ABC GMA Crew Sends Local News Crew “where you’re supposed to be”

Lenslinger

Well-known member
Several weeks ago I was shooting a morning live shot at the scene of an overnight tornado strike. Just before our first hit, an ABC crew pulled up, (sat truck, producer, tricked-out SUV). After exchanging pleasantries, they drove past our camera position and set up INSIDE the gas station parking lot in the distance. They then threw up enough HMI's to make that broken Citgo visible from Space. I was tempted to horn in on their cinema, but it was (way) out of my cable's reach and I didn;t think I could take them ALL if it came to fisticuffs. Besides, there were plenty of flipped-over minivans lying around for backdrop eye-candy. I do remember being surprised how far INTO the wreckage they set their gear, but I guess that's how you roll when you're Network. Probably made for a wicked shot.

I never seriously considered invading their set - but had it been closer quarters or slimmer pickin's, I may have been forced to suck up their light. Still don't think I would have bum-rushed their show, though.
 

Lensmith

Member
Well...after seeing the video...I realized I know members of that crew.

Talked to them this afternoon to find out what the heck went on. Yes, this is only the side of the network crew. Not the local reporter or photog. But...I'll tell you what they told me.

The crew arrived at 3:30 in the morning. They got permission from the owner of the gas station to set up and do all the GMA hits from that specific location.

They set up for the live hits with full network lighting, including sat truck. A very rushed job. Champion was running on no sleep as well. There were audio issues. Up until the very last minute all on the crew were involved on getting lighting and shot set as well as trouble shooting the audio problems. A difficult set up in a difficult location.

The local crew shows up an hour or so later. The indication I got was the reporter wanted to be right where the GMA crew was. Insisting that she had every right to be right in that exact spot as they did...even though they were late and the lighting and background were set to go. Just audio problems still being addressed and calls from New York coming in constantly to find out how soon and "if" there was going to be a shot.

Full disclosure...though I won't pass along his name...I've known the photog since he was 18 years old. He's been a long time network freelancer. "Long time" in the sense that he's been freelance more than twenty years. This following a ten year plus staff career. He is probably one of the nicest, most patient people I've ever known. I've never seen him lose it, be rude, or even get pushy in a scrum. He'll hold his ground but never throw an elbow...unlike me.

Anyway...the point is this guy is a long time pro. He talked with the reporter who had a major attitude. Why? Even he couldn't understand it since there was plenty of storm damage to go around. For some reason, some people think they have to prove something when they are around network crews. Yes, there are jerk network crews. But there are also plenty of small market people who act out because it's "their town" and they feel they have to prove it in some form or another.

The photographer, producer, even the soundie all took turns trying to calmly explain to the reporter this was their location that they'd staked out and set up on, again, with direct permission from the owner of the property. They were not trying to keep the local FOX crew away from anything. Like many of us, they assumed they'd use the background they'd lit up and do their own shot without interfering with the job the network guys were in the process of accomplishing.

Sam Champion was busy getting his info together to go live when he looked up and saw the local FOX crew headed their way. He realized they were actually going to come "on set" and that's when he held up his clip board and said what he said.

I too thought he was pretty low key addressing this FOX crew. I don't think I would have been as "soft". The proof is in the video. The words are there to hear. What Champion was referring to was the location to the side that the crew could still do their shot from when talking about "over where you're supposed to be".

The network crew felt the photog was "just following orders". He did what he was told to do...by whomever. The net crew said he was chiming in to support the reporter during the earlier "discussion" about the crew coming on set during their live shot but...the reporter was, without a doubt, the pushy one trying to run the show. Though...I've never understood a photog who has no spine, doing something that is wrong just because someone tells him to do it...but that's just me.

The video was not only posted on the FOX station web site, but because it involved Sam Champion, also ended up on other sites like TMZ and even the KOKH facebook page.

I have no sympathy for the local crew. Yes, I've only heard one side of the story, but with that story and seeing the tape, I have a pretty good idea who was in the wrong here. If the network crew had really wanted to push it, they could have asked the owner of the property to kick the local FOX crew out but that was not something they were interested in doing...even though they could have since it was private property and the net crew was operating with permission of the owner and the FOX crew was not. The net crew was there to do their job...and they did. The local crew seems to me to have decided the story they were sent to cover was not as important as trying to push their way around to prove some personal agenda.

In my eyes, the FOX crew are fools and are a perfect example of the bad element of television news we all know exists at some small level in all places.

Feel free to throw stones my way but I figured I'd share what I learned right from the scene instead of playing guessing games about people and a video I didn't know. In this case...I happened to know several of the crew members very well and can't help but take their side in this issue after hearing them explain what happened to me first hand.

By the way...this was not the first time this crew has worked with Sam Champion and they said the same thing about Champion that Icarus did. A great guy to work with even under stress. I think the video even proves what a patient guy he is..even if many of us may not have been as "polite" with interlopers as he was.

< note: edited for stupid spelling mistakes >
 
Last edited:

b-roll

Administrator
Staff member
John,

Thanks for the insight.

From that perspective, the story makes more sense. I'm not passing judgment one way or the other, but I would like to hear the other side as well.

If someone knows the local crew - tell us what happened from their side of the story.

kev

p.s. Strangely, the majority of the posts on the FORUM support the Network Crew... while the comments popping up on the blog story (http://www.b-roll.net/today/2010/05/abc-gma-crew-sends-local-news-crew-where-youre-supposed-to-be/) support the local crew...
 

eb

Well-known member
If the local crew had a specific reason to get a picture of something extraordinary at that network location, then maybe they might have made reference to it. But she didn't make any reference to any reason they were moving into network territory.

If there was something particularly extraordinary about that location, then perhaps the network crew could have realized it was of interest to the local crew as well... and backed up a bit in their set up.... to share the unique content....

But none of that is apparant. Looks foolish. Both reporter and photographer need to take responsibility for making their live shot be "the story" and take away from the real story... the devastation and the people who live and work there.
 

punky cameraman

Well-known member
i was watching (ABC)that morning, and if memory serves, several people
took shelter in the mini-mart that was destroyed.

that makes it news in my book, it "may" have been one of the only interesting
"survivors" style stories in that area

if that was the case, ABC can't own the story and the location like its a set.

forget about the talent and the photogs, the field producers are the
ones pushing the limits ... in my experience

all that said, looks like the local crew was very inexperienced

punky
 

adam

Well-known member
Regardless of the back story (which doesn't sound good for the local crew) they're there to serve the viewer (especially on a big local story) and that shot did nothing but advance a weird vendetta that served only the 2 or 3 people from the local shop. The end did not justify the means.
 

photogguy

Well-known member
i was watching (ABC)that morning, and if memory serves, several people
took shelter in the mini-mart that was destroyed.

that makes it news in my book, it "may" have been one of the only interesting
"survivors" style stories in that area

if that was the case, ABC can't own the story and the location like its a set.

forget about the talent and the photogs, the field producers are the
ones pushing the limits ... in my experience

all that said, looks like the local crew was very inexperienced

punky
You're right. No one media entity can "own" a location. But the rule "first come, first served" applies.

I've shot many live shots where I knew all the local stations would be live from. I made sure I arrived before them so that I could get the primo spot. I've never had arguments saying that I had to move my tripod.

Conversely, I've arrived later than the other guys, and sucked it up and took a lesser tripod location.

In this situation, the network was there first. They get the good spot. Other will have to settle for other tripod placements.

And then, to actually move into the location where the network crew already was, live on the air...that's just arrogant stupidity.
 

Shootblue

Well-known member
Lensmith...someone who works at the fox station posted this story a bit ago as the reason for all of this happening...which kind of makes sense if you didn't know that they net crew was having audio problems...and I'm sure the stress of it all probably was causing them to be a bit less than friendly at times.

"So I finally found out what really happened. Gma showed up and took over the area, and weren't even doing live shots! Went on being rude to all the local stations who were actually going live to get the story out to our viewers. So our brave camera man said screw it I'm going to get the best shot no matter what. And Sam champion wasn't anywhere near by..and he chose to get in our way when we went live. Which his field producer later claimed he didn't know we were live at the time. Really??"
 

Chicago Dog

Well-known member
"So I finally found out what really happened. Gma showed up and took over the area, and weren't even doing live shots! Went on being rude to all the local stations who were actually going live to get the story out to our viewers. So our brave camera man said screw it I'm going to get the best shot no matter what. And Sam champion wasn't anywhere near by..and he chose to get in our way when we went live. Which his field producer later claimed he didn't know we were live at the time. Really??"
I don't believe a single word out of that entire paragraph.

I think I have an idea who the Fox photog was...
 

Wheatstone Bridge

Well-known member
Well done Jonny D.

Very well done John, great report. Thanks for the in depth info. I've heard that the local reporter is a very obnoxious person.
 

Shootblue

Well-known member
Well, the person who I was told this from has now since unfriended me after her mouth-breathing, inbred friend was being all blindly apologetic for Fox 25 and I called bull$hit. Probably the kind of viewer that stations wants after reading some of their recent promotables...yikes...it's like news without class.
 

Tom Servo

Well-known member
i was watching (ABC)that morning, and if memory serves, several people
took shelter in the mini-mart that was destroyed.

that makes it news in my book, it "may" have been one of the only interesting
"survivors" style stories in that area

if that was the case, ABC can't own the story and the location like its a set.
Minimarts are large 3-dimensional objects. It's not like we're talking about a 1-entrance alleyway with the network crew blocking the only view of it. If your story is the minimart, and the network is set up on one side, go to one of the other 3 sides, or a little farther down on the first side. Watching the video again, it's really pretty apparent that this local crew was looking for a fight, which shouldn't be done at all, but certainly not live.

I think I have an idea who the Fox photog was...
That guy's camera would have ended up shoved down his throat if he pulled that crap with me. The apology is nice and all, but the fact that he thought it was OK to begin with marks him as an almost un-fixable jackass.
 

punky cameraman

Well-known member
tome servo,
comparing the GMA liveshot i saw and the clip above i think
the roof was off the mini mart and the walls were still standing
so there may have only been one access point
if the victims were hiding next to the refrigerators (according to GMA)
the shot you would want would be of the inside of the market.
also a big heap of cans chips and beef jerky makes a dam good shot

that said, if the ten person infotainment crew owns it, your out of luck.

i guess the "teachable moment" here is that if you behave like a jerk out at
one of these things you may be making a career altering choice.
"see http://idouche.net/"

another constructive idea to discuss here..... "first come, first serve"
is this really the way it works when network crews are involved?

punky
 

eb

Well-known member
Just for the sake of my point.... lets say the network crew had set up "surrounding" the critical content - the exact place where something big happened... their location was the only visual place to show and tell the story about what happened at that location.

I would think the local crew might have made reference to that. "Here's the place where the drama unfolded.... but a network crew has set up their live shot right in front of it.... behind them is the place where the action happened...."

But the local crew did not make any reference to anything like that. If they had, then it would have been clear to the viewer why they were in the network "area."

If the network crew knew there was a dramatic visual area where something happened... and then set up in such a way to restrict others from even shooting it... I don't know about that. Sure, if they got there at 3 a.m. and nobody else was there... then I guess that means its "all theirs" to surround. I wouldn't like that if it were a local competitor. Usually we would set up far enough back, so everyone would have "Some" access to the major visuals for a live shot. Does that make sense? Nobody likes it when another station "hogs" a live location... that has the main visuals....especially at a major news story... Maybe networks do that? Maybe networks are allowed to do that? Again, if that was the case, then the local crew should have just pointed the facts out to their viewers instead of making it look like they were the fools.

I don't know any of the facts, so I'm just stipulating.
 

adam

Well-known member
I think the "first come, first served" is perfectly fine. The Fox local will probably not make the mistake of showing up late (meaning not absurdly early) to what was, apparently, a must have live spot.
I've been on both sides of the coin on both sides of the coin... meaning network and early, network and late, local and early and local and late. Frankly, the locals have the advantage, they can get someone out before the next flight from NYC/CHI/LA and stake out a position overnight. Whether or not they take that advantage is another question.
I'm guessing that was a learning experience for that affiliate if not the market.

It's a pretty good reminder for all us local guys in this forum. If your shop is going to be sending you to a must have live shot, make darn sure you'll "have" it when you get there.
 

code20photog

Well-known member
My issue mainly lies in the attitude of the "You know where you belong" comment and everything behind it. I think we've all seen too many times where a story happens in a small market and a national crew that wouldn't have been able to find the town 2 days earlier without a GPS, a Sherpa and a trail of bread crumbs back to the closest Starbucks, show up and take over like they own the place. I saw it in my days in a small market. The other 362 days of the year, no one in NY (Or Atlanta) cares about anything that happens in our little DMA. But some kid shoots up a school, and for three days the network rolls in with their big satellite trucks, 10 person crews, and all of a sudden, the local guys are invisible and treated like dirt.

I work side by side with network crews quite often, and for the most part, they are all great people. But all it takes is one incident like this, to typecast both sides.
 

photogguy

Well-known member
My issue mainly lies in the attitude of the "You know where you belong" comment and everything behind it.

Actually, I take that comment to mean they (the two crews) had a discussion before that live shot about where the network was already, and that the locals would have to set up in a different spot. Which, I might add, is reasonable attitude for the first crew to set up their gear to have, network or not.

I don't take that comment as condescending. I take it as, "we're here, you're there, why are you moving back over here".
 

Tv Shooter

Well-known member
Being in Norman at the time, and catching the tornado that hit Lake Thunderbird, there was plenty of damage to do a live shot from. There was zero reason to walk over to the GMA set...no reason than to try and "prove a point" or something.

Yes when the big story happens, the network crews roll into town. No we don't cover your city everyday. That has absolutely nothing to do with this situation. It has to do with professional courtesy.

I've never seen a national crew do something like this....for that matter I've never seen this happen ever. The GMA area was set up hours earlier...they staked out their shot and had the situation been reversed, GMA would have simply found another shot. That's why they showed up at 3am....that's why I finished live shots at 11pm and showed up at my location not far from the GMA shot at 3am for my live shots. That's what we do....get there early and set up.

Times when I have showed up and a local was already set up, we just found another shot...no pissing, moaning or whining. Sorry-the Fox photog, regardless of what the reporter wanted should simply have walked the other way. That's what I did that same day when Early show was set up to my left....before I got there...I just went to the right. No big deal, they got there 30 minutes before me and it's just the way it is.

When you show up at a scene, if someone else is there you set up around them , not try and horn in on their set.
 
Top