General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSinclair executives trying to mollify angry anchors, but it's not working
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/4/6/1755009/-Sinclair-executives-trying-to-mollifying-angry-anchors-but-it-s-not-workingSinclair executives trying to mollify angry anchors, but it's not working
Joan McCarter
Daily Kos Staff
Friday April 06, 2018 · 3:11 PM EDT
The national firestorm over Sinclair Broadcasting's dictate to news anchors to recite verbatim an attack on fellow journalists is having the most blowback locally, where news anchors are direct targets of their viewers' ire. That's put Sinclair executives in the position of having to apologize for putting their employees in the hot seat. But they're not apologizing for mandating conservative ideological content.
In two of these conversations, anchors chided regional news directors for forcing local anchors to read the scripts. And in all three conversations, the news directors did not apologize for the content of the promotional video itself.
"The apology was for putting us in a bad spot, for making us unwilling targets," one anchor told The Daily Beast. "There is no remorse from the corporate leaders who will continue peddling their politics and quest for profits by any means necessary."
The Daily Beast talked to other anchors who were included in the now infamous Deadspin video, showing dozens of anchors reciting the promo spots in unison. They are really not happy and are still waiting for their apology from the bosses. "I'm the one taking the heat, and still no one is talking to me," one of them said. Apparently they have received an email from vice president of news Scott Livingston, who did acknowledge they're in a rough spot. "Unfortunately, you are facing the brunt of the reaction on social media," the email Daily Beast reviewed says. "That's unfortunate. I know all of you did your best in executing this promo spot and I greatly appreciate your efforts." Not exactly dripping with contrition, that.
Even for some of those few who got the apology call, it will never be enough. "Unfortunately, nothing is going to rid me of the regret and feeling like I'm a sell-out," one of them told the Daily Beast. "I wish life had do-overs."
wishstar
(5,272 posts)I can't find it on their website this morning to link, but 2 days ago I saw it posted. The Sinclair editorial attacked and accused everyone who has questioned or disagreed with their mandatory statement. In a Trumpian way, they twisted the issue around to accuse their critics of opposing fair and honest news reporting and not wanting to do anything about "fake news" and being responsible for "fake news". Disgusting.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)But, I will not post that kind of language.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)We are supposed to believe that they didn't know it was bullshit when it happened?
Merlot
(9,696 posts)and by loose their job, I mean they would break their contract and end up owning sinclar money.
Don't blame the messenger.
ooky
(8,932 posts)they could owe Sinclair mony for refusing to read politically ideological statements. Lose their jobs for refusing, yes, but they might also have a first amendment basis for a lawsuit on that as well by simply being forced to make such statements under the duress of losing their jobs if they refuse.
Tatiana
(14,167 posts)After Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. drew widespread criticism for having anchors read a statement taking aim at the integrity of other U.S. media outlets, many wondered why some of the companys journalists didnt just quit.
The short answer is the cost may be too steep. According to copies of two employment contracts reviewed by Bloomberg, some Sinclair employees were subject to a liquidated damages clause for leaving before the term of their agreement was up: one that requires they pay as much as 40 percent of their annual compensation to the company.
While they were also subject to a six-month noncompete clause and forced arbitration, three current and former Sinclair employees said it was the potential financial penalty that had the greatest impact on those thinking of quitting. Under the clause, theres a specific window of time during which employees can give notice. One current employee who requested anonymity because he wasnt authorized to speak publicly said the clauses limitations are the reason he hasnt quit. A former employee who also requested anonymity said both the noncompete and the damages clause dissuaded her at first from looking for work elsewhere.
Multiple employment lawyers said the damages clause wouldnt turn up in most employment contracts. They are pretty rarefor ordinary workers at least, said Peter Romer-Friedman, an attorney at Outten & Golden LLP, a labor law firm. But they are more common in the broadcast industry, specifically when dealing with on-air talent. The clause serves to protect companies from costs associated with replacing an anchor who suddenly leaves, for example. Yet at Sinclair, at least some employees who never appeared on television were still required to sign such contracts, the former employees said.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-03/sinclair-employees-say-their-contracts-make-it-too-expensive-to-quit
ooky
(8,932 posts)...no doubt these kind of contracts are common for quitting and I am not surprised to learn the Sinclair does it. To be clear, I was referring to the idea of refusing to read the statement but not quitting, but being fired for refusal to read the statement. If they are fired I don't know that they could be held to the penalties that are remedy for quitting.
Merlot
(9,696 posts)That's what happened to a sinclair employee in florida. sinclair suid the employee for damages for breaking their contract.
If there was a class action lawsuit on behalf of the anchors that would be awsome. But if the anchors go at it one by one, my guess is that they wouldn't get far.
ooky
(8,932 posts)they would be subject to breaking their contract. In your first post you said "lose their job" and I took that to mean firing as opposed to quitting.
is that even legal?
OldHippieChick
(2,434 posts)Constitutional rights. Depends on your price.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)RandomAccess
(5,210 posts)List of Sinclair stations by market and location is interesting. Click on the links to expand.
https://rabbitears.info//search.php?request=owner_search&owner=Sinclair&sort=state
brewens
(13,636 posts)I saw a piece they did on the Cambridge Analytical scandal and the anchor tosses out an Obama did it too line at the end. I hadn't noticed that kind of thing from them before.
Just last night they showed a clip of an old guy getting robbed and his brother coming back and clocking the guy with a wrench and running him off. Good story, and I might have picked that one too, but we're in Idaho and that I think was Illinois. I could have picked a lot of other things. What I'll be watching for is if they ever show a psycho cop abusing a citizen or something like that which would outrage RWers.
DownriverDem
(6,232 posts)They are most likely local. Tell them you will not use their companies.
djacq
(1,634 posts)LiberalFighter
(51,226 posts)And the local businesses with ads.
DownriverDem
(6,232 posts)Not ads = no station
SonofDonald
(2,050 posts)Promoting what?, lies and fake news it looks like to me.
Say goodby sinclair, you just opened a can of worms.
madaboutharry
(40,238 posts)It is easy for others to say that they should have staged a rebellion and refused to repeat the statement. Stepping back it is also easy to see how these news anchors were put between a rock and a hard place. The industry they are in is as competitive and difficult to break into as the film or music industry. Having on on air job, even in a small market, is hitting the big time. There is a lot of job insecurity and 1,000 other people waiting in line to take your job.
I don't fault them. Fearing that they would lose their jobs if the refused, they are now left with self-loathing and a loss of self-respect. Life's lessons are always hard and often unfair.
ooky
(8,932 posts)= fascist content.
Anti-democracy, anti-freedom.
ecstatic
(32,760 posts)I wish one of them would be brave enough to come forward. Dare Sinclair to fire them. I know that's asking a lot.
Also, I didn't see anyone from Atlanta reading that trash...I wonder if they only targeted small, "1 horse" towns?
dalton99a
(81,656 posts)hedda_foil
(16,376 posts)And they need to stay out front of every station and the corporate HQ, chanting, doing Interviews and carrying signs until Sinclair gives in. Like Oklahoma and West Virginia teachers. It has to be far too many key local employees to fire