How would Watergate have played in today's 24/7 News Cycle?

There have been more than a few comparisons between the current trials and tribulations the White House is experiencing to Watergate. The IRS targeting of conservative groups, hassling reporters for doing their job and of course, Benghazi. I admit to having more than a passing interest just where POTUS was while the latter was going on and why his handlers remain "hesitant" to tell us. I'm absolutely aghast with the 1st Amendment implications of the DOJ targeting reporters. But that's just me.

Watergate started out as a stupid political burglary. It ended up with President Nixon forced out of office in disgrace. Not for the burglary, but for subverting the Constitution covering it up. Those who forget the past are always doomed to repeat it and I'm seeing a lot of repetition.

Carl and Bob back in the Day (That's a typewriter on the desk)

What's got me really thinking however,  is how differently things were covered then and now. During Watergate it was the dogged determination of Woodward and Bernstein and the Washington Post. Real journalism and real personal risk to those covering Watergate. The story took a while to catch the attention of the rest of the news media but when it did, wow. What's really key is we had to wait for news as the story unfolded. We didn't hear about it until the latest edition of the Post came out. There were no websites, Tweets or Facebook posts and 24/7 outlets like CNN or FOX.

Yes, we had to wait for what was "New." But we had time to digest it before the next information dump came as Woodward and Bernstein dug and dug and dug some more. Both being of the belief that news is indeed what's new, they would go several days before publishing new stories. At least early on.

Today, it's non-stop. You can't avoid it. On both traditional and digital media. Regurgitation of old news plus information and misinformation at the speed of light. Then there are the pundits. There are times where I simply say "ENOUGH!" I love a chocolate shake once in a while, but not every minute of the day.

Regardless of whether you agree or not between comparisons of what's happening today compared to Watergate, what's making a difference at least to me, was how we got the news a generation ago compared to today. It was solid, it was backed up and while we had to wait for it, it was worth waiting for. Today, not so much.

If you really study the history of Watergate, how it unfolded and compare it to today's rash of scandals, they are eerily familiar. But is the information overload because of today's technology turning us off to what could be something that is potentially dangerous to our civil liberties moving forward?

In other words is too much of a good thing ...a bad thing? You know, for us?

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you?"

Got a spare hour to save a life?

I reached milestone of sorts today, having donated 7 gallons of blood to Bonfils Blood Center. It takes a while. Just over 9 years at a rate of one pint every two months.

 

I found out years ago my blood is O-Negative. It's rare blood type but the good news is anyone, regardless of their particular blood type can use mine. The folks at Bonfils tell me that on average every time you donate a pint of blood you save 3 lives.

This week's Tornado in Oklahoma, or even closer to home the Aurora Theater shootings demonstrate in the most awful way why having a safe and reliable blood supply is important. But every day people are injured and end up in the hospital. When they arrive, the surgical team needs several pints of blood ready to go. If there isn't any blood available, it's likely the injured will not survive.

Here's a statistic that never ceases to amaze me. In Colorado just 4% of eligible donors actually donate blood. Not 4% of the population, but 4% who can safely donate blood.

4%.

OK, I get it. When you give blood they stick a needle in your arm. Blood comes out in a collection bag. Not everyone's idea of a good time. But it's so easy I urge anyone who has never donated blood to do it at least once. The whole thing takes about an hour, you might feel a "pinch" for about half a second but that's it. Plus they have some great snacks for you when you're done. The Bonfils team is as professional as they come and they make it all a great experience.

Do you have an hour available in your life every two months to save lives? I've done it 56 times. I'm asking you to try it at least once. Please.

You'll feel good when you're done. Promise.

Brian Olson

Owner/Consultant

Conversation Starters Public Relations

"We start the conversation about you"

Relay for Life a Life Affirming Event

Several members of my immediate family and some of their friends have had their lives touched by cancer. As a result, all our lives have been touched by cancer.

Too much attention is paid to just one type of cancer during just one month of the year. Cancer isn't a month, it's year-round. It isn't a color either. And believe it or not, women get more than just breast cancer. OK, I'm venting a bit.

Thus my recommendation to check out the American Cancer Society's Relay for Life. We took part in one of the largest, if not the largest such event this past weekend in Gwinnet, GA. It's a suburb north of Atlanta. To put it mildly, we were simply amazed at the thousands of people who turned out including cancer survivors and their caregivers but by people who care. People who care enough to cheer us on and help raise millions of dollars.

Here's a video of the view as we joined so many other cancer survivors and caregivers. Watch and you'll understand truly what a special event it is.



You can find a Relay for Life using the link posted above. It's our hope to see you at one of them. There are incredible displays, booths and oh yes, great food. It's a party, a time of celebration. Once you've gone, you'll never forget it.

Join in the fight against cancer. Help us find a cure. It takes dollars. You can trust the American Cancer Society to put those dollars to the best use possible.

This Caregiver thanks you for helping save some family members I love very much, to be alive and thriving, and able to take part in the Survivor Walk this year and for years to come.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you!"

The Case for Chain Gangs

"That's the sound of the men working on the chain ga-a-ang"-Sam Cooke

I read recently about a Florida Sheriff who has re-introduced chain gangs as part of punishing bad people. Of course, some civil rights "activists" are having a tizzy about this being a mean thing to do.

It reminded me when I worked at KTVK-TV in Phoenix covering Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County. Back in the 90's he was watching news coverage of our troops deployed in the Balkans. It was December, snowing and cold. Our troops were housed in tents.

A lightbulb went off for Sheriff Joe. At the time there was a big debate about how to fund millions of dollars for a new jail for the county. Sheriff Joe figured if tents were good enough for our troops, they sure as heck would work for prisoners. So he went to surplus stores, bought a bunch of tents, surrounded it all with barbed wire and guard towers and even found a "Vacancy" sign at an auction.

He saved the good people of Maricopa County tens of millions of dollars. Heck, the Sheriff even got his food costs per prisoner down to about a buck a day. He also has an approval rating of about 85% of law abiding citizens. You know, voters. People who pay the bills and ask to be protected in return.

Arpaio's logic is sound. Don't break the law and you won't have to live in a tent jail. Don't break the law and you won't have to work on a chain gang. Arpaio says he's in the punishment business, not the rehabilitation business. He says if you don't rob, steal, pimp, sell drugs or shoot people, you won't have to deal with him.

Don't break the law. Fascinating in its simplicity and logic. But people do.

We need more chain gangs. We don't need palaces as jails. We need ugly places. People need to see that if you break the law, a bad thing happens to you. It's called punishment. It's a concept lost more and more in today's "Justice" system. Denver Police report gang related crimes have doubled in the last year. That's because we keep on letting them out of jail instead of keeping them in jail and punishing them. Maybe spending a few weeks/months/years outside in good weather and bad, shackled at the ankles cleaning ditches, filling pot holes and the like just might get some gang banger's attention there's a price to be paid when you do bad.

Here in Colorado child killers get more breaks than the children they kill. Shoot up a theater full of people in full view of hundreds of witnesses? You get the best legal counsel our tax dollars can buy. Paperwork snafus let criminals out of jail early on parole and those in charge don't notice when they slip out of their ankle monitor and go kill people.

Judges aid and abet the system by not allowing cameras in courtrooms. They do their best to hide what's going on in our courts because it's so shameful.

Our "Justice" system clearly favors the bad people. Not the law abiding citizens who are the victims of these vicious animals.

Yep, ugly jails, chain gangs and no parole. But only if you break the law. Behave yourself and none of it has to happen. This has nothing to do with race or gender. It has everything to do about law, order and what we used to call justice.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you"

News "In the News." A look back at the good, the bad and the F-Bomb.

From Boston to Bismark, the news business came in for some serious scrutiny this past week. It started with coverage of the bombings in Boston and ended with arguably the biggest faux pas in broadcast news history.

Just a week ago, reports started to surface from traditional and digital news outlets, and of course Social Media that the suspect(s) in the terror attacks were in custody. To their credit most news outlets cited, fairly, "sources close to the investigation." Having spent a couple of decades in the news business, if you trust your sources you go with the story and you don't have to name them. Especially if more than one confirms things.

But in a case like Boston, when there are multiple law enforcement agencies involved, there's a lot of stepping on toes. But the word was out, they got the bad guys. BREAKING NEWS!

Wrong. Oops.

To his credit, one reporter, NBC News Justice Correspondent Pete Williams wasn't so quick to pull the trigger. Something wasn't adding up. He opted not to be first, but accurate. So he was one of the very few that held back until he could truly nail down if it was really true. Of course it wasn't and a lot of news outlets ended up with egg on their faces.

Pete Williams-NBC News

I wasn't surprised by the way Pete handled things. We both started our news careers in Wyoming. I was News Director at KGWN-TV in Cheyenne while Pete ran things up at KTWO in Casper. I got to know him professionally and he was/is one solid no-nonsense journalist. (Although he has a terrific wit!) Pete was also my predecessor on the board of directors of the Radio-Television-News Directors Association.

Pete's career later took him to Washington to work for then Congressman Dick Cheney. Pete and I got together a few times when I was in town. Always a great experience. Good journalist, even better guy. Later when Cheney became Secretary of Defense. he wisely chose Pete to become Deputy Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, aka Pentagon Spokesman. Anyone who saw his media briefings could see he was a "cool hand" under pressure. I interviewed Secretary Cheney several times and anytime I was at the Pentagon Pete was just terrific to work with in arranging things.

Pete stayed in Washington, joining NBC News. Essentially he made the leap to network news from Casper, Wyoming. Not the usual "work your way up the ladder" route but his experience working with Dick Cheney was invaluable.

Now as a consumer of news, I have to know who to trust. Pete Williams is among a very small group of journalists I do trust.

Well done Pete. But wait, there's more!

Then came the "F-Bomb" heard 'round the world. As I mentioned earlier, Pete and I started out in small markets. It's the way things work. Start small and work your way up. Such was the case with A.J. Clemente, launching his career as a news anchor in Bismark, ND. His first words on the air weren't "Good evening." Far from it. Instead not one, but two words you never, ever say on live TV. He's now a former news anchor, fired after his first and only newscast. Frankly, I was stunned when I saw it. (On Social Media of course) The most important rule in live TV is "The mic is always on." We all make mistakes, including me and I do hope he learns his lesson and gets another chance.

(Warning! Strong language)

Stark contrasts in how do to, and not do things. Maybe A.J. should watch Pete Williams for a while.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you!"

Boston Coverage. Immediacy? Yes. Accuracy? Not so much.

I first saw, make that heard about the events in Boston in a pretty traditional way. Television. The set was tuned to Shep Smith on FOX News. He always includes the proviso in his open saying, "Unless breaking news changes everything."

Boy did his show rundown change. I heard sirens in the background, yelling from crowds of people. After a minute or so I walked over and saw what was happening. Two explosions at the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

Explosions. Death. Deja Vu all over again.

All the networks immediately went into "Wall to Wall" mode, i.e. non-stop coverage. So did Social Media. Facebook and Twitter blew up, with much of what was posted right from the scene by people who saw and felt it happen. Talk about "Eyewitness News."

As was the case with recent events like Newtown, the information being posted on Social Media was immediate but not always accurate. Likewise for traditional media.

It's in our nature to want to know what happened, how it happened and who did it immediately if not sooner. Both traditional and new media are great for the immediate part.

But the storylines changed on the fly. There were reports that another bomb went off at the JFK Library. Not true. There were reports of up to five other bombs found. Not true. There were and are reports of "Persons of interest." Maybe true. Then there is stuff we likely are being kept from knowing. Sometimes it's important in investigating crimes of this nature to keep certain information confidential to help catch the bad people.

Traditional media is good at spreading misinformation too. But at least they attribute the source and add they can't confirm the story. An example being the Wall Street Journal reporting 5 other bombs being found. More than one network repeated the story, attributing the source but adding the proviso "We can't confirm." One can argue, fairly, the merits of reporting something you can't confirm. The WSJ is very reputable. But a great rule of journalism is "Attribution before assertion." It should, but of course can't be enforced on Social Media. The whole "1st Amendment thing."

Social Media doesn't play by the same rules. Stuff is posted, re-posted and goes viral in moments. Attribution? Accuracy? So 20th century.

Then there's imagery. A picture or video clip that says it all. A great example is the now iconic shot of the first explosion going off, knocking down a 78 year old runner to the ground. We saw it over and over and over.

About as fast as the "experts" started appearing on traditional media giving often educated viewpoints, came the online pundits with snarky remarks and potshots. The left picking on the right, the right picking on the left and no useful purpose being served. Then of course, the conspiracy folks. They love Social Media.

On a positive note came the many heartfelt posts from all those in our Social Media Networks expressing their emotions and support for Boston. A trend I truly like are the images that are created almost instantly and shared. For the most part, a positive aspect of Social Media in a situation like Boston. And who would have believed the crowd at Yankee Stadium singing "Sweet Caroline?" A good thing.

 

Certainly a positive impact of the technology we carry in our pockets including the cameras in our cell phones is the very likely chance a picture someone took on their smart phone could help solve the case.

Ultimately, I remember this comment from President Reagan who in very analog times said, "Trust but verify." What he said then, fits well in today's digital times.

Immediacy doesn't always mean accuracy.

Brian Olson

Owner/Consultant

Conversation Starters Public Realtions

"We start the conversation about you"

When a Thousand Words is better than a Picture

OK, to be clear, I'm not blogging about the old picture being worth a thousand words thing. This is about not using the picture in the first place.

Driving home from the mountains Sunday night I heard about the terrible injury suffered by Louisville's Kevin Ware playing against Duke for a spot in the Final 4.  Listening to ESPN Radio the most used word to describe it was "Gruesome." Post-game interviews with the coach and fellow players were emotional to say the least.

I haven't and likely won't see video or pictures of the incident where he broke his leg. I was in Church when it happened, I'm not really a college basketball fan and as Texas wasn't playing, well I just wouldn't have watched in the first place.

But there's the news, highlights shows and of course, Social Media. It's just about impossible to not see stuff even if you're not interested in seeing it.  Reading about the accounts of the injury, it was indeed gruesome.

But to their credit, most media outlets used good judgement and other than the the folks who saw it happen live and couldn't have avoided seeing it happen, the rest of us have been spared. This wasn't about seeing the injury, but the story about it and in the days following.

I did see a picture of Keven being released from the hospital  Here's to a quick recovery for the young man. That's the kind of image I like to see!

Louisville is on their way to the Final 4 in Atlanta, and my guess is Kevin will be there to cheer on his teammates. And ...very likely back on the court next season. Let's hope so.

In this case, a thousand words was worth far more than the picture.

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you!"