As I'm writing this, it's Thursday afternoon. I still have the previous night's events stuck in my head, and Twitter's still blowing up with breaking news, opinions, and just about everything else that even marginally relates to what's been going on at Penn State. I was so caught up in what happened Wednesday night, I stayed up until 3:30 a.m. writing about it in my previous post.
I started watching the Board of Trustees' press conference a little after 10 p.m. The announcement that Joe Paterno would be fired came around 10:14. I was glued to my computer, watching feeds of CNN, ESPN, and the local ABC affiliate that gave coverage to the rioting. It wasn't until three hours later, around 1:15 that it seemed like everything had died down and that it was ok to stop watching what was going on.
I initially planned on writing only one blog entry on this subject, but as I began breaking down the press conference question by question, it became apparent that there was much more to this than I could fit in one reasonably-sized post. The press conference itself was a whole difference media monster than the coverage CNN and ESPN devoted to the situation. So that's what I'll look at now: The positives and negatives of both network's media coverage of the event.
Immediately following the press conference
Following the press conference, (which ESPN did carry via a local ABC affiliate) CNN immediately jumped into covering the riots (at that point a large number of students were gathering in support of Paterno) that had broken out in State College. ESPN, from what I understand, was not covering the formation of the riots. Plus one for CNN, if you're keeping score.
But it was clear that the anchor CNN rolled out to cover this breaking news story was in over her head. One of her first questions to someone on the ground in State College concerned when Penn State's next football game was. At around the same time, ESPN apparently had Matt Millen on to react to the firing. Millen, who played under Paterno while in college, is arguably the biggest conflict of interest ESPN has. Millen says he's a close friend of Paterno and Jerry Sandusky. But after a bizarre yet heartfelt appearance on Sportscenter earlier in the day, Millen should not have been allowed on air to discuss this. Yes, he's analyst who's paid to give his opinion, which he likely did (I hadn't turned to ESPN yet), but he's too attached to this to stay objective.
One hour after the press conference
I stayed with CNN during the hour following the press conference, as it appeared that ESPN was not covering the actions that were occurring in State College. This lasted until the network brought in Anderson Cooper to interview Dr. Phil about the scandal. Dr. Phil. You read that correctly. I was waiting for Cooper to finish with him and then move on to Dr. Drew, as he seemed like the next perfectly illogical option.
After this interview, CNN appeared to wrap up its nonstop coverage of the scandal and rioting. I switched over to ESPN, which finally appeared to be covering the escalating situation in State College. Stuart Scott and Steve Levy were given the difficult task of anchoring something that sports anchors are rarely asked to cover: Breaking news that's (somewhat) unrelated to the field of sports journalism. This was a tough task for the duo. It's also worth noting that Stuart Scott is no longer widely revered by ESPN viewers, and if often criticized for his laid back on-camera demeanor.
From what I could tell, Scott and Levy at one point were on air for over an hour without a single break, from 11:30 p.m. or so until around 12:45 a.m. It is my view, as well as the general consensus of those I follow on Twitter that Scott and Levy handled a very delicate situation very well. While there were no remarkable moments or announcements that will go down in broadcasting lore (this wasn't exactly on the same scale of Jim McKay's job covering the Munich massacre in 1972), they didn't make any real mistakes.
(One minor odd moment was when Stuart Scott mentioned that reaction on Twitter was split about 60/40 for/against the firing. My stream as well as many others who commented on Scott's statement were vehemently in support of his firing. Obviously we all follow a wide array of opinionated people, but it seems as if this particular statement conflicted with the general consensus).
What ESPN did suffer from was a lack of video from the scene. It had a handful of reporters on the ground and did carry images from a local ABC affiliate, but those images came from a single locked camera at one particular location. The reporters on the ground did a fine job to try and paint a picture of the scene going on, which included flipped news vans, downed lamp posts, thrown debris, and clashes with police. In this day and age, it's hard to understand why ESPN didn't have live coverage. Cell phones can pretty much do anything, and I'm sure ESPN has the capability of synching live streaming video (from platforms such as Skype) with its television broadcast.
Two hours after the press conference
By the time ESPN did whip out its cameras, the fanfare had begun to die down. JoePa came out to try and quell the students, but ended giving a mind-blowingly dumb appearance (which I'll detail in an upcoming post). And instead of devoting coverage to the rioting, ESPN focused on student reactions. And asking for the opinions of rioting college students right around the time that the bars get their largest number of customers is not the wisest thing to do. The first group of students interviewed were, unsurprisingly, in support of Joe Paterno.
"There's no crime. This is Penn State. There's no crime here." "He should coach until the end of time."
These were some of the things the students told ESPN. I'm no surprised. You're asking drunk, rowdy belligerent, college-age rioters what their opinions are about their dear old JoePa. There's a phrase I've heard thrown around about Packers fans a from a few years back: "People in Green Bay pray to two people on Sundays—Jesus and Brett Favre." Well, people in State College pray to JoePa.
Amazingly, the second time ESPN went to ask members of the swarming crowd for a sound bite they were able to come across a student who actually gave an intelligent answer. I don't know how much luck was involved in finding this student, and I'm conflicted about how to credit ESPN. It's great that they were able to find a counter voice to the rioting and pro-Paterno crowd. But this isn't a story that necessitates two sides. This student stood out because the pro-Paterno crowd had been give a soap box to stand on (and riot on). Those people were idiots, and it's unfortunate this student was put in comparison to them, essentially equating the two view points.
Three hours after the press conference
Shortly after that interview ESPN finally went to break for the first time on over an hour (unless I somehow missed a commercial break). When it returned from break, ESPN turned its coverage to the NBA lockout, the first time in several hours that it changed the subject away from the scene in State College. The reports from the people in the middle of the action made it appear as if the crowd had begun to disperse and that police were slowly but steadily dissipating the rioters. I don't have a problem with ESPN cutting away from its Penn State coverage in order to avoid an over saturation of coverage, something ESPN is notorious for screwing up.
I finally turned ESPN off and began to collect myself. I don't know whether this is a watershed moment in sports journalism yet, but right now it certainly feels like something that will be discussed for a long time. I'm certainly not finished writing about it, and the story itself is far from over. Next up, I want to tackle JoePa's statement he gave to students a few hours into the rioting, looking more deeply at the role of social media (i.e. Twitter) in breaking news stories such as this, and the debate concerning the alleged scapegoating of JoePa by the media.
Until next time, Orange Hat Guy
No comments:
Post a Comment