Did Denver Big3 Deliberately Endanger Citizen Journalists?

Some of the readership here may not be aware of a couple of terms I use. That’s not unusual – these terms have only been coined in recent months. When I say, “hyperlocal journalism” that’s about citizens who happen to be at the scene of an event, or in some cases covering a minor aspect of a community, such as a newsletter for a local organization or even a neighborhood. When I use the term “Big3,” it refers to traditional media – TV, radio, and newspapers.

There’s a great example of hyperlocal journalism here, where there’s an account of a blogger covering the on-the-spot details of a local flood disaster. Griff Wigley used the tools he had to enhance the coverage of the event by the Big3 in Northfield, Minnesota. In this case, the end result was positive on all sides – the community was informed in a way the professionals couldn’t manage.

In most cases, I applaud and encourage this kind of citizen cooperation when it comes to sharing the news. (Yes, it seems there are far fewer incidents of reporting online these days, considering the burgeoning number of places for anyone to access news.) The Northfield flood was only one situation – I’m sure there are many non-emergent items, such as school board meetings, church outings, and even neighborhood rummage sales being reported all over.

Yet there was one case recently where I’m not so sure this use of citizen reporters by the Big3 was either admirable or defensible.

Because I have a satellite dish, I happened to be watching an evening newscast of a Denver station, KCNC Channel Four. Early this week, the Denver area experienced a spate of tornadoes. They included in their coverage a number of photos taken by citizens with digital cameras or cell phones. As you can imagine, many of these were very well done, close up and quite dramatic.

The newscasters also encouraged viewers to send in their pictures of the event, which is where this kind of citizen journalism stopped being a positive thing.

I can’t imagine what they were thinking. They were actually suggesting their viewers go out, put themselves in harm’s way, and take pictures of tornadoes.

I’d seen this same request broadcast a day or two earlier, and so I paid particular attention to this broadcast. Neither time was there any hint of recognition that KCNC knew a tornado was a life-threatening event. They actually promoted viewer participation by showing a segment by someone who claimed the tornado “was right on top of my head.”

Perhaps they would say that it’s “common knowledge,” that a tornado is not to be taken lightly. In this case, however, they minimized the danger and emphasized the participation by viewers.

I don’t know whether this was also done by other stations in the Denver area. I watched only that one because I expected some kind of warning or disclaimer to air alongside the promotion for their viewers to have their photos seen on TV. This warning never appeared. If it did, it came in a separate package that I didn’t see.

This action is at best irresponsible. At worst, KCNC is deliberately eschewing caution in order to somehow appear “cutting edge,” or “responsive to consumer needs.” Of course a natural event such as a tornado is great TV; and I’m sure there’s not a broadcaster alive who wouldn’t give his right arm to be on the scene when something important happens. But reality doesn’t work that way.

KCNC is incredibly lucky no one was injured or killed following their pleas for live photos. Are they not aware that Denver, like most cities in the West, has a population comprised of many who are newly-arrived from backEast states with no history of tornadoes? Are they not aware that some people will do just about anything to get on TV – even if it’s just a photo with their name?

Denver is a major market, in media terms. Their TV stations do not employ news anchors or producers right out of school, or off the street. People who work in Denver media can be presumed to have solid experience behind them; it’s a market where our young, local broadcasters in Yuma AZ aspire to, and maybe even dream of working one day, after they’ve had some experience. As far as I know, no matter what the fragmentation of market or decline in ratings, has any station or media outlet here in the low desert ever suggested its viewers do something so dangerous for so little return.

It’s often been said that the Big3 is scrambling to keep up with the Internet. Are they now so beleaguered they will stoop to anything to gain viewers?