Edwards camp wants JOMC student story killed
Memo to John Edwards’ presidential campaign:
Don’t bully a student journalist just because you don’t like her story.
The Edwards campaign used some pretty heavy handed tactics this week after JOMC student Carla Babb posted a video story on YouTube about the fact Edwards’ campaign is headquartered in Chapel Hill’s Southern Village.
Ms. Babb produced the story for JOMC’s Carolina Week television program, but posted it on YouTube as an entry in an MTV contest. Edwards’ press staff did not like what they saw. So they called the student reporter, demanding the video be pulled. When that failed, they called JOMC Associate Professor C.A. “Charlie” Tuggle and again demanded, in a series of telephone calls, that the story be killed.
Tuggle declined to kill the story and was told it could mean any access to the campaign by UNC journalism students might be cut off. Here’s Tuggle’s account of the dust-up:
“It’s been an interesting day in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication. Officials at the John Edwards for President campaign are upset about a story one of my students did, complaining that she misrepresented the type of story she wanted to do, turning it from what Edward’s people were expecting into an attack against their candidate.
“It is, without a doubt, a tempest in a teapot. Though the story might not be what Edwards’ public relations folks were expecting and hoping for, it certainly was not, as they claim, completely unfair. Several professional media colleagues have seen the story, as has the dean of our School. All of those people see it as balanced. The Edwards camp would have us remove the story from YouTube and not air it during our scheduled Monday newscast (of Carolina Week) here in the school. We plan to do neither. Officials with the campaign have intimated that our stance jeopardizes the university’s relationship with the campaign.”
In other words, the story will air as scheduled. Meantime, it can be seen on YouTube, where before the flap it had only 195 views.
Thanks to the Edwards campaign for providing a valuable learning experience for UNC journalism students. The Carolina Week staff learned the importance of standing their ground against a disgruntled source, even when that source is a candidate for president. PR students saw firsthand how a public relations mistake can turn a small non-story into a potential national story. Very instructive. Posted by Leroy Towns
October 26th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
I am an enthusiastic John Edwards supporter, but I hope you stand your ground. Whomever it was from his campaign who pressured you to remove the young reporter’s post concerning the location of the Edwards campaign headquarters, ought to be fired. Because they don’t understand the principle behind the First Amendment. I tend to believe that the candidate himself was not directly involved in this action.
I speak as a magazine publisher myself, who has been very disappointed by the lack of follow through on the part of the Edwards press operation. We have repeatedly requested high resolution photos of the candidate for use in an upcoming story in our publication, and I even made this request in person to one of the Senator’s traveling press aides when I encountered him in Iowa. He took down my name and contact and assured me he’d been in touch. That was weeks ago and we still haven’t heard from him. His office has not returned our calls.
Given the amount of money that some of Edwards’ opponents have to spend in bombarding the airwaves with paid advertisements — especially in Iowa — I would think John’s campaign people would welcome free publicity. In fact, I felt that the young man who defended Edwards’ actions on behalf of the poor did a fine job and mitigated any criticism that was raised. So in a sense, your reporter did the Edwards campaign a favor.
So I find it especially ironic that they are now trying to censor what your student presented. I thought it was a balanced account. The reporter left it to the viewer to draw his or her own conclusions.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:48 am
I have to wonder about the credibility of the claims of any threat, given the shoddy attack made by the student “journalist”. This smacks of a smear generated by students who support another candidate, exploiting any opportunity they are presented with.
A credible journalist would have reported on any potential bias’ on the part of the student whose premise she based her report on. Is he supporting another candidate, affiliated with another campaign?
Babb’s own claim that Chapel Hill “isn’t for everyone”, given that UNC at Chapel Hill, a state university, seems oddly racist and classist to me. Perhaps Babbs feels that the town should be restricted to the wealthiest? It’s troubling to see such an important issue as ending poverty distorted through the lens of a shallow young woman who seems to be looking for something to springboard her career in journalism. A look through her other “journalistic” endeavors shows that she has never reported on poverty, or on anything other than the most shallow subjects.
Are we supposed to restrict ones ability or intent on issues based on their addresses? Does Babb believe those who live in poor neighborhoods can not speak out on corporate and other excess and corruption?
I’m sure she will make an idea pretty face on camera, spouting whatever propaganda she’s paid to promote, but she’s not a journalist.. she lacks the ethical standards one needs to be deserving of the title.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
As a follow-up to my post yesterday, I hope that the students involved will learn several lessons here. The first is that the Edwards campaign mishandled this matter from Day One and created a controvesy where none should exist.
Second, James Dillard’s criticism of the Edwards headquarters location was specious at best, as if a politician has to operate from modest surroundings in order to demonstrate genuine concern for the less fortunate. Upon further reflection, I DO think Ms. Babbs was remiss in not examining more closely Dillard’s motives and possible affiliation with a rival campaign. However, I think she did a good job of allowing representatives of both sides to speak.
Third, I hope students and others notice that the New York Times piece gave voice to Dillard’s bizarre criticism WITHOUT mentioning the rebuttal by the articulate Edwards campaign worker whom Mrs. Babbs interviewed. Was this media bias or just incompetence on the part of Jim Rutenberg of the NY Times? You decide.
Unfortunately, by making Edwards’ office location an issue, it plays into the hands of critics who have been denouncing John because of the so-called “$400 haircut” (most of which was travel expense charged by the barber; Romney paid hundreds to a Beverly Hills salon for make-up but that was not well publicized). And it reinforces the criticism that Edwards can’t possibly be sincere about caring for the poor and middle-class because he lives in a fabulous home — a notion belied by FDR and the Kennedys, who had great wealth but also compassion for those farther down the economic ladder.
Just as the journalists/professor involved are worried about being manipulated by the Edwards campaign, they also need to be worried about having been exploited for the purposes of causing a negative impression to be left of John Edwards by Mr. Dillard and/or those whom he represents.
October 28th, 2007 at 10:11 am
Whatever “demands” might mean, it appears those “demands” are undocumented hear-say. I wouldn’t think it unreasonable, given the purported purpose of the student journalist’s request didn’t match the real intent, that the Edwards campaign might well have been upset. Sorta like asking a Garage owner for an interview about auto repair and then focusing your report on the garage location and and subtly implying he must over-charge because it’s in a nice lation.
Seems to me the J School needs to add INTEGRITY 101
October 29th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
It’s not really fair to blame the ethics training in the J School, or the reporting training.
I am a senior in the school, and I can tell you from experience that ethics are drilled into the head of every aspiring reporter, advertiser, pr rep, and photographer the school produces.
The problem with this story is that it was intended to be student work for display on a student television show, and as a way for all of the students involved, not just Carla, to “springboard her career in journalism,” as Jenny Perry said. The Edwards campaign’s response is what turned this into the story.
Leroy Towns rightly points out the number of hits on YouTube. Carla has other videos posted that have similarly low viewership. We actually had a discussion about this video in Thursday’s class. Were it not for Edward’s press people, we would have never seen the story.