Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
I understand that but I am sure there were far better more educated interviewees in the campaign HQ, that wouldn't have been making the statements this one did.
|
Ahh but, would they talk? In my experience, it's often very difficult to find someone who isn't too shy to go on camera - especially if its live. People are savvy enough to know that if it's not live and they stumble and sound stupid, we edit around that. They also know that we can't do that live. Then, it's even more difficult in an election because a lot of people out there believe their votes should be private. Obviously, blabbing their opinion on television would be contrary to that viewpoint.
Now, picture this. You're a reporter. You've been working for the last three hours putting together a story that you're about to have to front live. You have about 10 minutes to find somebody before you have to run back to the live truck, put on your microphone, your IFB, and stand in front of the camera so the photographer can make the final touches on his lighting and camera position. You're having a tough time finding someone willing to talk when finally the aforementioned uneducated guy agrees. You're not happy with the interview, but what do you do - your news director said she wanted a live interview no matter what. You decide to go with the guy -is that racist?
Plus, keep in mind that those two reporters hadn't talked to each other since they got to work. The one reporter had no clue who the other reporter chose. Unless the station said "go find me a stupid black guy and a really smart white guy" then there wasn't the opportunity to coordinate racist coverage. And if the station did say that, you'd know about it by now.
As for sending a black guy to cover black people and vice versa - sometimes that's just coincidence and sometimes, yes, its' on purpose. I was at a station once where we had accusations of racism against black people to cover. It promised to be a complicated story, so we sent our best reporter down there to figure out what had happened. The guy happened to be white. Suddenly the next day we see one of the "victims" on our competitor's air telling the world that we were racist because we sent a white guy down to talk about a black issue. It should be apparent to anyone who's read my posts for long what my opinion was of that bullshit, but the unfortunate reality is that viewers are still repelled if they see white people covering a black issue - they feel the white guy couldn't possibly get the story right because he doesn't know what it's like to be black. It's stupid, it's wrong, but it's reality.
And the reason it's stupid and wrong is because a reporter's whole JOB is to understand stuff he wouldn't normally understand. If I do a story on fighter planes, no one bitches that I shouldn't do it because I'm not in the air force. If I do a story on gas prices, no one bitches that I shouldn't do it because I'm not in the oil industry. Yet for some reason a white guy can't possibly do justice to a report on a black guy. It's idiotic.