Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

Do you agree that this tv anchor should have been let go?

WJLA-TV [the ABC affiliate in Washington, DC] has fired veteran anchorman Doug McKelway for a verbal confrontation this summer with the station’s news director that came after McKelway broadcast a sharply worded live report about congressional Democrats and President Obama.

Now I don't know what he said to the director..but (if this is all) reading what he broadcasted I don't see the problem..nothing to bring on confrontation..it's true

 
tnmomofive

Asked by tnmomofive at 12:57 PM on Sep. 19, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 32 (56,190 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (18)
  • Because his reporting was imbued with his personal opinions.

    I don't think the FACT of how much BP donated to Obama is personal opinion.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 2:28 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • Firing for what he said on air? Not right. Firing for what he may have said to his employer? Lacking any evidence that he was contrite and it was all his boss's fault, probably right. It says he was fired over the confrontation, not the report. No matter how much freedom the press may have, there's still a limit to what an employee can say to a supervisor and expect to keep their job.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 1:01 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • WJLA-TV fires veteran anchor Doug McKelway, cites insubordination, misconduct...
    ....has fired veteran anchorman Doug McKelway for a verbal confrontation this summer with the station’s news director
    Lord took exception to McKelway’s reporting and asked to meet with him, according to several station sources who were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive personnel matter. A shouting match between the two men ensued, leading to McKelway’s suspension, sources said…
    _____________________
    Those are from your link. I think it's pretty obvious that he got into it with his boss. As to why they were fighting about the report, the leap of logic that assumes that the report wasn't left leaning enough and that's why he was fired is unsupported. I feel that his so called "report" had a definite bias to it when he used the words "far left" and his dissertation on the "last thing Democrats want to do." cont
    stacymomof2

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 1:22 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • cont...rather than obeying journalistic standards regarding the actual reporting of a live event. All you Fox news watchers don't even recognize what journalists are supposed to do anymore. And it doesn't say that he was fired for the report anyways, he was fired for insubordination. We don't know what reputation he has within his workplace or past events that have taken place between him and his boss. He was suspended and then his contract wasn't renewed.
    stacymomof2

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 1:27 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • Real reporting does not include descriptions such as "far left" unless the people are identifying themselves that way. It does not include his opinion of "the last thing that Democrats want to do." Those are not facts. They are opinion. Do you really not see that?
    stacymomof2

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 1:54 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • .rather than obeying journalistic standards regarding the actual reporting of a live event. All you Fox news watchers don't even recognize what journalists are supposed to do anymore.

    OMG I nearly spit my rockstar out on that one.

    But how about this one

    http://bearcreekledger.com/tag/brian-glover/

    It is sooo rare that a teacher gets fired but this one did. Why?? For writing and emailing an anti Obama song from his PERSONAL EMAIL while ON HIS OWN TIME.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 2:25 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • Why? because the statement of how much BP donated to Obama is the reason he was fired. Stating facts about the annointed one is a no-no in todays journalistic standards.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 3:07 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • tnmomofive

    Comment by tnmomofive (original poster) at 12:58 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • Right I have no idea what he could have said to the director..

    However,I do not see why the director would have even confronted him over what he broadcasted..
    tnmomofive

    Comment by tnmomofive (original poster) at 1:14 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

  • Nah I een said I have no idea what the exchange was between him and the director none of us do..he could have gone hog wild for all I know..

    My only question was why the confrontation at all? It makes it sound as if the director confronted him over his broadcast..and 'far left' I still don't see why he'd be confronted for that..
    tnmomofive

    Comment by tnmomofive (original poster) at 1:38 PM on Sep. 19, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN