For
out-of-towners and cave dwellers, a TV news team (KSDK-NBC in St. Louis)
planned a story on school security. Given that school shootings have almost
become a growth industry, the topic is absolutely relevant. I had a great
conversation with a former student who is now a principal (in a non-affected
school), who asked if the job of a journalist is to report the news or make the
news.
Certainly
KSDK’s approach to this story did some of both. They attempted to gain access
to five different schools, succeeding once (Kirkwood High School). According to
their own and other reports, not once did the reporter ever identify himself as
a reporter, even when the school “passed” their test. In the case of KHS, the “hidden camera equipped” reporter never identified himself, even after the school had “failed.” (And fail it
did, without question.)
When
KHS called the number he had given, his voice mail claimed he was a KSDK
reporter (I could put that as my VM-message, too; well, I might have to have my
granddaughter do it for me, but you get the point), but he failed to return the
school’s follow-up calls or respond to their messages, eventually resulting in
a near hour-long lockdown and unnecessary alarm and concern for students, staff
and parents (to saw nothing of lost instruction). Imagine getting this text from your son or daughter…. Parents have
every right to be outraged with the station (and upset with the school).
Had
the station truly been interested in reporting the news and not
generating “gotcha” publicity for their news promos, had it truly been interested in improving school safety, the reporter, immediately after the school
had “failed,” could have contacted the school, identified himself as a
reporter, and followed up with school authorities about their lack of security.
That would have been a real and worthwhile story, real and worthwhile reporting, and avoided generating its
own story. At the very least he could have responded to his damn messages.
Here’s
my big issue. I am 100% certain KSDK wanted a school to fail; otherwise, they have no
story. “New at 6 – School Security Plans Working.” But once they had generated
the story and promos, they did nothing to follow up, except to defend their
approach and give a non-apology apology – “We never intended to create this
problem.” I’m sure that’s true; I’m almost equally sure they never considered, or cared
about, the possible consequences.
Kirkwood
is apparently reviewing its procedures, which, I’m sure, will result in more
locked doors and less freedom. I have trouble arguing with that, admitting that
it’s a better alternative than making the news for hosting a massacre. Still,
while I do miss the times when schools were open and welcoming, I can’t deny
that train left the station a long time ago, a sad but necessary fact of life,
even as it makes me sad to have to get “buzzed in” to Becca’s school or my previous places of employment.
Perhaps
KSDK deserves some credit if Kirkwood becomes safer because of the station’s
need to generate headlines and ratings, but it also needs to take
responsibility for creating stress on innocent students, parents, and teachers
(the administration deserves whatever stress it’s feeling) where none was
necessary. All it took was to think about someone or something besides the
story.
From one of the best school newspapers in the country, the Kirkwood High School Call....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thekirkwoodcall.com/top-stories/2014/01/17/where-ksdk-went-wrong-2/
And from St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Bill McClellan....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.stltoday.com/news/local/columns/bill-mcclellan/mcclellan-ksdk-s-school-scare-lures-viewers-but-loses-the/article_fd5dae3f-25f7-5b85-a7cf-472f68e61f39.html