Strange Unethical Reporting Story

[Ksyrup]

First, there's the one about the LA mayor and the chick from Telemundo, now this story from Chicago.

hxxp://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_191075534.html


Quick facts - wife goes missing in April, one of NBC's local reporters befriends the family (apparently the missing wife's sisters) and is caught on tape in a bathing suit with her kids at the missing family's house. I assume at this point the wife's family doesn't believe the husband did it, but still, the circumstances are bizarre, to say the least. I mean, the dude could be a murderer, and she's not only breaching ethics to socialize with him, but she takes her kids along?! Anyway, the video got out and she "left the station."

What the hell is wrong with these people?

[clintl]

After reading the article, I don't really see what she did was that wrong. It's certainly not bizarre by any stretch of the imagination. There were other people there at the pool party - why would you assume she's putting her kids in any danger? Is the husband a suspect? There's no hint of that in the article.

[cthomer5000]

Your writeup is insanely confusing to me.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Your writeup is insanely confusing to me.

One could even call it awkward.

[Ksyrup]

I was doing my best Flasch impression.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by clintl

After reading the article, I don't really see what she did was that wrong.

Generally speaking, I believe it would be violation of the "thou shalt not party with people you're covering" rule.

Plus there's already growing scuttlebutt that this wasn't the first social occasion involving the reporter and the husband of the missing woman.

[Maple Leafs]

It sounds like there's two levels to this story. On the one hand, you have the "don't socialize with people you're covering" issue, which is important but not overly interesting. On the other hand, you have the thinly veiled "is she sleeping with him" storyline which is clearly what they want to talk about but are trying not to. That's where the sizzle is.

[MikeVic]

So she killed the wife?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by clintl

After reading the article, I don't really see what she did was that wrong. It's certainly not bizarre by any stretch of the imagination. There were other people there at the pool party - why would you assume she's putting her kids in any danger? Is the husband a suspect? There's no hint of that in the article.

If you look at the article headlines on the side, yes, I'd say the husband is a suspect. And I'm not sure I understand what is NOT unethical about a reporter socializing with people in a news story she is covering, let alone one with these facts.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Generally speaking, I believe it would be violation of the "thou shalt not party with people you're covering" rule.

Plus there's already growing scuttlebutt that this wasn't the first social occasion involving the reporter and the husband of the missing woman.

I agree with that part - it was an ethical violation. But it seems to me the appropriate remedy is to assign the story to someone else and give her a reprimand, rather than have her resign over it. I suspect it's not that uncommon for reporters to form a bond with the families of missing persons under these kinds of circumstances.

[Ksyrup]

NOW some of you are getting it!

There's the ethical issue, and then there's the circumstances of (a) whether the husband was involved with his wife's disappearance, (b) what is the extent of the reporter's involvement with the husband, and (c) is there any possible connection between their relationship and the wife's disappearance.

She may very well be guilty only of an ethical breach, but now she has brought the rest of the questions on because of it.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

If you look at the article headlines on the side, yes, I'd say the husband is a suspect. And I'm not sure I understand what is NOT unethical about a reporter socializing with people in a news story she is covering, let alone one with these facts.

I didn't see those before.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by clintl

I suspect it's not that uncommon for reporters to form a bond with the families of missing persons under these kinds of circumstances.

Not entirely uncommon I would agree.

But "forming an emotional bond" is short of "taking your kids over to the house of the man who remains the most likely suspect to date in the disappearance of his estranged wife."

And if you can't stop short of that mark then you're probably in the wrong business.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Not entirely uncommon I would agree.

But "forming an emotional bond" is short of "taking your kids over to the house of the man who remains the most likely suspect to date in the disappearance of his estranged wife."

And if you can't stop short of that mark then you're probably in the wrong business.

As I said already, I hadn't seen those articles yet that suggest the husband is a suspect. The original article Ksyrup posted does not really suggest that.

[Ksyrup]

The other thing that makes it strange, to me at least, is that despite her husband being a suspect, the wife's sisters came to the support of the reporter. The whole thing is bizarre.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

The other thing that makes it strange, to me at least, is that despite her husband being a suspect, the wife's sisters came to the support of the reporter. The whole thing is bizarre.

I was scratching my head over that bit too.

[clintl]

Let's say they don't believe the husband did it. You yourself stated that you assumed that in the original post. And let's say they believe the reporter has genuinely been helpful. Why wouldn't they come to her defense?

[Ksyrup]

Then I'd say they are trusting beyond what's good for them. This may all be innocent, I don't know (unethical in terms of her job, of course...). But the circumstances are very strange. That was my point to begin with. He hasn't been cleared, no one knows how or why the wife disappeared but he was her "estranged" husband, a reporter covering the story decided to go over to his house with her kids to have a pool party, and the wife's sisters are fine with it.

[Ksyrup]

Looking at some of those articles, another bizarre part of this story is that the husband filed for sole custody of the children a few weeks after his wife disappeared, despite there not being any issue over custody with the wife's family.


"In court documents, Lisa's attorney argued that granting Craig sole custody would have negatively affected Lisa's parental rights, at a time when questions remain about her disappearance. He also noted that on the date Lisa disappeared she signed and mailed documents seeking to have Craig forcibly evicted from the home they shared in Plainfield.

In the documents she claimed that Craig's behavior towards her both alone and in the presence of the children was cruel, inconsiderate, domineering and verbally abusive."

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Then I'd say they are trusting beyond what's good for them. This may all be innocent, I don't know (unethical in terms of her job, of course...). But the circumstances are very strange. That was my point to begin with. He hasn't been cleared, no one knows how or why the wife disappeared but he was her "estranged" husband, a reporter covering the story decided to go over to his house with her kids to have a pool party, and the wife's sisters are fine with it.

I could see your point if it was just him and her. But there were other people at the party. And perhaps she has been socializing with the sisters, too. The families probably know quite a bit more about the dynamics of the situation than outsiders do. Or, alternatively, maybe they don't know about the other visits. But I think it's pretty ridiculous if being at pool party in and of itself has somehow become a scandalous activity.

[Ksyrup]

The fact that she went there at all, given her position, is the entire reason for any other questions about the situation.

[rkmsuf]

I think he's gonna pork her.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

The fact that she went there at all, given her position, is the entire reason for any other questions about the situation.

I agree that she committed an ethical breach and used bad judgement. However, I don't think that what she did is "bizarre", and I think there have been some things posted here that are entirely unreasonable suspicions given the facts that I've read so far. Especially this one:

(c) is there any possible connection between their relationship and the wife's disappearance

There's no evidence that she even knew the family prior to the disappearance, and the great likelihood is that she didn't. And in the absence of any contrary evidence, that's a pretty absurd question to be asking.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think he's already porking her.

Fixed that for you
(or for me anyway)

I have a sneaking suspicion that this guy might be both cocky & funny.
And possibly even hits the long ball now & then.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

The fact that she went there at all, given her position, is the entire reason for any other questions about the situation.

Doing a little digging here, it seems that this is the reporter's m.o.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/463211,...eder11.article

Originally Posted by passage from article

Throughout her 11 years at the station, Jacobson has been known as an aggressive reporter who ingratiates herself with sources and sometimes employs questionable methods to get stories. Though she was a lightning rod for rumors, her bosses generally looked the other way and praised her for bringing them the scoops.

I don't really have sympathy for nor outrage against anybody involved--but it does sound like a situation where the parties benefitted from questionable methods until public outcry and paper trail (or fear thereof) caused one or more of them to get burned...

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I was thinking this already before I read the last post before mine. It sounded more like she was trying to get the scoop -- like behind the scenes stuff -- on the story by befriending the family. So, rather than being unethical in that it would shade her story to make the husband or family look good, but instead unethical to the family by being deceptive in appearing to be a friend. Kind of like she was being undercover. It may look like she is "socializing" with the family when instead she is undercover to get the scoop.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I think he's gonna pork her.

I don't think he's going to pork her Russ.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

I don't think he's going to pork her Russ.

He's got his hands on her tits right there at the pool.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

By the way, isn't the video an "invasion of privacy." Publication of unauthorized video or photos of someone at their home (where there is an expectation of privacy even outside) I thought was illegal, at least enough for civil liability. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought "naughty" celebs use this all the time to stop publication of embarrasing photos (as opposed to being on the beach or a hotel).

[MrBigglesworth]

Don't reporters, especially political and sports reporters, socialize with the people they are covering all the time?

[Ksyrup]

Looks like this story is bringing out the best in everybody involved...



This means war
Gloves are off in fight between old television rivals at NBC5, CBS2

July 12, 2007
BY ROBERT FEDER Sun-Times Columnist
A six-minute piece of videotape shot over a backyard fence not only torpedoed the career of WMAQ-Channel 5 reporter Amy Jacobson.

It also was the opening shot in what could become all-out war between two television titans.

In choosing to air selected parts of a tape showing a swimsuit-clad Jacobson and her two kids around Craig Stebic's pool, WBBM-Channel 2 broke a longstanding tradition in Chicago.

With rare exception, stations have adhered to a gentleman's (and gentlewoman's) agreement not to report on the foibles and failings of one another.
So when a Diann Burns charges the builder of her multimillion-dollar manse with racism or a Marion Brooks is forced to testify in court about her affair with the former mayor of Atlanta, other TV newsrooms take a pass.

Not so on Monday when Joe Ahern, president and general manager of CBS-owned Channel 2, approved airing a misleading and innuendo-filled version of the tape that led to Jacobson's firing.

It was an unmistakable shot across the bow at NBC-owned Channel 5 and its president and general manager, Larry Wert.

Wert and Ahern have a personal history that goes back to their early careers together in the sales department of ABC-owned WLS-Channel 7. They've always been friendly rivals.

But after what was described as a contentious shouting match between them on the phone Tuesday, the "friendly" part could be inoperative for a while.

Now before you jump to the conclusion that this really is all about ratings, consider this: On Tuesday night, when Channel 2 led its newscast with an almost giddy report on Jacobson's ouster, the station still finished dead last with a paltry 2.2 rating.

[Crim]

Crim likes ouster and paltry.

[Ksyrup]

PLAINFIELD, Illinois (AP) -- An estranged husband of a suburban Chicago woman missing for more than two months was named a "person of interest" by police who said they fear she was a victim of foul play.

Craig Stebic, the last person to report seeing Lisa Stebic on April 30, has "offered only minimal assistance to detectives" and twice refused to let investigators talk to their children, a police chief said.

The couple was going through a divorce, but they still lived together with their two children. On the day she disappeared, Lisa Stebic had mailed a petition seeking to remove Craig Stebic from their home.

The case made headlines this week when a local television reporter was fired after video surfaced of her in a swimsuit near the pool of Stebic's home. Watch how the news gatherer became the news »

Amy Jacobson has said she was just aggressively pursuing a source on her day off.

At a news conference, Plainfield Police Chief Donald Bennett said Craig Stebic has refused to participate in any of the searches organized by his wife's family or let police talk to his children, ages 10 and 12.

"Police have logged thousands of hours in this investigation and have pursued every viable lead," Bennett said. "Unfortunately, Mr. Stebic had denied investigators the crucial opportunity to conduct a thorough, in-person interview with his children."

The children were among the last people to see their mother, Bennett said, and authorities believe they may have "valuable information that will assist in the investigation."

There has been no activity on Lisa Stebic's credit cards, checking account or cell phone since her disappearance and police have found no signs that she left the house "of her own free will," Bennett said.

Friends and family members told police she never would have abandoned her children, and authorities are "now focusing on the scenario that she is most likely the victim of foul play," Bennett said.

Stebic told a reporter who approached his spacious 2-story home about 35 miles southwest of Chicago: "You know I can't talk to you guys. Call my lawyer."

His divorce attorney Dion Davi said he has counseled Stebic not to allow the children to be questioned and that the youngsters already talked to authorities a day or two after their mother's disappearance.

"There does not appear to be any new information upon which to question them," Davi said.

The attorney said his client is trying to make sure his children have as normal a summer as possible.

Noting his client is "as strong as he can be," Davi said: "Craig maintains the statements he has always stated from day one. He is innocent of anything that has happened with Lisa."

In the divorce case, Lisa Stebic had accused her husband of being "unnecessarily relentless, cruel, inconsiderate, domineering and verbally abusive." In May, police carried out a search warrant on the couple's home and vehicles, but a judge sealed its contents.

Stebic, whose 38th birthday was in May, had worked her normal shift in a nearby elementary school cafeteria on the day of her disappearance and was home when her children arrived from school.

Craig Stebic has said that he saw his wife leave the house carrying only her cell phone and purse. He reported her missing the next morning.

[Esquared1]

My friend and founder of The Beachwood Reporter appeared on CNN's "Realiable Sources" this morning regarding this story. Steve Rhodes has been writing heavily regarding this.


As a noted former reporter for Newsweek and Chicago Magazine, he covered the unethical methods of Jacobson, but at the end, could not help making a slight poke of others in the media. The host asked "Does Jacobson (the fired reporter) work in Chicago again?" Steve reponded "Perhaps at the Fox station."

For those still interested in the story, or hearing about the ethics involved, check it out at The Beachwood Reporter. Follow the link to "The Papers Archive" on the left bar.

[MrBigglesworth]

I don't think this would have been much of a big deal at all if it hadn't involved a blond woman in a bathing suit.

[Ksyrup]

She isn't all that pretty, so I disagree with that. I think it would have been a big deal if it involved members of the opposite sex, regardless.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

She isn't all that pretty, so I disagree with that.

By model standards maybe not, but by real life standards? This is the kind of story thing that always gives the story an extra jolt in the media.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I don't think this would have been much of a big deal at all if it hadn't involved a blond woman in a bathing suit.

Disagree.

A brunette hottie in a thong would have gotten the same reaction.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

By model standards maybe not, but by real life standards? This is the kind of story thing that always gives the story an extra jolt in the media.

By the shots of her wet, in her bathing suit. Not quite the same.

[ThunderingHERD]

This is intolerable. The public needs to have confidence in their source for missing-white-woman news.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Esquared1

My friend and founder of The Beachwood Reporter appeared on CNN's "Realiable Sources" this morning regarding this story. Steve Rhodes has been writing heavily regarding this.