ABC News - Guilty of Checkbook Journalism?

[LiveLaughLuv]

I agree, Magic Cat..which would make this a conflict of interest as far as Baez is concerned. He said in court there is no gold at the end of that rainbow. He stated there is no deal for $700,000 or whatever the number was. I do wonder, why this ABC guy is shadowing the Anthonys? Why would he continue to be at every court date? He's got an investment to watch over, IMO. When this trial is all said and done, there will be another interview for Inmate Anthony will no doubt be found guilty, JMHO. This one will be whatever the outcome of that trial is, how disappointed the A's are, how they feel LE "built" their case "around", Inmate Anthony...etc...they will bad mouth every one of the LEO's involved. How Inmate Anthony is innocent and we have already appealed!!! Such sadness surrounding Caylee's demise..they all seem too happy for my liking..:furious:

 

[Macushla]

I agree, Magic Cat..which would make this a conflict of interest as far as Baez is concerned. He said in court there is no gold at the end of that rainbow. He stated there is no deal for $700,000 or whatever the number was. I do wonder, why this ABC guy is shadowing the Anthonys? Why would he continue to be at every court date? He's got an investment to watch over, IMO. When this trial is all said and done, there will be another interview for Inmate Anthony will no doubt be found guilty, JMHO. This one will be whatever the outcome of that trial is, how disappointed the A's are, how they feel LE "built" their case "around", Inmate Anthony...etc...they will bad mouth every one of the LEO's involved. How Inmate Anthony is innocent and we have already appealed!!! Such sadness surrounding Caylee's demise..they all seem too happy for my liking..:furious:

WHEN KC is found guilty, it doesn't matter how many interviews she does, she will not get any $$ from them, thanks to SOS laws. If Baez were to get any money, he could be disbarred, and you know someone would leak that news - perhaps someone at ABC who is not a happy camper these days?

Unfortunately, GA and CA can and probably WILL get more money from ABC or someone else. They can profit from their granddaughter's murder - and there is nothing anyone can do about it except make their feeling known as strongly as possible to which ever media outlet pays out. I agree that having the ABC guy still hanging around speaks volumes about what the Anthonys plan to do. How do I feel about that? Well, if you listen closely you will be able to hear my teeth grinding, no matter how far away you are!

 

[magic-cat]

WHEN KC is found guilty, it doesn't matter how many interviews she does, she will not get any $$ from them, thanks to SOS laws. If Baez were to get any money, he could be disbarred, and you know someone would leak that news - perhaps someone at ABC who is not a happy camper these days?

Unfortunately, GA and CA can and probably WILL get more money from ABC or someone else. They can profit from their granddaughter's murder - and there is nothing anyone can do about it except make their feeling known as strongly as possible to which ever media outlet pays out. I agree that having the ABC guy still hanging around speaks volumes about what the Anthonys plan to do. How do I feel about that? Well, if you listen closely you will be able to hear my teeth grinding, no matter how far away you are!

That is how I feel they set it up...with George and Cindy as the other two of several whom the rights were purchased from, and I would not doubt the money was in their name only and that Casey signed over her rights to THEM so the money could be given to them and they in turn would deposit it straight back with Jose...so when the BIG payment comes (I mean, who do they think they are kidding with the ABC rep sitting close by their sides at every court hearing?) it will come to THEM again, I would say, with some agreement that Jose's fees will be paid at that time. It could not include Casey's name on the end deal, because if she were found guilty that would be illegal. So I do believe George and Cindy ARE the main recipients of this money and will be again when it is all said and done.

It truly is sickening that ABC is depriving 1400 families of their livelihood and PAYING someone like Casey Anthony! Who the heck cares about HER story! What about Caylee's story? What about that ABC???:banghead: :furious::banghead:

 

[LambChop]

Let's hope ABC has learned a lesson here and are done with the A's. Anything they run from here on out about this family will be questioned. JMO

 

[magic-cat]

Let's hope ABC has learned a lesson here and are done with the A's. Anything they run from here on out about this family will be questioned. JMO

I doubt they are done with them...wasn't their rep in court for the indigency hearing? He is still cozy with Cindy so...I doubt they have learned a thing...but we'll see...:blushing:

 

[magic-cat]

I guess you could say we EXPECT this sort of thing from mags like Globe, National Enquirer, etc...but we expect so much more from YOU ABC!!!

 

[Aedrys]

I doubt they are done with them...wasn't their rep in court for the indigency hearing? He is still cozy with Cindy so...I doubt they have learned a thing...but we'll see...:blushing:

Who wants to bet that their rep will be silently missing from the next hearing? Do I have any takers? ABC has got to be working on how to get out of this after having so much criticism lobbed in their direction. I wonder if that rep still has a job...

 

[Holly Oakes]

ABC has layoffs galore. Many are upset that much money was paid out. They are calling it a reorganize letting go of 1400 people but want to cut the force by 25%..poor money management???

Sounds like a lot of money at first, but on second thoughts - saving two hundred thousand dollars (and they must have got some value from the spend, so its not exactly $ down the drain) isn't really going to save anyone's job.

Naturally, people being laid off would feel otherwise. They need someone else to blame for starters. In restructures, its generally the poorer performing 25% of people or teams which get laid off. Never a pretty situation to be in. Hard not to feel for sorry for them.

Personally, I think $200,000 for the photos was a waste - a huge waste.

 

[kbl8201]

abc is literally a 'mickey mouse operation' so i dont expect anything from them.

i bet they gave the anthonys more for there blood money on caylee then they gave jaycee and her family for there home videos

 

[magic-cat]

Sounds like a lot of money at first, but on second thoughts - saving two hundred thousand dollars (and they must have got some value from the spend, so its not exactly $ down the drain) isn't really going to save anyone's job.

Naturally, people being laid off would feel otherwise. They need someone else to blame for starters. In restructures, its generally the poorer performing 25% of people or teams which get laid off. Never a pretty situation to be in. Hard not to feel for sorry for them.

Personally, I think $200,000 for the photos was a waste - a huge waste.

The average minimum wage employee earns about 10,000 annually...At LEAST 250 of thos jobs could have been saved by the 200,000 dollar payout being paid to them instead at least for one year. Plus, the payout was LIKELY 250,000 since the defense states THEY received 200,000. Taxes had to have been paid so that would have been another FIVE families who could still have their livelihood if ABC had spent their money more wisely.

I think they are going to find out just how much "value" that money was worth when it hits them in the pocketbook. I would say there are plenty of people who will think twice before supporting ABC/Disney in the future in light of this revelation. I know I am going to think THREE times myself. :furious::furious::furious:

 

[Holly Oakes]

The average minimum wage employee earns about 10,000 annually...At LEAST 250 of thos jobs could have been saved by the 200,000 dollar payout being paid to them instead at least for one year. Plus, the payout was LIKELY 250,000 since the defense states THEY received 200,000. Taxes had to have been paid so that would have been another FIVE families who could still have their livelihood if ABC had spent their money more wisely.

I think they are going to find out just how much "value" that money was worth when it hits them in the pocketbook. I would say there are plenty of people who will think twice before supporting ABC/Disney in the future in light of this revelation. I know I am going to think THREE times myself. :furious::furious::furious:

Hi MC, forgive me for correcting your math, but ... @10k pa, that's 25 not 250 jobs. And lets not forget the lights-on cost and overheads for running an employee.

Personally, I think it's a fallacious argument - equating money spent on photos to jobs saved. A colleague in advertising suggests the broadcaster may have actually made money from the deal, thereby SAVING a few jobs from the chop.

That said, it makes it no less palatable that Casey Anthony should benefit, in any way, from the sale. IMO, Casey is a monster. Whether a product of nature or nurture, she deserves what's coming to her. Thankfully there is no god, but there IS a justice system.

 

[elementary]

I guess as a journalism major I am shocked that people havent realized this by now. Yes, we all go thru a course in journalisim ethics. There are legal requirements you have to learn about too, but journalisim is a truly cut throat business folks.

Its mostly about ratings, sensationalisim, demographics and very very very competitive. You have networks, papers, and websites all fighting for ratings, advertisers and attention. There are too many blogs, tv channels, websites, social networks etc all reporting. Almost anyone can report the news these days due to the internet. So yeah, the traditional media is feeling the pinch.

What ABC has done is no different than any other major media outfit in the U.S. I may not agree with it, but you have to understand that most people won't be that outraged. ABC will issue an apology and this story will be buried.

You wonder why certain cases get attention and others don't? Well the hard core truth is that news rooms are full of editors that determine which stories are gonna "sell". Thats why Natalee Holloway gets so much attention while a missing black mother in Harlem doesnt. Its not fair, but its true. Then there are certain outlets that have a political or social agenda. Thats a whole nother story.

Like someone said, the real question is which came first: The chicken or the egg. Did journalism change because of us or did we change because of journalisim. I think its society that changed. Tabloids make big bucks while straight and narrow outlets such as NPR dont generate a blip. So the mainstream media becomes more Tabloid and less traditional. They have to the pay bills folks. So if Tiger Woods gets over 500,000 hits on TMZ.com well then ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX etc would be fools not to jump on that bandwaggon. So they are gonna pay whoever for a text, picture, interview, video, whatever they can.

We as a society have become more cynical, more reactionary, more impatient, more into gossip oriented news. Especially the young people!! the 18-30 yr old cares more about gossip and sensation than "real" news. Real news is boring and old fashioned to my generation. The media has to get that demographic to buy what they are selling. Its all about instant news brought to you online, through your cell phone, IPOD, etc.

I love the media, but for every Anderson Cooper or Nancy grace there are a thousands of hungry, driven journalist out there trying to make a name for themselves and are looking for the big story that will get them recognized and promoted. Once you've reached that higher level then you have the luxury of being an investigative crusader or a big wig behind the scenes. But until then, you may have to bend the ethics a bit or do something that might poke at your morality, but if your conscience gets in the way of your job then journalism might not be the career for you! You have to stay objectionable always.

This is what is nagging me. There are lots of missing children out there. Why did this story "sell"? What did Baez tell them to make this such a hot property given that at that point, Caylee was merely a "missing" child? How did Baez "sell" ABC? Because to my way of thinking, he had to tell or promise them something out of the ordinary.

ETA: BTW, you are pretty well validating that opportunistic, corrupt journalists along with opportunistic, corrupt attorneys strive to manipulate and create the news. And this might be exactly what Baez did with ABC.

 

[magic-cat]

You are absolutely right on that math...I must have been asleep. But you know what? 25 families keeping their income would be better than one child murderer being paid two hundred thou for her defense fund. THAT math is indisputable. 25 familes or Casey Anthony? It's a no brainer.

Regardless, ABC should not have paid for those "rights" as they say...they should follow the story like the next guy-it should not hinge on money.

 

[magic-cat]

Good afternoon ABC.
I have heard it said that until you find a huge cause to throw yourself into and devote your very life to that you have not really lived. I am considering making YOU mine.

Journalism should be about getting the scoop-not BUYING the scoop. Don't you agree?

 

[LambChop]

This is what is nagging me. There are lots of missing children out there. Why did this story "sell"? What did Baez tell them to make this such a hot property given that at that point, Caylee was merely a "missing" child? How did Baez "sell" ABC? Because to my way of thinking, he had to tell or promise them something out of the ordinary.

ETA: BTW, you are pretty well validating that opportunistic, corrupt journalists along with opportunistic, corrupt attorneys strive to manipulate and create the news. And this might be exactly what Baez did with ABC.

Good question. Maybe we should look into this further and speculate about why it did sell.
1. The lying may have been one reason. That she was bold enough to lie and bring LE to a place she had not worked in 3 years.
2. Pretty white female states hispanic nanny kidnaps child. KC says the Nanny's father has money and clearly nanny does not work full time but watches Caylee and does not charge. Now really if you had a friend who watched your child would you ever refer to them as your Nanny, particularly if you did not pay them. You would say, my friend Zanny is watching her for me. KC lowers Zanny's level as a personal friend to unpaid help. (Could this be because of CA's attitude?)
3. Another thing KC says continually like a broken record. "ZFG has been my nanny for 1 1/2 to 2 years." So which is it. If nanny was watching your child would you not remember actually how long she had done so. "She been watching Caylee since Caylee was a year old. The statement sounds rehearsed.
4. Interestingly JB, under oath, stated June 17th as the date he began representing KC. Many are saying he made a mistake but did he. The judge agreed so the judge may know something we do not. Did KC contact JB on June 17th and ask if he would represent her if she needed him in a yet undisclosed matter. Would an attorney agree to represent her when he was not sure what crime she had committed? Or did CA threaten to have KC arrested the night they had a fight and KC thought she might be needing an attorney if her mother did, in fact, press charges against her.

No matter how much JB denies a book deal there will be one for him in the end, once everything dies down. He may not author the book but I bet he will get paid. JMO

 

[Snaz]

This is what is nagging me. There are lots of missing children out there. Why did this story "sell"? What did Baez tell them to make this such a hot property given that at that point, Caylee was merely a "missing" child? How did Baez "sell" ABC? Because to my way of thinking, he had to tell or promise them something out of the ordinary.

ETA: BTW, you are pretty well validating that opportunistic, corrupt journalists along with opportunistic, corrupt attorneys strive to manipulate and create the news. And this might be exactly what Baez did with ABC.

BBM

I can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you what sucked me into this case.

My very first introduction to this case was Cindy Anthony on Fox News with Greta Van Susteran and also with Megyn Kelly, right after this all started. I remember thinking, "Who acts like that when their grandchild is missing?" I just thought she acted so bizarre.

I was hooked after seeing those two appearances. And her behavior only got worse from there!

CA with Greta Van Susteran:
[ame]http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=2521568&referralPlaylistId=playlist[/ame]

CA with Megyn Kelly:
[ame]http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=2503541&referralPlaylistId=playlist[/ame]

P.S. Can someone please tell me how to properly embed videos, and I will correct these two videos. When I used embed code, all that showed up was the code. When I used link... this is how the video came up. (I thought it would post just the link.) TIA!!

 

[magic-cat]

Cindy says in that 2nd video that Caylee had been missing from Casey since June 14th...ANOTHER date? Geez!

 

[okiedokietoo]

Interesting article by Robert Rector who is a former editor with the Pasadena Star-News and Los Angeles Times. His columns appear in the Pasadena Star-News, San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Whittier Daily News

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_14770062
Posted: 03/27/2010 07:12:38 AM PDT

Robert Rector: Paying for stories is journalistic prostitution

 

[kbl8201]

you know if it somehow came out some day that cindy killed cayleey and then hoodwinked casey into to taking the fall (honey, people will believe you, just like we do!) it wouldnt shock me at all

 

[magic-cat]

You know, I got to thinking about this whole checkbook journalism thing...(thanks for getting the wheels turning for us all ABC) and this is the conclusion that I have reached within myself.

:banghead: Casey is in the wrong from the start of this LEGALLY...all the way back to DAY 1 of not reporting anything about Caylee. We did not get in the know until Day 31. By then, she was 30 more days guilty than she was at the start. Even if she did not kill her daughter, she was still guilty of criminal child neglect and endangerment RIGHT THERE on Days 1-31 and beyond right up until THIS day. She put her child at risk and she should NOT have been paid ONE RED CENT for it.

:truce: Then there are the fringe people, the innocent people who did nothing wrong except to have the misfortune to KNOW Casey Anthony and to be in her life as friends, lovers, and acquaintances. I do not blame THOSE people one bit for selling their story. They had a valid story that the media wanted to pay for, and were willing to pay for, and these people were NOT guilty of child neglect and child endangerment. They never knew Caylee was missing until Day 31 like the rest of us. AND some of their lives are just ruined-they have had their names dragged through the mud, by mere association. So yeah, they should do what they can to cover their lawyers, missed work and the agony that evil woman has put them through...

:furious: Then there is the immediate family. With a big fat payout (and they DID know Caylee was missing from her HOME from DAY 1) while Caylee was still missing and not ONE RED CENT put up as a reward leading to information or to her safe return? NO! They should not be allowed to profit, except insofar as that would have profitted CAYLEE. They did not give the money for Caylee's sake-they gave it ALL to the one who took her life. That should NOT be legal for them to be able to do that even though I know it is.

Don't worry ABC...I won't forget you...:blushing: The one who so generously gave money to this woman who had neglected for 31 LONG days to report her OWN child missing...:sick: