pain and the possibility of a serious injury. He's big, and he's tough, and he's macho, and that's the way it is in the NFL. And, I'm sure that Martz was happy to accept what his quarterback said, because if Warner had said, "I'm in too much pain, coach. I can't continue," Martz would have taken him out. Besides, just a few weeks earlier, Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb had played almost an entire game with an ankle fracture.

I'm not sure how badly the fans and the media panicked in Philadelphia when McNabb, and then Coy Detmer, went down with injuries, but Coach Andy Reid didn't. He simply called on his third quarterback, Adam Joshua Feeley, and went on with his game plan.

There's a key question about Martz in here, too. Why has Jamie Martin been hanging around all season if Martz has no faith in him? Given Warner's performance against the Eagles, Martz would have been within his rights to replace him with Martin along the way. But, still, as I noted earlier, it was a one-touchdown game, so it's difficult to fault Martz. The coach's other shortcomings have been noted early and often by Bernie Miklasz, one of the few media types to get on his case. I haven't read, listened to or watched all the writers and talkers, but most of them approach the coach, and relate to him, as if he walked on water.

This is not a call for Martz's scalp, either. I think he's an excellent offensive coach, a fertile offensive mind. His problems with clock management can be eliminated if he would delegate some authority, but the most important thing he has to learn is that despite his success with his theories, the only commandment worth remembering in any sport is "Offense sells tickets, but defense wins games." Miklasz should learn it, too.

Another key question is how the injury will affect Warner's market value either as a Ram or as a commodity for trading.

Something else that has gone uncovered also intrigues me. During Marc Bulger's run of success, Martz often gave him more blocking protection than he did Warner. One or two fewer receivers went downfield, leaving someone in the backfield to block, though I wince when the someone is Marshall Faulk, who is willing to sacrifice his body by blocking a linebacker or a lineman who outweighs him by 80 pounds. I'd rather see Faulk go out on the pattern while Ernie Conwell, or even a spare tackle, did the blocking.

But as Warner returned to action, Martz mentioned that he thought some extra blocking help would make it easier for Warner to get up to speed. I don't know if anyone else thought that important, but I saw an awful lot of empty backfields behind Warner and kept looking for someone at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch to tell us how often Warner got more assistance. Given the number of writers at each game, someone could have been delegated to count blockers, or the world's greatest football statistician, Seymour Siwoff, could have provided the information. Rams' public relations man Rick Smith has enough staff to do it, too.

The arrival into the fray of Brenda Warner, riding to the rescue like the cavalry in old western movies, adds still another dimension to this rapidly advancing drama. I'm not sure who Brenda is trying to rescue, but inserting herself into the debate between the coach and his quarterback-and on a radio call-in show at that-does not indicate a condition of great wisdom.

Media/Law
Top legal stories of the year
By Ken Jones

Here are my top 10 year-in-review legal stories of 2002 in St. Louis.

Clergy abuse: The clergy sex abuse scandal was, by far, the top legal story of the year. Revelations that several priests with tarnished pasts were still in active ministry, together with the hierarchy's response to the disclosures, dominated the news for weeks in the spring. Who can forget Archbishop Justin Rigali's media tour, which was not exactly a tour de force, as he attempted to respond to the crisis? The story caught the attention of Jefferson City, too, as the General Assembly amended the child-abuse law to add clergy to the list of people required to report suspected abuse to the state. Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce and County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch also got involved, prosecuting priests charged with crimes.

Democratic Supreme Court: When Judge John Holstein stepped down from the Missouri Supreme Court and was replaced by Judge Richard B. Teitelman, it marked the first time in years that a majority of the court had been appointed by Democratic governors. Although a party change is not as significant on the state level as it would be on the national level, the Carnahan-Holden court will make its mark in a number of areas, especially criminal law and the running battle between the plaintiffs' bar and the insurance companies.

Kenneth Baumruk ruling: The local press seemed to be caught by surprise when the Missouri Supreme Court overturned the murder conviction of Kenneth Baumruk, who shot up the St. Louis County courthouse in 1992. The court, split on party lines, ruled that holding the trial in St. Louis County, the site of the shooting, was inherently prejudicial. Antonio Richardson case: A U.S. Supreme Court decision in June on the execution of mentally retarded convicts led to a delay in the execution of Antonio Richardson. Richardson was convicted in the deaths of the Kerry sisters, who were raped and thrown off the Chain of Rocks Bridge. The high court ruled that the death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment when applied to mentally retarded people. Richardson had an IQ of about 70. Another Supreme Court ruling could help Richardson avoid execution-in June the court said that only juries, not judges, can impose the death penalty.

Juror secrecy: The Missouri Supreme Court adopted a rule making the identities of jurors in criminal cases confidential. Media advocates were disturbed by the rule because it prevents reporters from talking to jurors unless "good cause" is shown to the presiding judge. The press was also annoyed because the committee that drafted the new rule said its primary purpose was to stymie the media, which created a "circus" after Ellen Reasonover's conviction was reversed.

Judge Shaw vs. the 8th Circuit: U.S. District Judge Charles A. Shaw engaged in a very public feud with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals over his decision to dismiss a police officer's civil rights case. Officer Thomas Moran sued the police board and other officials, claiming he had been scapegoated for the beating of a mentally retarded man wrongly suspected of burglary. When the 8th Circuit reversed Shaw's decision because he did not disclose a personal relationship with a police board member, Shaw wrote a follow-up opinion castigating the "six white men" on the 8th Circuit who ruled against him. Several weeks later, the 8th Circuit returned fire, saying that Shaw's comments "were calculated to impugn the integrity of this court in the eyes of the public."

GOP takeover: Following the Republican stampede through the November elections, the GOP will control both the Missouri Senate and House for the first time in almost 50 years. On the legal front, the Republican takeover means the specter of tort reform-limiting damage awards, restricting medical malpractice cases and considering a "loser pay" attorney's fee system. Republican control won't have an effect on judicial appointments since judges in St. Louis are selected by the governor.

Junk faxes: We're all annoyed by junk faxes, and now, some of the senders are paying the price. A Metro East car dealership that sent unsolicited faxes to consumers agreed to pay $6.5 million to settle a class action case filed under a federal law banning junk faxes. Similar settlements have been made around the country. But, a federal judge in St. Louis threw a monkey wrench in the litigation when he ruled that the ban violates the First Amendment. The case is now on appeal to the 8th Circuit.

Gun owner liability: A Jefferson County trial court made a significant change in the law when it ruled that a gun owner could be held liable for negligent storage of a handgun. The gun had been taken by a mentally disturbed young man from his father's closet and was then used to kill the man's brother. The wife of the dead brother sued the father for negligence. The jury awarded $400,000. Previous courts have ruled that gun owners could not be held responsible for the criminal acts of third parties.

George Harrison/Chuck Berry: Two music icons won victories in St. Louis courts within several weeks of each other during the fall. The estate of George Harrison prevailed in federal court in St. Louis on a claim against a former business associate while Chuck Berry won a defense verdict in a case filed by a former band member seeking a cut of the royalties on songs such as "No Particular Place to Go," "Roll Over Beethoven" and "Sweet Little Sixteen."

Media/Politics
News in context
By Terry Jones

In 1979, Philip Meyer's Precision Journalism urged newspapers to make greater use of social science concepts and methods in covering key social issues. Meyer, then a Knight-Ridder reporter and now a University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill professor, has continued to preach this sermon, most recently in his 2001 book, The New Precision Journalism. But, alas, the impact has been modest at best.

How would a story with sophisticated social science content differ from the typical fare? Let's take a recent St. Louis Post-Dispatch story on residential segregation in metropolitan areas as a case in point.

The front-page Nov. 29 story, based on a Nov. 27 U.S. Census Bureau news release, did nothing wrong by normal journalism standards. It put the main point in the lead (black-white segregation is down among the one-million-and-larger U.S. metropolitan areas but the St. Louis region remains among the most segregated); got useful quotes from a longtime area civil rights leader, two national scholars, and one local academic; and wove them into a compact 23-paragraph story accompanied by two charts. For someone on deadline, it would be unreasonable to expect much more.

But, as the Post editorial page regularly and appropriately reminds us, race is the region's preeminent moral and pragmatic challenge. Such a story merits more attention and greater reporter investment, especially the kind of explanation and understanding that a social science approach would provide.

First, how is residential segregation measured? The Census study actually employed five different yardsticks, each capturing a distinct dimension: how evenly whites and blacks are distributed, how likely each race is to be exposed to the other, how spatially concentrated each race is, how much one race is located in and around the core, and how much one race is clustered within a contiguous portion of the region. A sidebar on these would help the reader better understand what is being discussed.

Second, more substantively, what is the trend? All measurement is relative so both longitudinal (Is St. Louis becoming more or less segregated?) and cross-sectional (Is St. Louis more or less segregated than other regions?) information is needed. The Post story states that "the study was based on 2000 census figures," but in fact, the report contains all the scores from the past three censuses: 1980, 1990 and 2000. And, to answer the trend question, St. Louis has become less segregated on four of the five indices (all but clustering). On the two most widely used residential segregation measures-the ones measuring distribution (dissimilarity index) and exposure (isolation index), the region has dropped more than 10 percent during the past 20 years.

Third, more spatially, what would a map of residence by race for the St. Louis region look like? These data can easily be expressed graphically and, for example, side-by-side maps for 1980, 1990, and 2000 would be worth more than the proverbial 1,000 words in helping readers grasp residential segregation patterns. What parts of the region are integrating and which are not?

Fourth, more theoretically, what causes and sustains residential segregation? The story latched onto one factor-the inertia of past history-but did not mention alternative explanations. John Farley, a Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville sociologist, has published several excellent articles testing various factors. Among his most intriguing findings, contained in his November 1995 Urban Affairs Review article ("Race Still Matters: The Minimal Role of Income and Housing Cost as Causes of Segregation in St. Louis, 1990"), is that, as the title implies, differential economic circumstances account for only a fraction of residential separation by race. Contacting the Metropolitan St. Louis Equal Housing Opportunity Council would have enabled the story to probe the role real estate practices, such as steering, play.

Fifth, more conceptually, what are the consequences? How does residential segregation contribute to educational segregation? What role does it play in inhibiting equal economic opportunity? Just a few days after this story appeared, the Post had an update on the future of the Voluntary Interdistrict Transfer Program. The connection between the two accounts is painfully obvious, but the Post did not connect the dots. Again, another local scholar-St. Louis University's Todd Swanstrom-is the co-author of the prize-winning Place Matters: Metropolitics for the Twenty-First Century and would have been a superb source for expanding these points.

Sixth, with a possible whiff of civic journalism, what is being done about residential segregation? Little more than a year ago, FOCUS St. Louis issued a task force report entitled "Racial Equality in the St. Louis Region: A Community Call to Action." It contains both extensive documentation of the area's residential segregation and numerous recommendations for addressing it. Neither this report nor anyone associated with it was mentioned in the story.

As Meyer continues to stress, the ingredients for incorporating more social science content into daily journalism continue to expand. Social science shares with journalism the goal of answering the five W's: who, what, when, where and why-especially the why. Citizen-readers can benefit substantially by having a closer partnership between the two.

Radio History
Paying the Price
By Frank Absher

Sometimes it's hard to imagine life in the "old" days, especially when those who have firsthand knowledge are no longer around. Such is the case when it comes to remembering St. Louis' first black disc jockey.

Wiley Price Jr. got his first radio job in 1944 at WTMV, then a local powerhouse station with studios in the Broadview Hotel in East St. Louis. He was 31 years old. The country was at war and African Americans were considered second-class citizens. What would possess a radio station to hire an African American and put him on the air into a high-profile job?

Even though WTMV was only operating with a 250 watt output at 1490 Kc., the station had an excellent reputation for news, sports and entertainment in the region. It once boasted in a promotional article that 35 of its people had graduated to "big time" radio within a five-year period.

In the 1940s and '50s, a person could carve out a radio career by being a savvy self-promoter. Station owners were always interested if money could be made, so many announcers would buy their own time in hour-long blocks and then sell ads on their programs. Wiley Price III says, "My father could talk his way into anything." But talk wasn't always enough. According to radio veteran and historian Bernie Hayes, an African American announcer would "have to convince management that he was articulate and that he could pay for the time."

Once Price had made his case to WTMV management, he was given a late night air slot. To his listeners, he became known as "Mrs. Price's Boy Wiley." His radio shows were a mixture of gospel and rhythm & blues music, with gospel artists often performing live in the studio. His on-air approach was smooth and intelligent, according to the late deejay Roscoe McCrary, who would have his own program on WTMV in 1951. It was said Wiley was a "class act" on the local airwaves.

The rhythm & blues music of those days was called "race music," according to Bernie Hayes. It was actually a mix of R&B and jazz, featuring artists like the Ink Spots, the Five Blind Boys, Ethel Waters, Andy Kirk's Band, Cab Calloway, and many others from the Chitlin' Circuit who emulated the sounds of the white musicians. Wiley Price's son, Wiley III, says his dad was personally acquainted with the great jazz artists like Duke Ellington and Count Basie, and he grew up in North St. Louis with Clark Terry. Those relationships continued even after his dad left radio work: "I remember Stan Kenton visiting our home several times when I was a kid."

Wiley Price Jr. was a St. Louis native, raised on Aldine on the north side, a graduate of Sumner High School with additional schooling in accountancy and a military veteran. Hayes says of Price's place in radio history, "He was something to be idolized by the African-American community. On the air he was laid back, very sincere. Everybody liked him."

Price moved on to work as a deejay on KXLW and KSTL, playing the same mix of music he'd become accustomed to on WTMV. He left the business when station owners insisted he start playing a new form of music that was being called "rock 'n' roll." His son says Wiley Price Jr. called it "the ignorant man's music" and said it would never last.

The first African American to have his own radio show in St. Louis suffered a stroke in 1961 and died at the age of 56 in 1969. The death of the market's first black disc jockey did not even merit a story in either of the city's major newspapers.

AM/FM
Carroll's decision misguided
By Lynn Venhaus

By the time you read this, a settlement may have been reached in the complicated and messy break-up between Charles Jaco and KMOX (1120 AM).

Since the firing last month, station management has chosen to take the bullet, hunkering down with no comment-thus neither clarifying the controversy nor defending its actions, while a defiant Jaco is fighting back with AFTRA legal representation.

KMOX's standard alibi is that it's a personnel matter, which can't be discussed. Not even the employees can talk about it amongst themselves.

Jaco was savvy enough to enlist the union's help and is trying to salvage his reputation. He wants either an apology or retraction, and he deserves it.

When KMOX's Karen Carroll fired Jaco for "gross misconduct," that left interpretation up for grabs, with innuendo spreading like wildfire. The news went around the world, and the man who earned an international reputation as a CNN war correspondent was livid. "It sounded like I was smoking crack in the bathroom," Jaco said in a phone interview. "My reputation has been damaged with a lie."

Eventually, snide e-mails that Jaco had sent to listeners were pinpointed as a reason. So was a blow-up in the newsroom with news director John Butler. Jaco admits he acted immaturely by telling a listener to "piss off" and should not have sent the "intemperate" missives. He frequently quarreled with Butler. "Of course I should have walked away," he said.

There must be more to the story. Discipline, yes, but firing? Jaco says it is retaliation for requesting union representation in the disciplinary meeting, and for various union activities over the past few years. He also implies it's a personal grudge.

He is not going to go gently into that good night. Would you expect otherwise?

Being a prickly personality alone doesn't usually get one fired. Jaco's ego might rub some folks the wrong way, but the man knows what he's doing and is very good at it. If we were to rid the business of all the egomaniacs, there would only be a few journalists left-none of the good ones.

So why would Carroll risk looking bad and cutting Jaco loose at a time when another war may be looming in the Gulf? His contract expires in September 2003. Apparently, she had a long list of things she was annoyed with him about, and his role had been diminished at the station for some time. He was bounced around as a fill-in for the morning show and others and was the lead guy for afternoon news, but his "Nightwatch" show was infrequent, booted for Cardinals baseball most evenings for six months.

Jaco was the sole national marquee name at the station. His international cachet was considerable. One always learned something from his shows, and he's rightfully proud of his work there during the past seven years.

Jaco praised his producer, Peggy Cohill. "She's a genius. She's the best booker/producer I've ever worked with. She's one of a kind," he said. "We're very proud of the show we did. Our objective was to have listeners say, 'I didn't know that' or 'You made me look at it differently.' If one person said that, we accomplished our mission."

Was Jaco's $122, 500 salary a factor? (Is anyone else surprised it's that low?) If it's not a salary dump, the timing is unfortunate. New Cardinals' announcer Wayne Hagin's hiring came at the same time as Jaco's firing. It looks suspect. Sources say, however, that they are not connected.

Carroll's misguided choice of using "gross misconduct" seems petty-a loophole that prevents the man from severance pay and then the non-compete clause intrudes on his chances to earn a living. Carroll looks heartless and mean, and ignoring the union is just plain stupid. The union is there to protect employees from whims of revolving-door management.

And if it's true, as Jaco charges, that KMOX is catering news to the 10 suburban zip codes where its listenership is strongest, shame on them. Has it come to this, niche news, for 50 percent corporate profits?

Love him or hate him, Jaco was one of KMOX's pluses. He was the go-to guy for hard news, great news analysis and interesting commentary. He made the station better, made the St. Louis market better. He believes there are smart people here who want intelligent news-talk. "Hard news does matter," he said. I want to believe the talking heads in this town are not only dedicated to truth, justice and the American way, but also have the smarts to carve their own path. With Jaco, you knew he wasn't going to suffer fools, and that raised the bar.

Hard news should matter at the news-talk leader of St. Louis.

Has Carroll misread listeners' desire for intelligent talk? Hundreds of supporters have barraged Jaco with e-mails. He said he stopped counting at 250.

Jaco likes it here. He wants to stay here. He has been approached by KTRS ("All I can say is that they've expressed an interest"), and he is also entertaining some offers from out-of-town ventures. "I would prefer not to leave. We're raising our two-year-old granddaughter, and she's thriving here," he said.

While Jaco's daily livelihood has been yanked, he is still writing books and working on his Ph.D. "I'll survive. I'll land on my feet," he said emphatically but would like to be able to support his family.

ooo

And the winner is ... Wayne Hagin of the Colorado Rockies. The new play-by-play man for the St. Louis Cardinals' radio network is, by all accounts, a real nice guy and total pro, having covered the major leagues for 21 years. With all the fanfare of anointing a new head of state, KMOX announced that Hagin would join Mike Shannon in the broadcast booth last month after a massive search process.

Hagin, 46, has been the Rockies' broadcaster since the team's first season in 1993. He began in 1981 doing Oakland Athletics' games, and has also worked on San Francisco Giants' and Chicago White Sox coverage. He has experience in college basketball and baseball and the NBA's Golden State Warriors. Plus, he even played college ball, at San Diego State University.

"I am thrilled to be coming to what I consider the best baseball city in America," Hagin said in a statement. "Having been a visiting broadcaster for these many years, you can't help but feel the incredible energy and devotion of the fans."

As for being the heir to Jack Buck's old position, Hagin states, "Jack Buck can never be replaced. I hope to honor his past work with my future work."

Tom Langmyer, operations manager for KMOX, thinks the community will embrace Hagin, as he has been very active in the Denver area. "Wayne is not just a sportscaster or announcer, he's a broadcaster and conversationalist. Conversation is what baseball on the radio is all about. Stay tuned for some great conversations between Mike and Wayne," he said.

"I think Wayne represents many of the qualities we were looking for in a broadcaster to work with Mike Shannon. He's a solid broadcaster and also a very nice guy," Langmyer added.

Hagin's contract is for three years. His wife, Valerie, has local ties, as she's a native of Carlyle, Ill. He can probably comfortably become an active St. Louisan.

Let's hope he can ease in to the job with fans giving him some time to gel with Shannon. It looks like KMOX made a good choice, but it all comes down to chemistry on-air. After all the musical chairs these past few years, it could be exciting to witness a fellow endear himself to Cardinal Nation with warmth, charm, knowledge and talent.

ooo

After finally earning a full-time gig at KLOU, Randy Raley has departed to become the new morning man on classic rock station KCFX (101.1 FM) in Kansas City.

Raley said it was an offer he couldn't refuse, and the bosses at KLOU agreed he should take it. After all, it was a three-year deal, which is practically unheard of in the business in this day and age.

"It's a really good company. It was a really good offer. I'm as pleased as can be," he said. "Both Mike Wheeler (KLOU operations manager) and Al Brock (program director) said it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity."

The station, known as The Fox, is owned by a family-run company called Susquehanna. "They really make it comfortable for people to work for them," he said.

Raley's last day at KLOU was Nov. 29. His first day in KC was Dec. 2. He's on from 5 to 9 a.m. weekdays and is paired with Teri Wilder, who is also a professional singer. "So far, it's worked out really well," he said.

Raley is no stranger to Kansas City. He worked at another station there from 1978 to 1985, then came to KSHE (94.7 FM), and returned to Kansas City from 1989 to 1991. He came back to St. Louis, working at KSHE again, moved to The Rock (97.1 FM) and after the Emmis-Sinclair-Bonneville deal in 2000, to Smooth Jazz 106.5 FM. He landed a part-time position at KLOU when he regained his health after a lengthy illness. "A year ago, I was so sick I couldn't even get out of bed. I am so grateful and so blessed to get up every morning," he said.

Raley's been happy in St. Louis, and his family remains here. He plans on coming home weekends. His wife of 15 years teaches at Priory, and he has a stepson and daughter at home. He asked the family to vote on the job opportunity, and it was 3-0 in favor of the move. "I didn't know how my family was going to take it, but they were like, 'You've got to go,'" he said.

Raley was content at KLOU, especially with the new super-hits format and working for the new program director. "Al Brock is one of the coolest individuals I've ever worked for. The format kicks ass. It's so wide and varied. You don't know what's coming next. I think that's the key," he said. "I'm humbled and proud that I got to help kick that off. He was just great to me. I was treated very well by Clear Channel. I had a great time there. I would still be there, but I just couldn't pass this up."

It had to be an offer he couldn't refuse, for in the latest Arbitrons, his KLOU midday show was number one for 25 to 54 year olds. "It was the first time KEZK was beat in a long time," he said.

The KLOU staff has added veterans Lee Edwards and Paul Arca to their line-up.

ooo

John Angelides, died Nov. 8 of complications from a heart attack. He was 65. Starting in 1962, he spent 12 years as a reporter and editor at the St. Louis Globe-Democrat. He left in 1974 to become KMOX's news director and built the newsroom into one of the most respected in the country during his 21 years there. After retirement in 1995, he formed a public relations business with Jeff Rainford-Angelides, Rainford & Associates. He represented the RCGA and KTRS, among other clients.

Kent Martin, a former KMOX newsman who's now news director at KTRS, remembered Angelides fondly. "I owed John so much. He was the man who brought me to St. Louis and gave me the dream job: full-time reporting and writing documentaries for the most dominant station in America. Coming from a background that included University of Missouri Journalism School training, John made his newsroom the best place to work in radio news, here or anywhere," he said. "He brought to radio news a rare combination of street smarts and newspaper experience that few broadcasters could match. He, along with Joan Beuckman, made the newsroom an exciting, and a rare, place to work. He was passionate about news."

Martin said Angelides put together an award-winning newsroom that general manager Bob Hyland was proud of, and both men respected each other. "As a result, John enjoyed a certain freedom in running the newsroom. We didn't have to worry about narrowly targeting certain audiences or specific demographics with our coverage. Our focus was on the stories that mattered most to our general audience," he said. They won three George Peabody awards.

That obviously made an impression on Martin. "It's what St. Louisans have come to expect from their news media. It's the same philosophy I'm incorporating in our newsroom at KTRS today. In fact, much of what John taught us then we're trying to put into practice. It's always best to go with a winner."

KTRS and Coast-to-Coast host George Noory was news director at KSDK during John's reign at KMOX. "We talked a lot and lunched once in a while at one of his favorite spots, St. Raymond's Church in south St. Louis. He helped me a lot when I came to St. Louis and gave me valuable insight, which we used to build one of the best TV news departments in the country. John helped and never asked for a thing. If you believe in the afterlife, he's way up there," Noory said.

ooo

Another radio personality admired by colleagues has died. Doug Wilson, KLOU's program director from 1990 to 1994, died Nov. 3 in Austin, Texas, where he was operations manager and on-air personality at the local oldies station. He was 50 years old.

Former colleague Mike McCann said while at KLOU, Wilson inaugurated the station's annual all-star concert at what was then called Riverport. He also arranged for the station to sponsor free oldies shows at Union Station. "His close relationship with such stars as The Turtles, Jan and Dean, and Chubby Checker, helped bring these legendary stars back to St. Louis," McCann said. "His wisdom, creativity and combination of leadership and trust in his staff made him a pleasure to work for."

Late Edition
Sorry, same story:
Disregard for human rights, governmental lies, corporate exploitation of resources
By Charles L. Klotzer

In the November issue we published the 10 most underreported stories in the U.S. They highlighted the editorial myopia at most mass media. As our readers know, Project Censored of Sonoma State University, California, actually selects 25 key features which deserved national attention. Below we publish another eleven with the balance in the coming issue.

These brief reports are depressing. They expose lies at the highest levels of government, utter disregard for human and civil rights, and the exploitation by corporations of global, irreplaceable resources.

11. Bush appoints former Iran-Contra officials
"President Bush is quietly building the most conservative administration in modern times." Over the last year Bush has attempted to bring back into office men who were discredited by their involvement in the Iran-Contra affair; men like John Poindexter, Otto Reich, Elliot Abrams and John Negroponte.

Last February John Poindexter was appointed to head the new Information Awareness Office (IAO), an offshoot of the Pentagon based Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The IAO will supply federal agents with "instant" analysis of private e-mail and telephone conversations. As the vice president of Syntek Technologies, Poindexter helped develop the Orwellian "Project Genoa" for the IAO. Genoa will gather information about electronic conversations, financial transactions, passport tracking, airline ticket sales, phone records and satellite surveillance into a matrix from which "useful information" will be made available to federal authorities.

Along with the flagrant violations of our civil liberties the IAO is threatening, it is important to note the criminal record of the head of this operation. After serving as Reagan's National Security Advisor, John Poindexter was charged and found guilty of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and the destruction of evidence as he played a central role in the Iran-Contra affair. Costa Rica has officially declared Poindexter to be a drug trafficker, and has barred him from entering the country.

Elliot Abrams was recently appointed to the NSC as director of its office for democracy, human rights and international relations. In 1991, Abrams pleaded guilty to withholding evidence from Congress regarding his role in the Iran-Contra affair. He was active in covering up some of the worst atrocities of the war. According to congressional records, under Abrams watch, the Contras "raped, tortured and killed unarmed civilians, including children," and that "groups of civilians, including women and children, were burned, dismembered, blinded and beheaded." He was subsequently pardoned by former President Bush.

John Negroponte, the new ambassador to the UN, served under Reagan as ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985. He is known for his role in the cover up of human rights abuses by CIA trained paramilitaries throughout the region. Otto Reich has been appointed as assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs (which includes Latin America). The Bush administration used a "recess appointment" last January to side-step the Senate confirmation hearing otherwise required of the appointment. Democrat opposition to Reich's nomination had been predicted. In the '80s, Reich was head of the office for Public Diplomacy, which was censured by Congress for "prohibited covert propaganda activities" after influencing the media to favorably cover the Reagan administration's position. That office is now defunct. He also helped terrorist Orlando Bosch gain entry into the U.S. after being imprisoned in Venezuela for bombing a Cuban airliner, killing its 73 passengers.
-David Immel
Sources: The Nation, (May 7, 2001), by Peter Kornbluh / In These Times, (Aug. 6, 2001), by Terry Allen / Extra, (Sept./Oct. 2001), by Terry Allen / The Guardian, (Feb. 8, 2002), by Duncan Campbell and (Feb. 18, 2002), by John Sutherland / Washingtonian, (April 2002), by Michael Zuckerman.

12. NAFTA's definition of property rights
Certain investor protections of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) are giving business investors new power over sovereign nations and providing an expansive new definition of property rights.

Chapter 11 of NAFTA, which allows a corporation to sue a government, contains a particularly disturbing "regulatory takings" clause. Under this "takings" clause, intangible property, such as a corporation's potential future profits, is considered private property. Any law or regulation that is imposed to protect the public interest is considered "taking" that company's potential to make a profit. Therefore, the government should be required to compensate the owners for lost property/profit. This expanded definition of private property goes beyond established terms in U.S. jurisprudence and has the potential to override domestic law. NAFTA's investor protections and the "regulatory takings" idea mimics a radical revision of constitutional law that the American right has been pushing for years.

This would require governments to pay corporations whose property, tangible or intangible, is in some way diminished by public actions. Since any regulation will have some economic impact on private assets, the "takings" doctrine is therefore a vehicle to shrink the reach of government and cripple its regulatory procedures. This has the potential to undermine long-established social welfare and environmental regulatory protections.

"Regulatory takings" laws have not yet been adopted into U.S. domestic law. The Supreme Court has so far declined to accept this redefinition of the Constitution. However, NAFTA's precedent has opened the door for the "takings" premise to become a standard facet of international law, and corporations are working to realize that goal. In April 2001, a collection of 29 major U.S. multinational corporations and industry organizations (including GE, Ford, GM, International Paper, Motorola, Dow, DuPont, Chevron, Procter & Gamble and 3M) wrote to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, urging him to push for a Chapter 11-type provision in upcoming FTAA negotiations. The letter applauded NAFTA's regulatory takings clause, saying it provides "protection from regulations that diminish the value of investors' assets." Although FTAA negotiations are not yet complete, at present the draft of the agreement includes a provision nearly identical to Chapter 11 that allows for "investor-to-state" lawsuits. If the potential-profit laws "succeed" to the degree that some companies hope they will, such basic government regulations as minimum wage raises and OSHA standards may become null and void in favor of corporate profit.
-Sarah Potts, Chris Salvano
Sources: The Nation, (Oct. 15, 2001), by William Greider/ Terrain, (Fall 2001), by David Huffman.

13. Henry Kissinger and Gerald Ford lied to the American public about East Timor
The release of previously classified documents makes it clear that former President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, in a face-to-face meeting in Jakarta, gave then-President Suharto a green light for the 1975 invasion of East Timor.
Sources: Asheville Global Report, (Dec. 13, 2001), by Jim Lobe.

14. New laws restrict access to abortions in U.S.
A quiet war against abortion is being conducted by many local governments in the United States. Cities and counties are placing unnecessary restrictions on clinics, ranging from how wide a hallway can be to the jet and angle type of the drinking fountains; from the height of the ceiling to how long one must wait between initially seeing the doctor and when the procedure can be performed.

These legal ordinances are known as TRAP laws. TRAP stands for Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers. These laws regulate everything except the abortion procedure itself. While called women's health laws, they are seldom applied to any medical facility other than abortion clinics. In effect, these laws are prohibiting abortions even though they are still legal. In the words of one right-to-life leader, the idea is to create an environment "where abortion may indeed be perfectly legal, but no one can get one."

TRAP laws have been passed in several states including Utah, Connecticut, Louisiana, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Alabama, Colorado, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Illinois, Nebraska, and Texas. These regulations such as hallway width, angle and jet types of drinking fountains, ceiling height, doorway width, counseling room dimensions, air-circulation rates, outdoor weed-control practices, and separate changing rooms for men have resulted in the closing of abortion clinics for mandated remodeling. Sometimes the clinics are closed temporarily, but sometimes the repairs are simply too expensive and the clinic is forced the cease operating altogether. In 1992 when the Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling continued to support the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, a new stealthier strategy was called for and shaped by prolife campaigners. After the Casey decision, right-to-life advocates began thinking about other ways to attack abortion that were not so overtly against the Wade decision. By claiming that abortions take place in dirty facilities and cause such illnesses as depression and breast cancer, right-to-lifers realized they could subtly move the focus of the debate away from the moral and legal angles.
Sources: Mother Jones, (Sept./Oct. 2001), by Barry Yeoman.

15. U.S. energy plans will increase air pollution
The Bush administration's energy plan will increase air pollution in the United States. Bush's energy plan also calls for decreased funding for research into renewable, clean energy development. In spite of record high smog levels, increased respiratory related hospital visits, and record-high asthma cases in the East Coast last year, the Bush plan still calls for increased fossil fuel consumption. The plan also indicates that there are no scheduled upgrades to the 30-to-60-year-old power plants that pollute four to ten times as much sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon dioxide, and mercury as newer power plants.

Although Bush conceded earlier in his presidency that global warming is underway and that steps must be taken to reduce emissions, the U.S. is still responsible for 25% of the world's greenhouse emissions. The Bush plan nonetheless puts in jeopardy the "New Source Review" (NSR) provision which is a vital part of the Clean Air Act. The NSR requires facilities to offset pollution increases with reductions elsewhere in the facility or demonstrate that the facility is using the best available pollution control. Major power, coal, and oil companies, who own many power plants that were built between 1940 and 1970, have sought to ease the restrictions of the NSR claiming that the restrictions hurt their business because of costs to upgrade to the best available pollution control technology. The EPA and several states have successfully sued a number of large utilities for violation of the NSR provision. These legal victories have led to millions of dollars in penalties and commitments to cutting millions of pounds of air pollutants that have been shown, after repeated exposure, to cause as much damage to human lungs as smoking a pack of cigarettes a day.

In a time when record smog levels on the East Coast have resulted in 6 million asthma attacks and 212,000 hospital visits due to respiratory problems last summer, George Bush claims that his energy plan will be good for the environment and the economy. The slashing of funding for research into clean renewable energy and increased dependence on fossil fuels by the Bush energy plan will speed up the effects of global warming and have a detrimental effect on our health and the future.
-Derek Fieldsoe
Sources: Asheville Global Report, (July 19-25, 2001), by Cat Lazaroff-Environment News Service / The Progressive Populist, (Mar. 15, 2002), by David Corn.

16. U.S. oversees abduction, torture, execution
Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. government has illegally abducted dozens of people who are suspected of having links to terrorists and/or terrorist organizations. These abductions, known to those in the business as "rendition," violate local and international extradition laws as well as internationally recognized human rights standards. U.S. agents ship these captives to allied countries where they are denied legal assistance and imprisoned without any specific charges made against them. The prisoners have been taken to countries such as Egypt and Jordan (whose intelligence agencies have close ties to the CIA) where they can be subjected to interrogation tactics-including torture and threats to the prisoners' families-which are illegal in the United States. The details of this covert and illegal abduction campaign were brought to light by a Washington Post article printed on March 11, 2002, "U.S. Behind Secret Transfer of Terror Suspects." The article cites various U.S. and Indonesian officials (sources unidentified by name) recounting and commenting upon these violations. Although the article appeared on the Post's front page, the story was not picked up by any other mainstream media source, and the Post itself-as of this writing-has not followed up its own story with any new information or editorial commentary.

One of the abductees, Muhammad Saad Iqbal Madni, moved in mid-November 2001 from Pakistan to Jakarta. Iqbal was believed by the CIA to be an al-Qaeda operative. In January, the agency urged Indonesian intelligence officials to apprehend him. A few days later, the Egyptian government requested the Iqbal-who had carried a passport for Egypt as well as Pakistan-be extradited in connection with terrorism, although they did not specify the crime. Indonesian agents quickly took him into custody, and two days later-without any legal hearing or access to a lawyer-Iqbal was put on board an unmarked, U.S.-registered Gulfstream V jet and flown from Jakarta to Egypt. A senior Indonesian government official told the Washington Post reporters that revealing the U.S. role in Iqbal's case would have prompted criticism from Muslim-oriented political parties in the region. "We can't be seen as cooperating too closely with the United States," he said. Nevertheless, the official confirmed that, "This was a U.S. deal all along. Egypt just provided the formalities."

The Washington Post cites a U.S. diplomat, "After September 11, these sorts of movements have been occurring all the time. It allows us to get information from terrorists in a way we can't do on U.S. soil."

Although such "movements" have intensified since September 11, the U.S. has been involved in this practice of rendition for at least a decade. According to the Post's sources, from 1993 to 1999, suspects were rendered to the U.S. from a variety of countries, including South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, and the Philippines. U.S. officials have acknowledged some of these operations, but the Post's sources say that dozens of other covert renditions occurred, the details of which remain cloaked in secrecy.
-Sarah Potts
Sources: World Socialist Web site, (Mar. 20, 2002), by Barry Grey / The Washington Post, (Mar. 11, 2002), by Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Peter Finn.

17. Corporate media ignores key issues of the anti- globalization protests
The United States press failed to inform the public about the core underlying issues in major anti-globalization protests in recent years. Dramatic images such as protesters enshrouded in tear gas, facing down a line of police officers dressed in riot gear have come to dominate the media coverage and overshadow the actual reasons that thousands of people are taking to the streets.

Columbia Journal Review took a hard look at more than 200 stories by major news outlets. ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time and Newsweek showed serious weaknesses in the coverage of the four largest protests.

In July 2001, more than 100,000 people came to Genoa to protest the G-8 meeting. Corporate television gave little recognition to the issues that were being raised by the protesters. CNN showed few protesters actually sharing their views and reasons for protesting. Instead, news correspondents are left to sum up the protest, including who was there and why. This occurs in a broad summary without significant attention given to the issue at hand, and not given by the actual protesters themselves. On Fox networks, the Genoa protesters were all but ignored. The message that protesters are trying to get across is that they want more democratic control (and less corporate control) over the rules that affect the environment and labor conditions around the world. This includes more democratic control over "supranational" organizations such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization, whose un-elected leaders, the protesters argue, override democratically arrived at laws and regulations in the name of development and free trade.

Many times, there are instances of police brutality at large protests, but what is emphasized by the broadcast news sources are acts of protester violence. For example, at the Genoa protest , approximately 70 members of an Italian SWAT team barged through the doorway of the location where the protesters were organizing. This led to the hospitalization of 61 demonstrators. However, few news sources reported the police violence, and most sources focused on protester violence.
-Caroline Hubbard
Sources: Columbia Journal Review, (Sept./Oct. 2001), by John Giuffo / The New York Times, (Feb. 5, 2002, Sec. A, p. 15).

18. World's coral reefs dying
French Polynesia, is home to one of the most dynamic reef systems anywhere. The reefs here are formed in conjunction with shield volcanoes, rising from hot spots on the floor. Long after the volcanoes are extinct, the corals remain on their fossilized flanks. Corals are among the simplest of invertebrate animals, composed of little more than a hollow tube, the gastric cavity, surrounded by a fringe of stinging tentacles with which they capture prey.

Ordinarily, more than 6.5 million zooxanthellae inhabit each square inch of coral, and in return these algae contribute the by-products of their photosynthesis: oxygen, carbohydrates, and alkalinity. The corals' calcium carbonate production is considered a likely mediator of atmospheric CO2, and therefore makes this collaboration between plant and animal a contributor to the stability of our atmosphere. The reefs contain nearly one-quarter of all marine life, and as they are altered by climate and sea-level changes, are record-keepers of the sea.

Coral reefs have survived enormous changes in our planet's past, yet today are experiencing challenges not just from one front, but from a multitude of them: pollution, sedimentation, overfishing, rapid global climate change, all of which have contributed to destroying one-quarter of the world's reefs. Remaining reefs are in such peril that governments are preparing for the contingency that millions of island residents might need to be relocated. The worldwide trade in aquarium fishing, currently worth $200 million per year, is in need of transformation. The collection methods of exotic fish include using poisons, primarily sodium cyanide, which destroy entire ecosystems in order to capture the few remaining fish on the perimeter. Blast fishery is also a common practice in such places as the Philippines, where fish for local consumption are collected with explosives, killing the fish at the epicenter, and incapacitating those on the perimeters. The blasts also reduce the reefs to rubble, from which they may never recover.

Under assault from pollution, coastal development, agricultural runoff, overpopulation, and overfishing, the world's reefs are exhibiting their vulnerability in many ways.

Because reefs occur primarily in poor regions of the world, and are often inaccessible, they are not thoroughly studied. Historically, reefs have been shown to disappear and reappear, however it is unclear whether or not humans can exist without these reefs.
Sources: Harpers, (Jan. 2001), by Julia Whitty.

19. American companies exploit Congo for profit

Western multinational corporations attempting to cash in on the wealth of Congo's resources has resulted in what many have called "Africa's first world war," claiming the lives of over 3 million people. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been labeled "the richest patch of earth on the planet." The valuable abundance of minerals and resources in the DRC has made it the target of attacks from U.S.-supported neighboring African countries Uganda and Rwanda.

The DRC holds 80% of the world's coltan reserves, more than 60% of the world's cobalt and is the world's largest supplier of high-grade copper. With these minerals playing a major part in maintaining U.S. military dominance, and economic growth, the minerals in Congo are deemed vital U.S. interests.

Historically, the U.S. government identified sources of materials in Third World countries, and then encouraged U.S. corporations to invest in and facilitate their production. U.S. corporate firms have accessed Congo's minerals for more than 30 years. However, during the reign of Mobutu, Congo's government began to limit access by Western corporations, controlling the distribution of resources. In 1998, U.S. military-trained leaders of Rwanda and Uganda invaded the mineral-rich areas of Congo. They installed illegal colonial-style governments that have received millions of dollars in arms and military training from the United States, even though these governments are known human-rights abusers. Funding from our government and a $5 million Citibank loan in 1999 maintains the rebel presence in the Congo. Their control of this strategic area allows many western corporations such as American Mineral Fields to illegally mine the minerals. Rwandan and Ugandan control over this area is beneficial for both governments and for the corporations that continue exploiting the Congo's natural wealth.

American Mineral Fields (AMF) landed exclusive exploration rights to an estimated 1.4 million tons of copper and 270,000 tons of cobalt. San Francisco-based engineering firm Bechtel Inc., established strong ties to the rebel zones as well. Bechtel drew up an inventory of Congo's mineral resources free of charge, and also paid for NASA satellite studies of the country for infrared maps of its minerals. Bechtel estimates that the DRC's mineral ores alone are worth $157 billion.

Through coltan production, the Rwandans and their allies are bringing in $20 million revenue a month. Rwanda's diamond exports went from 166 carats in 1998 to 30,500 in 2000. Uganda's diamond exports jumped from approximately 1,500 carats to about 11,300. The final destination for many of these minerals in the U.S., to different corporations and industries, all aware of the exploitations and deaths of citizens in Congo.
-Arinze Anoruo
Sources: Dollars and Sense, (July/Aug. 2001), by Dena Montague, Frieda Berrigan / CovertAction Quarterly, (Feb. 7, 2001), by Ellen Ray.

20. Novartis' gene research endangers global plant life

Scientists working for Swiss food giant Novartis have developed and patented a method for 'switching off' the immune systems of plants, to the outrage of environmentalists and Third World charities who believe the new technology to be the most dangerous use so far of gene modification.
Sources: The London Observer, (Oct. 8, 2000), by Antony Barnett.

21. Large U.S. temp company undermines union jobs and mistreats workers

There is a trend in corporate America to eliminate full-time, union-covered positions in order to replace them with part-time, non-union temps. Understanding this, the nations temp workers have begun to make a unionizing effort.

Labor Ready, a national temporary employment agency employing 700,000 people, is not in good standing with the AFL-CIO. The union's Building and Trades Department has the temp agency in the hot seat after learning about the organization's abuse of employees.

Labor Ready temps are paid minimum wage for rigorous work. They receive no health benefits and can be seriously mistreated in their temporary places of employment. The temp agency has been used to supply strikebreakers to break strikes including the Steelworkers' strike in Spokane.
Sources: The Progressive Populist, (June 1, 2001), by Harry Kelber.

Features
Journalists denied access to Missouri jurors' names
By Bob Schaper

Columbia, Mo., Circuit Court Judge Gene Hamilton isn't sure why the state Supreme Court asked him and his rule-making committee to hide jury information from the public-he just knows that he likes the idea.

"At some point during 2001, the Supreme Court sent us a letter asking that we draft something for a juror confidentiality rule," recalled Hamilton, who is the chairperson of the Missouri Supreme Court Committee on Procedure in Criminal Cases.

The 11-person committee-made up of judges, prosecutors, a state public defender, a law professor and a private defense attorney -unanimously recommended the following change to the criminal procedures manual: "Jury lists and questionnaires maintained by the court in criminal cases shall not be accessible except to the court and the parties. Upon conclusion of the trial, the jury lists and questionnaires shall be retained under seal by the court except as required to create the record on appeal or for post-conviction litigation. Information collected by the court or court personnel about a venire-person is confidential and shall not be disclosed by the parties or their lawyers except on application to the trial court and a showing of good cause."

The proposed rule change, part of what Hamilton called a "nationwide trend," was accepted by the Supreme Court and will take effect Jan. 1. Similar rules already shield jurors in St. Louis and St. Louis County.

"We gathered up rules from other states," Hamilton said. "Also, the National Association of State Chief Justices recommends this sort of thing, and other states have a system of doing this."

As Hamilton and the others on his committee see it, the rule change is necessary in order to appease an increasingly anxious jury pool.

"Jurors are concerned about being contacted after a trial," he said. "They have a very jaundiced view of what happens after a jury trial because of some of the TV shows like 'The Practice.' They get the idea that they're going to get contacted all over the place, when they aren't contacted that much."

Aside from being paranoid television junkies, Hamilton also fears potential jurors will turn into pathological liars unless treated with kid gloves.

"What is happening more often in criminal cases-and particularly capital cases-is the public defender's office is submitting questionnaires to prospective jurors where they ask about all kinds of opinions," Hamilton said.

Indeed, Hamilton correctly points out that the information requested by defense attorneys is of a highly personal nature. Examples include an individual's views on drug use (including his or her own past use), extramarital sex, abortion, entertainment preferences and much more.

"People are not going to answer very honestly if they know the questionnaires are open to the public," Hamilton concluded.

But Charles Davis, director of the Freedom of Information Center at the University of Missouri School of Journalism, isn't buying it.

"Fundamentally, (the new rule) threatens the integrity of the system," Davis declared. "Access to the proceedings and to the jurors themselves is the only way we can promote confidence in the system."

Under the new rule, to gain access to a jury list, a reporter-or anyone else not a party to the case-would have to first petition the trial judge.

"You would have to come in and file a request to have the records open," Hamilton explained. "The circuit judge at that point would hold a hearing and make a finding on it."

Although a judge's ruling could be appealed, Davis says the new process is backward-that jury lists should be open unless there is an overriding concern for juror security.

"If you have to ask the judge for permission, the first inquiry of any judge who's worth their salt would be, 'What do you need it for?'" Davis said. "You are, in essence, telling people that they have to come up with a justification for gaining access to something that they have a fundamental right to."

Hamilton counters that his rule is a balance between privacy rights and a fair and open jury selection system. Besides, he says, anyone interested in knowing the names and views of prospective jurors needs only come to his courtroom.

"Obviously, if a person from the press is in the courtroom during voir dire (jury questioning), they're going to hear the names of the people because they're called out," Hamilton said.

That rarely happens, Hamilton claims, because the local press in Boone and Calloway counties is almost never present during jury selection.

"If this is so greatly important," the judge wondered, "then why aren't the press people in the courtroom during voir dire?"

But whether people take advantage of their right to access isn't important, Davis says. Rather, the therapeutic effect of knowing that the process is open by itself cuts down the possibility of juror misconduct.

"It's not that people are taking access of it every time," he said. "It's that they could. You handle information on the government side completely differently when it's open. It's just that simple."

Jurors who believe themselves to be forever anonymous have no pressure to do the right thing, Davis said.

"The new rule says do whatever the hell you want in there because nobody's going to know who you are anyway," he added.

Allan Howard, a law professor at St. Louis University School of Law, said the new rule seems contrary to two U.S. Supreme Court decisions. When it comes to jury trials, Howard says, the court has long-believed that there is a Constitutional presumption to openness.

"I don't know that these people (jurors) are entitled to perform this public service almost in anonymity," Howard said. "They can participate, but then, they have a right to meld back into society as nameless people. Generally, the Supreme Court said that the process worked better in sunshine than in darkness."

But Hamilton says the adversarial system of justice is, by itself, a sufficient safeguard for jury misconduct. To prove his point, he noted that many cases are indeed appealed on the basis of jury selection.

"Not only do you have the defense and the state knowing what's going on, but also, if the press has a question about it, they can be there in the courtroom during voir dire," he said. "And if you have any kind of good cause, you're able to get into those records."

Davis said Hamilton and the Supreme Court are using classic pro-secrecy arguments.

"Government is telling people this is not something you need to know. Let us protect it for you, you poor jurors. Those pesky reporters might talk to you so let's make sure that you're anonymous, and we'll protect your privacy," he said. "It's a never-ending theme these days-government kindly turning to the people with a smile on its face saying, 'Hey, we'll bottle that up for you.'"

Plus, Davis doubts most judges will ever find good cause to open up the jury lists.

"Media requests would be almost automatic grounds for denial," Davis predicted. "What if you said, 'My purpose for doing this is to monitor the system'? I think their response would be that that's not good enough."

Indeed, asked directly about whether generic citizen interest would be good cause, Hamilton laughed.

"It doesn't sound good to me," he said. "If that's good cause, anything's good cause."

Howard said the new rule starts from the presumption that privacy should prevail and that those who want to rebut that presumption have the burden placed on them.

"(Hamilton) is saying that, typically, why should third parties have any interest in this?" Howard said.

Hamilton pointed out that other types of jury information, such as jury photos and video images inside the courtroom, have been kept from the public for years.

"It's because a lot of those people don't want to be called later," he said. "They don't want people to know they were on a certain jury. It just may be a simple case in a neighborhood where they don't want their church members or neighbors to know they were on the jury-whether they decided to put people to death or decided to acquit.

"If they want to talk about it, fine," Hamilton added. "But, they shouldn't have to be in a situation where they're contacted afterwards unless they want to be."

Howard wondered if a juror's right to privacy overrules the need for openness.

"The juror has the right to not cooperate with the reporter," Howard said. "If that's the only reason for the new rule-that you have the right not to be accosted by a reporter-I'm not sure that would be deemed to be a compelling interest."

Besides, a juror being pestered is a good way to monitor the criminal justice system and its performance, Davis says.

"It's very, very difficult to know what's going on in jury rooms without access to the jurors."

Negotiations begin at Post
By Joe Pollack

The first negotiating session between the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the Newspaper Guild is scheduled for Dec. 10, certainly the first of many long and contentious meetings between the parties. The Guild's contract with the newspaper expires Jan. 9 but will remain in force while negotiations continue.

King & Ballow, the Nashville-based law firm that has represented newspaper management for the last decade or so, will again negotiate for it. For the first time, however, the Guild will be negotiating as a part of the Communication Workers of America (CWA), which will bring a new legal team into the fray. The Guild was absorbed into the CWA several years ago.

And a recent arbitration decision will apparently add one more topic to the negotiations ahead. Joseph L. Daly, a law professor at Hamline University, ruled in November that the Post had violated the contract when it forbade Jim Thomas and Keith Schildroth of the newspaper's sports department from accepting some freelance writing assignments. Daly decided that the grievances were granted and that "the ban on their freelancing work of the nature in dispute must be rescinded."

Barbara L. Camens of the Washington-based firm, Barr and Camens, represented the Guild while Howard M. Kastrinsky of King & Ballow argued for management.

Thomas, who covers the Rams as the paper's lead pro-football writer, was told he could not write for the NFL Game Day Magazine or NFL Insider.com, while Schildroth, who processes box score information and also writes freelance Post pieces on soccer and other sports, was forbidden from writing for Blue Lines Magazine, published by the Blues. Thomas, however, was permitted to continue to write for The Sporting News and to appear on KFNS.

Larry Starks, assistant managing editor for sports, claimed that the NFL and the Blues were exploiting the Post writers, and such exploitation was forbidden by the contract. He also said that the newspaper felt that its employees should not write for the teams and leagues they cover.

Thomas and Schildroth pointed out that the newspaper has no written policy about freelancing except that "no employee shall exploit the newspaper without specific permission" and that, historically, there has never been a requirement about obtaining permission when freelancing for a non-competing publication. The writing involved includes feature stories and personality pieces, or notes, but avoids anything that could be construed as breaking news. Reporters-especially sports writers-have been doing this sort of extra work since time immemorial.

Managing Editor Arnie Robbins testified to changing times and expectations over conflicts of interest and added that the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) had promulgated a code of ethics that stated journalists "should avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived."

However, the Post has not adopted the SPJ code, nor has it written its own, though an ethics policy is presently "in the development stage," according to testimony from Michael Hammett, director of industrial relations.

This was not good enough for Daly, who emphasized, in his decision, that the Collective Bargaining Agreement remains in force, permitting employees to freelance for other publications. And, he added, "Changes cannot be made unilaterally because the employer is 'in the process of developing a new ethics policy' or because the employer has a new unilateral understanding of the meaning of 'conflict of interest.' The freelance policy is a term and condition of the contract."

During the hearing, Thomas estimated that the ruling had cost him about $4,000 and had cost Schildroth about a third of that, but Daly did not discuss a monetary award.

'Gross misconduct' at KMOX
Jaco firing reveals anti-union bias, right-wing shift at Infinity station
By Don Corrigan

KMOX Radio management may hope adverse publicity over the firing of talk show host Charles Jaco is at an end now that he and the station have reached a legal settlement. However, there's plenty of reason to believe the fallout will continue.

Jaco's angry fusillades aimed at KMOX in the aftermath of his firing revealed an unsavory underside of the self-proclaimed "Voice of St. Louis."

Jaco contends the station takes a dim view of its audience and has "dumbed down" news programming accordingly. The station also has undergone a tilt to the ideological right, surely no great revelation to those who tune in daily to KMOX's three-hour servings of partisan rant from Rush Limbaugh. What's more, the station has revealed itself as no friend of organized labor.

Indeed, KMOX General Manager Karen Carroll has raised the ire of some in labor because of her conduct in the firing debacle. Particularly upsetting was Carroll's refusal of Jaco's initial requests for an AFTRA (American Federation of Television and Radio Artists) representative to be present during his grievance process after he was notified of an impending reprimand.

A memorandum by Robert Kelley of the Greater St. Louis Labor Council has urged unions to reconsider any advertising on the station. The memo, which has received wide circulation, noted that labor "has spent a great deal of money advertising on Cardinal baseball, which, unfortunately, is carried on KMOX Radio.

"In my opinion Cardinal baseball, Morning Drive Time, and Charles Jaco are the only programs worth listening to on KMOX," Kelley wrote. "I believe the quality of programming will again diminish without Jaco, but that is Ms. Carroll's decision."

KMOX felt the heat over the Jaco firing from angry listener letters, e-mails and damaging publicity in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the Riverfront Times (RFT). But, when advertising dollars may be in jeopardy, that's a whole different matter. Organized labor in St. Louis is one of the top five sponsors of Cardinals baseball on KMOX.

In his letter, Kelley specifically asked the local Painters Union District Council to "please contact your ad agency, KMOX, and the Baseball Cardinals and implore them to resolve this matter with Mr. Jaco in a fair manner. Presently, Mr. Jaco has been fired without severance and told that the station intends to fully enforce its 'non-compete' clause."

Organized labor had cause enough to balk at advertising on KMOX with the relentless union-bashing carried out by the station's syndicated master of invective, Limbaugh. But the ham-handed handling of the Jaco matter by Carroll slapped the icing on the cake for many in the local union movement.

Carroll's "Gross Misconduct"
KMOX management has remained consistently mum about the reasons for Jaco's termination, even after a settlement in the dispute was reached on Dec. 6. One of the first hints of the cause for Jaco's Nov. 18 firing came in a Post column by Bill McClellan.

McClellan reported that Jaco was dismissed for firing off a nasty e-mail to a listener who accused Jaco of bias in his handling of the political candidates in the Gephardt-Enz race for the 3rd Congressional District. In his e-mail, Jaco reportedly justified his on-air approach to the race and also told the listener to, in effect, "piss off." Jaco said his e-mail may have been "intemperate," but it had little to do with the nuclear-like response it triggered from KMOX management.

"My firing really had nothing to do with any e-mails," Jaco said. "This had everything to do with a blow-up I had with Karen Carroll and John Butler (KMOX news director). And this had to do with retaliation for my asking to have an AFTRA union representative in the room at a meeting where I was told I would be disciplined."

According to Jaco, Carroll had previously disciplined on-air personality John Carney. Jaco said Carney was in the dog house for making a joke about the fit of a hairpiece adorning the scalp of Ray Vincent of American Equity Mortgage. Vincent, a top KMOX advertiser, wanted his pound of flesh from Carney for remarks about his hair.

Carney quietly took his slap on the wrist from Carroll without an AFTRA representative in the room at his reprimand meeting with the general manager. Carney was taken off the air for two weeks as punishment for insulting an advertiser, Jaco said.

"I chose not to go Carney's route," Jaco said. "When I was called into Carroll's office, I was told by Carroll, 'We have to discipline you over this e-mail situation, what do you think it should be?' I told her that I wanted an AFTRA representative with me if we were going to discuss disciplining me and she had a fit.

"She started cursing about how she did not want 'a goddamned union rep' telling her how she should run her shop," Jaco continued. "She said I did not need a union rep, whereupon I told her that she may be in violation of some labor rules if she was denying me a union rep."

Jaco said that in the time between his next meeting with Carroll, he took a KMOX-sponsored travel tour to South Africa. When he returned from that assignment, another meeting was scheduled.

"The next time we met I had an AFTRA representative there and Karen said, 'This will be a very short meeting; you are being terminated for gross misconduct.' I cleaned out my office and shortly thereafter I filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board," Jaco explained.

Dissing union agreements
Both past and present KMOX employees note that Jaco fought management at KMOX on several occasions when it appeared the higher-ups were trying to skirt AFTRA rules, cut benefits or trim 401k retirement contributions. Attempts to ignore or circumvent the union contract usually meant bad news for radio staffers.

"In 1999, there was a directive from on high, perhaps going to Infinity, that parking spots were going up and would not be paid for," Jaco recalled. "Well, this was part of a benefit in the union contract and to my mind it was a collective bargaining issue. When I pointed that out to Karen Carroll she again went ballistic and into one of her fits.

"Sometime after this, she threw a bunch of Fourth of July event parking permits down at me and yelled, 'here.' I don't think she ever understood that I was not so concerned about paying a little extra out of my pocket for a parking space," Jaco added. "The issue was collective bargaining and honoring employee contracts."

Jaco said his relationship with Carroll after the parking fees incident was all downhill. He said News Director Butler told him "in so many words" that he must have a death wish bringing up concerns about the details of AFTRA contracts at the station.

There began to be more and more concern at KMOX about Jaco's show, programming and content as the station entered a new decade and a new millennium. Jaco said he was called into regular programming meetings with Carroll, Butler and Tom Langmyer, program director at KMOX.

"I asked that AFTRA's Jackie Dietrich be there for some of these meetings, because I did not want a situation where three people agreed what happened at a meeting and I was out there all by myself," Jaco said. "Well, Langmyer says at one point, let's just have a meeting where all comments are off the record and we just let our hair down about programming."

At that meeting, Jaco said he outlined his deep concerns about management's obsession with advertisers over program content. Jaco also was frank about morale problems at the station and the failure of management to reward or compliment the work of the news folks in the trenches.

"Next thing I find out, Langmyer has turned around and fired off a complaint to corporate for my file saying I was engaged in a profane tirade," Jaco said. "This really set off Jackie Dietrich who confronted Langmyer about a total double cross, because he set the ground rules that everything was to be frank, open and off the record."

Dietrich confirmed to SJR Jaco's account of the meeting. She said the meeting was clearly a setup and a doublecross, and AFTRA looked into any legal implications of Langmyer's actions but concluded that they were probably only unethical.

"Interestingly enough, when my contract was renewed, it was for 18 months instead of the usual three years for other employees," Jaco noted. "I was told that this is what happens when you take the company's business outside the office, which I feel was clearly a reference to my bringing AFTRA into some of the disputes that came up."

Racist suburban listeners
Jaco said that the program meetings he was asked to attend were a signal of a shift in the works at the station. That shift became most obvious, earlier this year, when Carroll bumped Jaco from his afternoon show, directly following Limbaugh, to evenings.

"More and more I was told that my show was too intellectual for the audience," Jaco said. "Butler started saying that we've got a racist, right-wing, suburban audience and that my stuff wasn't playing well with them.

"That's when Butler started pulling out the top 10 zip codes where KMOX has its audience-places like St. Charles and Affton," Jaco recalled. "He said that my program topics, such as one on the state of city public schools, didn't play with that audience. He said none of them give a damn about city public schools. I told him I thought playing to any audience prejudice was wrong."

Jaco said he caught flak for planning shows that might offend advertisers. He said when he wanted to do some tough pieces on TWA's financial crisis before its takeover by American Airlines, he was told "we don't need a bunch of critical stuff about TWA." Jaco said Butler pointed out that TWA was a major advertiser at the time.

Besides those skirmishes over advertisers, Jaco said Carroll was always pushing for more "warm and fuzzy." She said the listeners weren't interested in hard news, and wanted less of it, according to Jaco.

"I think she really insulted an important part of the KMOX audience," Jaco said. "She was always saying they want warm and fuzzy. When I mentioned doing a show on India and Pakistan having the bomb and the possibility of an atomic war in East Asia, she said none of the KMOX listeners really care about what happens in Pakistan and India."

KMOX's rightward shift
Jaco said the e-mail chastising him for his 2002 election coverage was hardly the first from the station's dittoheads-a crowd ever on the alert for perceived left-wing bias in the news media. KMOX's dittohead listeners may have been salivating for more cacophony about feminazis, environmental whackos, welfare queens and traitorous liberals after three hours of Limbaugh, but Jaco refused to deliver for them.

"I got caught in the culture wars, and that was a problem for my afternoon program," Jaco said. "When your show comes right after three hours of right-wing talk radio, you are going to get disappointed listeners who say that you are not a Christian, that you are a liberal, that you may not be loyal."

Some KMOX news staffers are quietly apologetic about the three hours of Limbaugh that the station foists on St. Louis daily, but management has determined that the core of listeners Limbaugh can bring is essential to shore up an eroding listener base.

The station has seen a slow, but steady slide in audience share since the halcyon days when Bob Hyland ruled the roost. Limbaugh commands a loyal segment of audience for the late morning/early afternoon slot, but his presence has a pervasive effect on everything else that goes on at KMOX.

"It's not that my journalism was not fair and balanced," Jaco complained. "The problem is that a good portion of KMOX audience has shifted things to the right. That's a problem for KMOX because it feels it has to use Limbaugh to hold onto audience. And so we were all told that we have to skew things to the right. It always came up in these meetings where Butler was pulling out his zip codes and demographics.

"One time one of the St. Louis listeners called up Limbaugh and reported a couple of things I said, and Limbaugh said something to the effect that, 'That's what you get with a so-called journalist like Jaco.' Well, I had a few choice words for Limbaugh and it all ended up in Jerry Berger's column, and station management again was unhappy about that."

So-called journalist
Jaco has no apologies to make to Limbaugh for his track record in journalism. Jaco made a name for himself covering American military actions throughout the world for CNN, including his famous coverage of the last confrontation with Iraq in the Persian Gulf War.

While Limbaugh beats the drums for President George W. Bush and the administration's new plans for war in the Middle East, Limbaugh avoided any war experience himself when he sidestepped military service because of a pilonidal cyst in his anal region. Jaco's war experience and knowledge of the Middle East makes him a coveted journalistic authority as the United States once again contemplates a face off with Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

Jaco's departure from KMOX quickly stirred interest from other radio stations both here in St. Louis and elsewhere. KTRS General Manager Tim Dorsey told the RFT that taking Jaco off the air at this time of confrontation with Iraq was a major disservice to St. Louis and that he would love to talk with Jaco about a spot at KTRS 550-AM.

However, up until the Dec. 6 settlement with KMOX, Jaco was tied to a non-compete clause in his KMOX contract and labeled as guilty of "gross misconduct" by the station. It was that "gross misconduct" charge which allowed KMOX to fire Jaco without having to pay him severance and that has prompted Jaco to speak out against his former employer.

"Gross misconduct sounds like I was smoking crack in the bathroom," Jaco said. "It's part of a personal grudge that KMOX has circulated, and it's all over the world."

Jaco told SJR that he would likely no longer be able to talk about station matters once a settlement with KMOX was reached. Attempts by SJR and others to reach KMOX for comment on Jaco's departure have been met with, "We do not comment on personnel issues."

On Dec. 6, KMOX Radio forwarded this statement to SJR regarding the Jaco settlement:

On November 18, 2002, KMOX-AM announced that Mr. Charles Jaco had been dismissed due to "gross misconduct." The phrase "gross misconduct" is a legal term referencing provisions of the collective bargaining agreement between KMOX-AM and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) that permit immediate termination of employment. Use of the term "gross misconduct" was not intended to convey any belief that Mr. Jaco engaged in conduct that was illegal or immoral. KMOX-AM has not and will not reinstate Mr. Jaco, as the station and Infinity Broadcasting maintain that his dismissal was warranted. Mr. Jaco has disputed that he committed gross misconduct. Nonetheless, the parties have reached a settlement of the dispute over Mr. Jaco's termination.

Under terms of the settlement, KMOX released Jaco from a non-compete contract provision that would have kept him from working at another radio station for six months. He could return to the local airwaves as early as Feb. 18 under the agreement.

(Some information for this story was provided by SJR columnist Lynn Venhaus.)

Student press freedom endangered
By Don Corrigan
Another attempt to extend the Hazelwood restrictions on the high school press to the college news media is working its way through the federal court system.

The Hosty v. Carter case, which goes before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago on Dec. 7, will determine whether college administrators can preview and censor university student publications.

Governors State University, in south Chicago, was sued by student journalists Margaret Hosty, Jeni Porch and Steve Barba in 2001. The First Amendment suit came after Dean Patricia Carter told the college newspaper's printer to hold the presses on any future issues until a school official had OKed the student newspaper's content.

The paper, The Innovator, had previously published news stories and editorials critical of the school administration. Carter issued the directive requiring college officials' approval of future issues despite a university policy that said the students "will determine content and format of their respective publications without censorship or advance approval."

In November 2001, a federal district court allowed the students' lawsuit to go forward against Dean Carter, and in early 2002, Governors State appealed. The case generated national attention when Illinois Attorney General James Ryan, the Republican candidate for governor in this year's election, defended the school's right to engage in prior censorship of the student newspaper.

Ryan asked the appeals court to extend the Supreme Court's 1988 Hazelwood decision, which curtailed First Amendment protections for high school students, to public-supported college's student expression. Ryan's friend-of-the-court brief against student free expression earned the ire of college newspapers throughout Illinois and helped galvanize a coalition of media and First Amendment groups.

"The Ryan brief certainly caught our attention," said Mark Goodman, executive director of the Student Press Law Center (SPLC) in Arlington, Va. "This is the second case in less than two years where the courts are dealing with a move to extend Hazelwood censorship to the college media. Fortunately, in Kincaid v. Gibson, the Appeals Court for the Sixth Circuit rejected the application of Hazelwood to a Kentucky State University yearbook.

"But here we are, back at it again. It's alarming," Goodman said. "And an adverse ruling would have far-reaching effects. It would not just affect college newspapers. It would give college administrators unprecedented control over college speakers' bureaus, film programs, student plays, yearbooks and broadcasting."

"Content completely ours"
The Seventh Circuit's ruling on Hosty v. Carter will specifically affect college media in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. However, Goodman warned that such a ruling would embolden college administrators to clamp down on college media beyond that court jurisdiction.

Marleen Trout, editor of the Southern Illinois University-Carbondale Daily Egyptian, told the SPLC quarterly report that she is concerned about the impact an adverse ruling could have on the aggressive reporting at student papers such as the Daily Egyptian.

"It's a very scary thing," Trout said. "We really pride ourselves on being completely student-run. The content is completely ours. We can cover the university in whatever way that we feel is right, and I think that has helped make this a better university over the years."

Goodman said the SPLC did an investigation of the situation at Governors State and found that the newspaper had once served as a mouthpiece of the administration. When new editors decided to report stories about the dismissal of college employees and about faculty grievances, the administration reacted.

"We did a report on our investigation that neither the administration, nor the students liked," Goodman said. "The paper had some ethical problems. SGA members were reporting on the student government. The adviser was writing a personal column for the paper. But there was nothing going on where censorship could be condoned.

"The content of the student newspaper is really irrelevant at this point," Goodman said. "The major issue is, can college administrators engage in prior review and censorship of a student newspaper?"

Goodman said the case became more troublesome when the student complainants decided "to go it alone" before the appeals court without an attorney. Fortunately, he said, the appeals court has agreed to allow SPLC to come before the court to argue for student free expression rights in the case.

College press must react
At the fall convention of the College Media Association (CMA) in Orlando, Fla., in November, Goodman told student journalists they would be wise to take a personal interest in the Hosty v. Carter case. Goodman made three recommendations:

First, college journalists should inform the campus community about the far-reaching implications of applying Hazelwood to the college sphere. The range of administrative censorship would potentially extend far beyond just the activities of the college press.

Second, college journalists should begin a campaign to dramatize free press issues, including regular features in the student press. College journalists should also get involved with high school press organizations in their efforts to counteract Hazelwood with free expression legislation introduced in state legislatures.

Third, college journalists should ask top school administrators to sign off now on a statement in support of student press freedom on campus. What this statement should say can be as simple as this:

(Name of school) recognizes and affirms the editorial independence and press freedom of all student-edited campus media. Student editors have the authority to make all content decisions and consequently bear the responsibility for the decisions that they make.

"If administrators are not willing to go on the line in favor of freedom of the press for students, then the college press can let that be known-and it can turn up the heat," Goodman said.

"A lot of administrators may, in the abstract, be willing to speak up for the student press," Goodman added. "But there always comes a time when there is something that they would rather not see in the college press. If they have pledged to maintain the independence of the student press, they are less likely to be tempted to interfere or to attempt some form of censorship."

Right face: Post-Dispatch uses Pulitzer platform to execute a shift to the right
By Ed Bishop

The editorial page of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch has argued strongly in favor of abortion rights and against concealed weapons for years. In dozens of editorials, the page has taken uncompromising stands for environmental protections, stronger corporate regulations, and the separation of church and state.

Then, this past November, the Post endorsed Todd Akin for the U.S. House of Representatives.

It would be difficult to think of a member of Congress more out of step with the Post editorial page's views on abortion, the environment, corporate responsibilities, and the separation of church and state than Akin.

But, in fact, the Post endorsed several candidates -all incumbents-who are archconservatives. Out of the 16 statewide races in Illinois and Missouri, the Post endorsed seven Republicans, including Kenny Hulshof, John Shimkus and Jim Ryan.

It seems the editorial page of the Post has taken a significant shift to right-canceling its editorials with its endorsements.

"I think that if we've made any shift it's in our thinking," says Christine Bertelson, editor of the editorial page. "We try to take very literally what the Pulitzer platform stands for-to be 'drastically independent.' We have a responsibility to not be allied with any political party."

When the example of Akin is raised, Bertelson said the editorial page doesn't have a "litmus test" for candidates. She says the Post continues to stand firmly behind such issues as abortion rights and environmental protections, but the page isn't limited to endorsing candidates with similar views.

"People aren't one dimensional," she says. "Character is important-how sincere they are, their past experience, their dedication to constituent service. We don't simply match a person with our agenda."

Bertelson acknowledges the "long history of (the Post's) liberal page" but says liberal issues are now less important than the other criteria she mentioned.

Bertelson says that since St. Louis has become a one-newspaper town, the Post has a responsibility to all its readers, both liberal and conservative. She believes it's important to show readers that the Post is not allied with the Democratic Party and that endorsing a Todd Akin demonstrates that independence.

"Maybe we can talk him into our point of view," she says.

A similar shift seems to have taken place on the op-ed page, that page opposite the editorial page where syndicated political columnists are published. At first glance, this page seems balanced, but a closer look shows it too has a decided slant to the right.

Running David Broder and Mona Charen on the same day isn't really balanced. Broder is a thoughtful, experienced journalist with mainly middle-of-the-road opinions. Charen is a political operative with a limited journalism background and a strong conservative. So when degrees of ideological commitment are taken into account-with Molly Ivins at one end of the political spectrum and Cal Thomas at the other-the op-ed page is seen as biased to the right.

Bertelson agrees. But, she sees it more broadly. She says the op-ed page must be balanced against the liberal editorials on the preceding page. In other words, if you take both pages as a whole, then the right-wing slant of the op-ed page is counterbalanced by the leftist editorials produced by her staff.

"Besides," she says, "sometimes they surprise you. I was just reading a column by Cal Thomas today, and I was finding myself agreeing with him. I usually don't. But, he surprised me."

Will radio ever grow up?
By Frank Absher

Two New York disc jockeys thought it would be clever to broadcast the sounds of a couple having intercourse inside St. Patrick's Cathedral. Even though no Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations were broken, the public outcry forced the radio station to fire the disc jockeys.

A morning announcer in Phoenix broadcast a phone conversation he had with Darryl Kile's widow in which he told her she was hot and asked if she had a date for the ball game. He broke the FCC rule against airing a phone conversation without first getting the permission of the other party. He was fired by management-not for breaking the rule but because major advertisers started canceling their business with the station. To date, no complaints have been filed with the FCC over the improper broadcast of the phone conversation, so it appears the station won't be penalized.

Two Nashville disc jockeys were suspended after they sent an intern out in a car, telling him to crash it into a wall to see how fast he had to go before the air bag deployed. They had taken the bag out of the car.

A syndicated host out of Chicago made references to "oral sex, genitalia, masturbation, ejaculation and excretory activities" and saw his parent company fined $21,000 for his conduct. He said, "Life on the edge ain't always easy. If you don't take chances, you don't make advances."

Welcome to what passes for creativity and entertainment in radio today.

If there is anything "wrong" with the incidents described above, it's that they are becoming more commonplace. Listeners seem to expect outrageous behavior from radio announcers. Radio managers seem to think their stations benefit from publicity, even if it's negative publicity. But, what about ethics or conscience?

Scott Shannon, a nationally known program director and radio veteran, recently told the Associated Press, "For the stations and the shows that do these kinds of stunts, there certainly has been a re-examination of conscience, attitudes and guidelines." There is, however, little overt evidence of a sea of change in radio.

No less a figure than Ron Jacobs, known as the granddaddy of KHJ's (Los Angeles) success in establishing the Drake Format as the rock format of the late '60s/early '70s, draws an interesting analogy between today's "talent" and the deejays he oversaw: "It's like comparing the creativity of a kid on the street flashing a bus with the creativity of Johnny Carson." Jacobs remembers when you could turn on the radio and hear "mature guys doing classy things."

But, maybe listeners don't want intelligent, mature, classy radio announcers today. In the wake of the above-mentioned stunts, Edison Research and Jacobs Media conducted a poll of listeners, the results of which were published in the Nov. 1 issue of Radio & Records. The survey questions were posted on the websites of more than 20 of the country's rock stations, and there were more than 7,300 responses.

Only 28 percent of the respondents agreed with the phrase "Shock jock radio personalities have gone too far." In fact, respondents were twice as likely to tune in to shows where the announcer pushed the limits of good taste. Several announcers stated that anyone who was offended should simply listen to another station.

Given these numbers, it stands to reason that radio management would seek out announcers who say or do controversial things. Kevin Metheny programs the Clear Channel cluster in Cleveland. He told R&R, "We anticipate that certain high-profile talent will draw a lot of fire. We want to be a magnet for the most remarkable, compelling, difficult-to-duplicate radio talent in the world." He also told the magazine, "The point is not to frivolously insult people or offend their sensibilities; the point is to entertain."

Some feel the station owners should shoulder a big part of the blame for what radio has become. Dave Sniff, program director of KFMB in San Diego, is quoted in another R&R article: "Infinity and Westwood One are no strangers to this style of radio … They not only know that controversy will follow, they expect it and, most likely, will celebrate it when it happens."

For more than 45 years, Curt Brown has worn just about every hat in the business in Springfield, Mo. For 31 of those years he was general manager of KTTS-AM and FM. His take on the whole situation of what passes for "entertainment" on the radio today is one of confusion-just as it is for many of us: "The trend of using people who tell T&A jokes while some buffoon laughs in the background has caused many people to be less than thrilled with radio today. Why has radio assumed a leadership role in smut media offerings? Is it because there was no place else to go?"

So, there's enough blame for the current state of radio to be spread around to everyone. The radio we have today is, to paraphrase Jimmy Buffett, "our own damn fault." If we weren't listening to it, station management would have to give us something else, and just about anything would be an improvement. But don't get your hopes up.

Ethics? Conscience? Ron Jacobs summed it up: "Radio was happening in the 20th century. It stopped being innovative in the 1990s. There is no hope of it being rescued."

Merger could mean the end of ABC News
By David Cohen

Hardly a day goes by that some publication doesn't have a story on the talks to merge CNN and ABC News. The stories always mention how much money a combined operation could save and how beneficial it would be for those who own stock in Disney and AOL Time Warner. Usually, somewhere later in the story is a mention of the benefits that might accrue to the merged entity's journalism.

That's the problem. This is not a proposal to improve journalism. That's a huge flaw in the deal.

Merging ABC News and CNN does have some merit, but I don't think there are enough benefits to make such a deal successful.

The prime reason for the deal is that Disney's and AOL's stock prices are way down and investment bankers and stock market analysts feel if the expensive news divisions were separated out of the media behemoths, the stock prices would then rise significantly. I think that's a lousy reason to merge two similar but disparate journalism organizations.

The investment bankers would love to have the deal go through. Their cut is about 7 percent of the value of the deal. So, if a merged ABC News and CNN operation is valued at $1 billion, they get $70 million in fees right off the top. The bankers would then try to get the new company to trade on one of the stock exchanges and they would make even more money in setting up the initial public offering.

The analysts would then engage in their favorite pastime of rating the company's operations strictly from a financial perspective and setting the stock off on the Wall Street roller coaster.

Never mind that some investment bankers and analysts have shown their greed by manipulating deals and stock prices to line their pockets without regard to the impact their financial shenanigans have on the companies they're dealing, the impact on what those companies do and the lives of the people who work for them.

According to many of the stories that have been written on this proposed deal, ABC News and CNN would be merged into a new stand-alone company. AOL Time Warner and Disney would own the new company. How much each company owns and what control each would have appears to be the sticking point that has kept negotiations from coming to a conclusion.

Supposedly, the deal would include guarantees that Disney would hire the new company to produce news programs for the network which currently include "World News Tonight," "Good Morning America," "Nightline" and "20/20." But the sanctity of "Nightline" has already been challenged, and "20/20" is only as strong as its ratings.

Though unlikely, it is conceivable that Disney could decide one day that it no longer wants or needs any news. It would then be much easier to stop buying programming from a supplier, which ABC News would become in a merger, than it would be to close a company division.

Another area of concern is revenue to the new company. Currently, ABC Network Sales handles sales of the news division's commercial time. That would likely change in a merged environment and that could be devastating to ABC News. ABC frequently packages the news programs with other shows to sell packages of commercials. In other words, you buy two minutes on "NYPD Blue" and you get time on "World News Tonight" and "Nightline." Without the package approach, revenues for ABC News programs could drop. While ABC programs could be sold jointly with CNN's programs, ABC gets a far higher price for its news programs than CNN does for its. The benefit here is that CNN has much more time to sell than ABC News does.

From a journalism perspective, there are some good reasons to merge the two news-gathering companies. ABC News gains access to more international bureaus and a larger domestic reporting staff. CNN gains a higher profile corps of anchors and correspondents. Both organizations have more outlets for their work. There is a negative aspect as well. While there may be greater opportunities for airtime, the variety of news sources continues to shrink.

There are hundreds, if not thousands of operational issues. ABC's workforce is unionized, CNN's is not. A merged company would likely mean layoffs as bureaus are consolidated, studios are merged and managers look for ways to continually trim costs to keep the investment bankers and stock market analysts happy.

Simply put, merging CNN and ABC News is a bad idea, especially if the reasons for doing so are focused solely on cutting costs, boosting the stock prices of the parent companies and giving Wall Street dealmakers a reason to make millions.

Channel 2, sweeps and serial killers
By Jim Kirchherr

Did we really need to see a naked woman chained to Maury Travis' basement post, even if she was shown only from behind? The police say yes. KTVI (Channel 2) News Director Brad Remington and anchor Mandy Murphey say yes. But, KSDK (Channel 5) News Director Mike Shipley says no. Then again, his newsroom didn't have the home videos shot by the serial killer.

Travis is believed to have killed at least 10 and as many as 20 women. He committed suicide in his jail cell three days after being arrested in early June.

Channel 2 might not have gotten it either if a producer from ABC hadn't been pushing the St. Louis Police Department to release the video. ABC wanted it for its news magazine "Primetime."
Police officials agreed to release about 15 minutes of tape, some with audio only, excerpted from the 10 home video tapes found in the Travis home. ABC agreed in writing to mask identifying features of the women shown on the tape, to use the clips only in the one story on Travis and to not provide any of the video to third parties. St. Louis police spokesman Richard Wilkes said the department then gave the tape to Murphey, who asked for it. Channel 2 signed a similar agreement restricting its use.

That was in early October. Murphey knew she was the only local reporter with the tape and that the "Primetime" story wouldn't air any time soon (the story is still in development as SJR goes to press). Channel 2 had that rare commodity in TV news: time. Murphey could carefully construct her piece and choose the shots. Remington says he was more involved in this story than he normally would be and that the piece was reviewed and critiqued by a number of staffers as it developed. It was, therefore, the very best work Channel 2 was capable of doing. Shipley says it's a story Channel 5 would have never done.

Police spokesman Wilkes said when Channel 2 began promoting the Travis story, Channel 5 reporters were on the phone requesting the tape. They were told it was not immediately available because of the written agreement involved. Shipley said he wanted the tape "for background" but that his first thought had been that he would not use it on the air.

"Our viewers don't want us to censor the news, but they do expect us to use good judgement," Shipley said. "There's no question there was a titillating factor that a portion of the audience would be interested in watching. I wasn't sure what value it offered the viewer besides the sensational factor."

It's possible that this is just sour grapes by someone who got out-hustled by the competition. A producer who knows the Channel 5 newsroom, however, says Shipley does tend to play it safe when it comes to sensational material and that it's very possible he would have vetoed use of the tape.

At Channel 2, that was never in question. Murphey and Remington said no one in their newsroom argued against using the tape, but there was plenty of debate about how it would be used. Murphey said she "stood over every shot" chosen for the report and the promos. She says she kept the original police tape locked away. She said her main concern was to mask the identity of the women in the tapes to "not put victims' families through any more grief." Male and female staffers viewed early versions of the story and debated which shots should not be used, using a "we'll-know-it-when-we-see-it" approach. Assistant News Director Audrey Prywitch said one shot on the police video showed the shackled victim straining to see what Murray was doing behind her. It didn't make the final story, because it was felt to be "too raw, too awful."

Remington is proud of Murphey's report and unapologetic for holding it until the beginning of the November ratings period. He said the six-minute report that aired Nov. 6 in the second half of the 9 p.m. news hour was "a darn good piece of journalism and good TV as well." And while you can debate the journalism issue, Murphey's report was well produced in the news magazine style, with good story telling, slow dissolves, graphics and mood music. Remington rejects the purists who decry using such dramatic techniques in a hard news story, saying that Fox 2 News isn't the "Jim Lehrer News Hour." And he has a point. Like it or not, this is the direction television has been heading for years.

Murphey's story was similar to what you might see on a show like "Primetime" and on cable (two cable true crime producers also have the Travis tape)-not "60 Minutes" though, which holds to its more traditional "hard news" standards.

Some producers said they would never use music as Murphey did with Maury Travis' video because it would alter, and therefore sensationalize, the already graphic facts. If it's important to show, they say, then show it as is.

Still, viewers see this kind of thing all the time. When it comes to stories about children heroically battling disease, slow motion video and poignant pianos are almost standard procedure to enhance the impact. If it's good storytelling for tragedy or heroism, why not for creepy serial murderers?

Murphey said her report let viewers understand Travis' control and manipulation of his victims and "what was driving him." She also felt the story was justified because, as she told viewers in the introduction to the piece, the evidence collected from Travis' home had been sent to FBI headquarters because it gives investigators a rare opportunity to learn about a serial killer. After the story aired, St. Louis Police Lt. Col. Raymond Lauer sent Murphey a note complimenting her, saying, "I know there was some criticism in the community, but the detractors must realize there is a need to report such dastardly acts-to protect others in our city."

When Channel 2 began to promote the upcoming story two nights before it aired, the critical calls started coming in-to the police for releasing the tape and to the TV station for choosing to air it. Both said there were only a few calls after the story was broadcast Monday night. Remington said the spike in ratings for the quarter hour indicated the viewers tuned in to see the story. Remington decided the Maury Travis story was inappropriate to show the following day during the 11 a.m. midday news, and it wasn't repeated. Under the agreement with the police department, the story and the tape will not be shown again on Channel 2.

Dine talks about labor and the press
By Ed Bishop

As regular readers of SJR know, we have often referred to the woefully inadequate coverage given to the American labor movement by the news media in this country. Even though the media are often blasted for being liberal, the backbone of leftist ideas and programs in America-labor unions-rarely receive in-depth coverage. What little news the thousands of men and women who belong to labor unions do get from the mainstream press is invariably negative.

Philip Dine is the exception who proves the rule. For almost two decades, he has given readers of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch insights and information about labor unions. For 10 years, he wrote a regular column on unions for the Post. He is known both nationally and internationally as one of the leading labor journalists in the country.

Last week, Dine, who currently works out of the Post's Washington, D.C., bureau, agreed to discuss the news media's coverage of labor and labor unions with SJR via e-mail.

SJR: Do you agree that the labor movement in this country gets very little in-depth coverage? And when it does get coverage, isn't it always negative?

Dine: There's a lot to that. Labor does get relatively little media attention given its size and importance, and the stories that are done often result from sensational events such as strikes or picket-line violence or corruption. What gets overlooked is the essence of what unions do-the day-to-day representation of workers in various aspects of life on the job; the wrestling with management or public officials over safety conditions; the renewed efforts to organize workers or make inroads in unorganized sectors; the fight to keep good manufacturing jobs in America; the difficult task of protecting health care benefits as costs skyrocket and more Americans are uninsured; the drive to improve the lot of workers around the world so they don't pose unfair competition by working for slave wages.

The point isn't that unions necessarily do these things well or are right in the positions they take. Rather, that-good, bad or indifferent-this is the bulk of what unions do and it shouldn't be ignored in writing about them. The marginal way labor is often covered would be tantamount to covering education by focusing on school shootings or teacher arrests, which nobody would think of doing.

Unions are part of the nation's political, economic and social fabric, and what they do bears for better or worse on major issues that affect everyone, such as workplace productivity, economic competitiveness and trade. It's also a field that's full of human interest stories with broad appeal, because nearly everyone works or has worked.

Unfortunately, not only is labor covered infrequently and then often on side issues, but even the language used is pejorative. For example, we hear about management offering a contract, or the union demanding a raise. That could just as easily be rephrased as the union offering to work for certain conditions, but management demanding that they accept something else. Or, we hear about business executives but labor bosses, even though union officials are generally the only elected people in the workplace, and they're not the ones with the power to fire or demote.

By the way, your words about labor "in this country" are also pertinent. Worker struggles overseas, such as South Africa and Poland, tend to get more attention from U.S. media than labor efforts here.

SJR: Why do unions receive such little coverage?

Dine: Here, things get more complex. If you listen to labor leaders, they're ignored because the media are biased against workers or are simply out of touch with working class issues. There's something to that, but it's only half the story. If the union message doesn't get out, labor shares the responsibility with journalists.

As for media outlets, they are indeed assigning fewer and fewer reporters to cover labor, even as overall business coverage increases. A typical metropolitan newspaper might have 15 business reporters with only one of those people handling labor, and that as just a part of his or her beat. Television usually has no one. That often means that a major work-related story, such as a plant moving overseas, will contain comments only from management.

This reduced staffing is understandable in part, given labor's decline as a portion of the overall workforce in recent decades, but it also reflects the "yuppification" of many newsrooms. The personal interests of editors and reporters have evolved over the years, as have the demographics confronting newspapers, whose readers are increasingly in the suburbs. And the same factors lead to lesser play for labor stories.

That said, labor's view of the situation is somewhat skewed. I've heard union leaders propound conspiracy theories-that the views of wealthy, conservative media owners, as well as the influence of advertisers, prevent fair coverage of labor. Labor's allies in the alternative press or academia support this notion by stressing the increasing control of the media by a few conglomerates.

This sounds good but it largely misses the mark as an explanation for the paucity of labor coverage. When a union press release doesn't make it into print or a labor issue doesn't get covered, it's not a corporate plot but generally because busy reporters and editors are looking for stories that day likely to make a big splash or get good play, and labor simply isn't seen as filling the bill. As for the terminology used or the reliance on management's point of view, it's force of habit or the use of a trusted Rolodex at deadline, rather than class warfare. Companies have well-paid spokesmen who can be reached at any time; unions, especially at the regional or local level, generally don't.

Unions need to do better in getting their message out. Many labor leaders duck when confronted with a tough issue, as if the story will go away-but the only result is that their point of view isn't heard. And few unions are pro-active in terms of being alert for workers or events that could produce good copy. With some exceptions, they're content to put out predictable statements on Labor Day, at the time of new unemployment figures or during elections. If labor wants its message heard, it should focus more effort on improving the part of the union-media equation it controls-by making its approach more dynamic and creative-and less on lamenting those factors it doesn't control.