(The following report appeared on The Moscow Times website on August 30.)
MOSCOW - Guards at a railway in the Sverdlovsk region detained a television crew Wednesday after the journalists planted a fake bomb on the tracks while filming an episode on terrorism for a news program.
The three-person crew planted several pieces of soap wired to a pager on the tracks at the bridge over the Iset River in central Russia. A passerby spotted this and alerted the guards, Interfax reported.
The guards contacted the Sverdlovsk Railways traffic controllers to stop one cargo and two passenger trains before deploying the guards to the bridge to detain what they thought was a terrorist group.
The crew was released after producing their press identification cards, but Sverdlovsk Railways plans to sue the trio for at least 50,000 rubles (about $1,950) in damages due to the delay of the three trains, Interfax reported.
“The [railway] management is outraged by this incident and considers it to be of the same caliber as making false bomb threats,” the agency said, quoting a statement by the Sverdlovsk Railways.
Railway guards across the country have been jittery since a passenger train was bombed en route from Moscow to St. Petersburg on August 13.
Dozens were injured in the attack, which security services suspect was carried out either by nationalists or Northern Caucasus militants.
I will agree with you, except to say that to lump all media into the same category does some of us a disservice. “Journalist” is an all-encompassing word prone to mis-labeling. Those on the ABC Evening News consider themselves journalists just as much as the crew that gives us Entertainment Tonight. But we know that is not the case.
As a person with a print newspaper background, with some radio, I must opine that too often most – NOT ALL – TV news people today are the bottom-feeders of the business because of the fierce competiton for ratings numbers, which doesn’t exist at the same temperature in radio or print. What that Russian crew did simply wouldn’t work or be as effective in radio or print. The visuals are everything and very powerful “evidence” – even if they’re not real.
In the average 30-minute local evening news show there are 9 minutes of commercials, 3 minutes of sports and 3 minutes of weather. Less graphics, happy talk and transitions, that leaves about 12 minutes for “news” – which may include a canned puff-piece feature or two and the “health news” that came down the network pipe. Plus, more and more TV news shows are being used to promote the network’s shows with those phoney celebrity interviews, etc.
Today’s TV news, in an effort to attract viewers, has become too bogged down with fancy, hip graphics and sound effects which may or may not conceal the fact that most of the evening “news” has been culled from that morning’s daily newspapers. I’ve lived in the Chicago area my enti
“…As a person with a print newspaper background, with some radio, I must opine that too often most – NOT ALL – TV news people today are the bottom-feeders of the business because of the fierce competiton for ratings numbers, which doesn’t exist at the same temperature in radio or print. What that Russian crew did simply wouldn’t work or be as effective in radio or print. The visuals are everything and very powerful “evidence” – even if they’re not real…”
P.Z. Maybe the answer is for the ‘actual’ reporters who chase down detailed stories and report on actual newsworthy events to find some way of seperating themselves from the TV ‘talking heads’ that are so prevalent and just read the news in an air conditioned studio. These people seem to have co-opted the term ‘journalist’ and demean its meaning. We try to watch the morning news at home to get a feel for what is going on in the world overning;what is presented is maybe one decent story that is surrounded by fluff and nonsense to fill airtime.
I used to love a quiet evening meal [dinner][skirt steak] at the Green Door Restaurant [about 5800 Pulaski] and a chance to read the ‘Trib’ front to back, when I was working up there some years back , too many years now[%-)]!
It seems like the prime function of many of the female TV newsreaders here is to emcee charity fundraisers, speak to journalism classes abouty their “art” and wave like a robot from the station’s parade float. As you probably remember, we have about three parades in the city every weekend.
Is it strange that more newspaper reporters make the move to TV instead of the other way around? Hmmm.
The one shot airing of ‘Anchorwoman’ on Fox last week showed just how ‘journalistic’ small town TV news is…NOT AT ALL TV news is about ratings and commercials, nothing else.
Pappa Zit is exactly right. To take another example of TV “news” borrowing their story ideas from print journalism, recently the Wall Street Journal ran an article about ridership being up on Amtrak. Sure enough, within a couple of days MSNBC and ABC news “discovered” ridership being up on Amtrak.
which is why I try to watch the News Hour with Jim Lerher on PBS if anything interesting is going on…after the news summary (5-8 mins, no comercials!) they go in depth on the most important news stories…(well, usually they are the ones I think are important, not always…)
And Washington Week in Review is a great way to make sense of the circus surrounding an election year…which, unfortunatly, seems to get longer and longer…
TV news is about ratings and commercials, nothing else.