SportsShooter.com - Reporter Abused and Assaulted by Campaign Hack

	London \| ON \| Canada \| Posted: 12:54 PM on 01.15.10
	->> Mike : " The only thing I see is the guy helping him up." Really ? So the bully apologized for being a Good Samaritan, right ?

Eric Canha, Photographer

Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 1:20 PM on 01.15.10

->> Tom political views aside. I too watched the video and even searched youtube and watched other videos shot from a second angle. What CAUSED the trip was not caught on tape. At least not to the point that Ed Hochuli would reverse the ruling on the sidewalk of incidental contact.

.....
2. So you need a credential to ask a political candidate a question on the sidewalk now ?
.....

You're not really that naive? You do realize that we are talking about a campaign with major national implications, right? Whichever ass wins will get to wag the whole dog until the mid term elections. Given the incredible weight that this one off cycle election holds I'm surprised that anyone can get within 50 yards of either candidate without passing security checks.

Again I'm not partisan one way or another.

Mike Janes, Photographer

	Attica \| NY \| USA \| Posted: 2:11 PM on 01.15.10
	->> Actually I WILL take it back - I did not see the long version before posting and you can clearly see he gave the old hockey check into the fence (as you can hear the "reporter" hitting it after). I was judging JUST off the short version and the photo where you didn't see that.

Geoff Miller, Photographer

Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 2:19 PM on 01.15.10

->> Jim,

John McCormack had a credential and displayed it to the hack, though he resisted Michael Meehan's efforts to snatch it from him. In the video he refers to it was a "Congressional Fast Pass" (members of the DC press can shed more light on this).

If you watch this expanded video, you can get a better sense of what happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGyIVstNTa8&feature=related

1) McCormack is in the press group waiting for Coakley to exit the DC fundraiser.
2) As Coakley is asked questions by the press, McCormack throws out a follow up question about Coakley's statement in her last debate about there being no more terrorists in Afghanistan.
3) Coakley ignores the question and making some general comments about the campaign.
4) Coakley walk away with the press in tow.
5) Meehan, knowing that Coakley's "no terrorists" remark is a potential "Poland" moment for his client move alongside McCormack. No doubt to make sure that he doesn't get near enough to ask his question again.
6) As they near the metal barricade, you can see a hand and arm extend outward at waist level a second before McCormack falls. It would appear that McCormack was likely "guided" into the barricade in an effort to slow him down.
7) Meehan, who I doubt tried to go as far as knocking him down, plays the nice guy and helps him up.
8) Meehan then starts demanding to know who McCormack is and continues to try and block his path.
9) McCormack show his credential and resists Meehan's efforts to snatch it away.

Eric, your right, this is nothing new and can be expected at times. Here in Michigan in the last months of Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick's time in office members of his secrity detail were known to "help" members of the media asking tough questions walk into walls, and other similar objects.

Walt Middleton, Photographer, Photo Editor

Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 3:22 PM on 01.15.10

->> My first impression is that I'm impressed with the reporters restraint... Personaly when someone invades my space in that manner (read personal assult) my first reaction would have been to put that person on the ground... Albeit... restraint is the better part of vallor I know...

But, if I was knocked down and then what looked like a forceful patdown without that person identifying themselves as law enforcement... Lets just say I would have been through Meehan a little faster than McCormack was...

Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer

McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 5:34 PM on 01.15.10

->> Tom,

The tape doesn't show a "bully".

In this day of whack jobs and threats an unidentified man chasing a candidate is cause for concern by security and staffers alike.

When it comes to suspicious behavior it matters a lot where someone, and I dare not call them "reporters", comes from. Someone from a blatantly political web site with an obvious agenda doesn't deserve the same respect as someone working for a real news organization.

Viewing the reference video it looks as though the person tripped of their own accord and not through the intervention of anyone.

The only sources for the story appear on BigGovernment.Com appear to be, wait for it, BigGovernment.Com and the Weekly Standard. Therefore I consider the item poorly sourced. Your standards may not be as high.

Stan Cochrane, Photographer

Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 5:56 PM on 01.15.10

->> Then what your saying Jim is, that Black Panthers holding sticks at polling places don't deserve the same respect as registered pollster's working during national elections? Why were they not a concern? The same ones who are yet to be prosecuted. I love your typical double standards.

"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under."
H.L. Mencken

Again, you don't know where I stand.......enjoy the rest of the debate.

Don Kelly, Photographer

	Charlotte \| NC \| USA \| Posted: 5:59 PM on 01.15.10
	->> Eric, I like the Ed Hochuli reference ....

Geoff Miller, Photographer

Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 6:23 PM on 01.15.10

->> Jim,

Interesting... asking a politician an uncomfortable question is now "suspicious behavior".

"Someone from a blatantly political web site with an obvious agenda doesn't deserve the same respect as someone working for a real news organization." So then, you'd be similarly OK with someone from, say Sarah Palin's entourage manhandling a reporter from Rolling Stone, or say The New Republic if it became clear that they wanted to ask Palin a question about an awkward statement that she'd made about foreign relations (pick one)?

And after watching the video that shows Meehan taking up position behind McCormack after his initial attempt at asking her his question, trailing him as Coakley and the rest of the press pack move down the sidewalk, moving along side McCormack as they approach the barricade, sticking his arm out and appearing to make contact with the side of McCormack just prior to his running into the barrier, walking past McCormack, and then turning back to suddenly come to his aid and start his interogation of McCormack... you still think that McCormack was just being a klutz... well, it's a free country (well, I guess it has been for the last year, anyway). I think most people would agree that Meehan saw an opportunity to use the barrier as a "pick" to give McCormack the brush off, and it didn't quite go as planned.

Is this a "big deal"? No. It's not the first time a member of the press (be they recognized by you or not) has been roughed up by a campaign operative who doesn't like the questions being ask... nor will it be the last. But it's not "nothing" either. And to me it doesn't matter if the dude asking the question is from Weekly Standard or The Huffington Post.

Tom Szczerbowski, Photographer

London | ON | Canada | Posted: 6:24 PM on 01.15.10

->> Jim,

1. "I dare not call them 'reporters' " -- I don't think it's a stretch to call The Weekly Standard a reputable publication, whether you agree with their view of the world or not. They've broken many key stories over the years, their editors and writers regularly appear as panelists on the top news/discussion shows alongside elected representatives, and they also moonlight as contributors for some of the country's biggest papers.

2. "In this day of whack jobs and threats" -- There was nothing in this reporter's behavior that was even mildly threatening. Posing questions that make a political candidate uncomfortable is not illegal. Someday, it might be.

3. "it looks as though the person tripped of their own accord" -- it really doesn't !
Meehan, the guy who gets physical with the reporter, said this in his apology, which I was unaware of when I first started this thread : "I clearly did not intend to cause John McCormack to trip and fall over that low fence." Note the use of the word "cause." And in a separate statement, Meehan said this : "It wasn't my intention to knock him on the ground." Now, if an apology isn't incriminating enough, isn't it at the very least an admission of guilt ? Meehan realized after the fact that he had erred, when he was told there was a video of the incident. Meehan most likely was afraid that criminal charges would be brought against him, for which there is solid grounds, and decided to defer to the reporter.

4. Your earlier statement about the "man with no credential who refuses to identify himself" is flatly untrue -- McCormack showed Meehan his ID and even told him who he's with. This can be seen on the video.

Luke Sharrett, Student/Intern, Photographer

	Washington \| DC \| United States \| Posted: 6:53 PM on 01.15.10
	->> What would the response be if a Huffington Post reporter was shoved by a Republican campaign hack?

Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer

	Lexington \| VA \| USA \| Posted: 7:41 PM on 01.15.10
	->> "Someone from a blatantly political web site with an obvious agenda doesn't deserve the same respect as someone working for a real news organization." Wow. Sounds like something King George would have said about Thomas Paine.

Yamil Sued, Photographer, Photo Editor

	Peoria \| AZ \| USA \| Posted: 7:57 PM on 01.15.10
	->> "Someone from a blatantly political web site with an obvious agenda doesn't deserve the same respect as someone working for a real news organization." So Jim, Do you have to be a Left Winger to work for a "REAL" news Organization??

Luke Sharrett, Student/Intern, Photographer

	Washington \| DC \| United States \| Posted: 8:23 PM on 01.15.10
	->> Both the White House and the Congress credential blatantly political news outlets, in web and in print.

Eric Canha, Photographer

Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 10:11 PM on 01.15.10

->> Don, politics in Massachusetts is a full contact sport. Just thought I would try to keep it sport-centric.

The reporter who was checked needs to spend a few days on the ice with with some of the kids I've been shooting. Any of them would have either skated around that stunt or brought Meehan to the ice with them.

Maybe McCormack can spend next season covering the post game handshakes at Gillette.

Matt Marriott, Photographer

	Tampa \| FL \| USA \| Posted: 11:43 PM on 01.15.10
	->> Jim... you got smoked. Nice spring break photos btw. I guess that's what passes for "Real" journalism in McAllen, Texas.

Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer

McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 10:51 AM on 01.16.10

->> "Then what your saying Jim is, that Black Panthers..."

Nope. How you got THAT is amazing.

"asking a politician an uncomfortable question is now "suspicious behavior""

Nope. Chasing them down the street and yelling might be.

"you'd be similarly OK with someone from, say Sarah Palin's entourage manhandling a reporter from Rolling Stone"

Nope. Rolling Stone is a life-style publication that presents politics as an aside to the latest American Idol winner whose reporters, at least the ones I've known, are sensible enough to know how to behave with proper decorum.

"I don't think it's a stretch to call The Weekly Standard a reputable publication"

I consider it to be nothing more than right-wing screed whose reputation is that of a producer of commentary, not reporting. YMMV.

" There was nothing in this reporter's behavior that was even mildly threatening"

Aside from the running and screaming.

" it really doesn't"

It does in the clip I saw.

"What would the response be if a Huffington Post reporter was shoved by a Republican campaign hack"

If the HuffPo reporter was acting like a lunatic, so be it.

"Both the White House and the Congress credential blatantly political news outlets, in web and in print"

If anyone credentialed at the White House or US Senate did what that guy did they'd be thrown out on their ass and never allowed back in.

"Do you have to be a Left Winger to work for a "REAL" news Organization"

Nope. There are many excellent reporters who cover the news on a regular basis that hold right-wing views. I know because I've had some wonderful discussions with many of them. They do, however, know enugh to leave their politics at the door when covering something.

"you got smoked"

Hardly.

"Nice spring break photos btw"

Thanks.

"I guess that's what passes for "Real" journalism in McAllen"

Anyone who does most of their work as PR for SeaWorld and Busch Gardens should think about the old "glass houses/throwing stones" adage.

Stew Milne, Photographer

	Providence \| RI \| USA \| Posted: 3:51 PM on 01.16.10
	->> "know when to hold 'em... know when to fold 'em"

Tom Szczerbowski, Photographer

London | ON | Canada | Posted: 4:30 PM on 01.16.10

->> Jim,

->> "asking a politician an uncomfortable question is now "suspicious behavior""
->> Nope. Chasing them down the street and yelling might be.

If chasing were disallowed, do you realize how that would affect news coverage ? In sports stadiums and on city sidewalks alike. Care to rethink this ?
BTW, you ARE aware that the 'chasing' part of your statement would of course disqualify most photographers covering the NFL from holding a credential, right ?

->> "I don't think it's a stretch to call The Weekly Standard a reputable publication"
--> I consider it to be nothing more than right-wing screed whose reputation is that of a producer of commentary, not reporting.

You're entitled to your opinion, but if you can't respect any outfit that holds opinions which aren't inline with your own, then maybe your zeal has overtaken your intellect. Dealing with press on an emotional level rather than an intellectual level will get you the most homogenous press corps in the history of news -- all people who think alike and ask the same kinds of questions. The Weekly Standard reports news as well and offers analysis too.
If bad commentary from people with White House credentials concerns you, have you not been listening to what Helen Thomas has been saying about "so-called terrorists" in Afghanistan ?

--> "There was nothing in this reporter's behavior that was even mildly threatening"
--> Aside from the running and screaming

This reporter, McCormack, did no such thing. He tried to quickly sidestep Meehan, the guy throwing his weight around and blocking the reporter's access, . . . illegally, at that, since he was there in the role of a political consultant, not as a body guard or in any law-enforcement capacity. I'm amazed you don't find Meehan's conduct/assault disturbing or, at the very least, way out of line.
Grasping at straws to excuse behavior that is hardly excusable is not the way to lay out a winning argument.

Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer

McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 11:19 PM on 01.16.10

->> "If chasing were disallowed, do you realize how that would affect news coverage?"

If the real journalists amongst us stopped needless "chasing" (and 99 percent of chases are unnecessary IMO) things might become a bit more civilized once again.

"You're entitled to your opinion"

As are you.

"...if you can't respect any outfit that holds opinions which aren't inline with your own..."

I often read the Weekly Standard and have done so for years. I read it for its right-wing commentary and opinion as I don't consider it to be a purveyor of news.

"Grasping at straws to excuse behavior that is hardly excusable is not the way to lay out a winning argument."

You're excusing McCormack's behavior.

Geoff Miller, Photographer

Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 11:54 PM on 01.16.10

->> "Nope. Chasing them down the street and yelling might be."

Fine, be I'm not sure what your point is here. McCormack did none of the above when he was accosted. The manner that he asked the question was in a manner and tone no different than the other reporters trying to get sound bites out of Coakley. As for running, McCormack was one of several members of the press that followed her down the sidewalk, but he did not run until after he had been singled out, knocked down, and hindered further by Meehan. And if trying to walk along with a media subject while trying to ask them an uncomfortable question isn't acceptable for professional journalists, then those that have worked for CBS News/60 Minutes over the decades will be quite suprised to hear your pronouncement.

Tom Szczerbowski, Photographer

London | ON | Canada | Posted: 12:45 PM on 01.17.10

->> Jim,

What's clear by this point is that you don't seem to be the least bit troubled by Meehan's actions, and that in itself seems a touch unsettling.
To maintain even a pretense of objectivity, you could have taken a position against the reporter while ALSO acknowledging the obvious -- namely, that Meehan acted like a thug. Meehan did apologize, after all, so you're defending what even Meehan at this point won't defend. Odd.
But to robotically condone an assault because you don't like the publication's politics is most disquieting of all.

--> "If the real journalists amongst us stopped needless 'chasing' "
McCormack asked the candidate in a civilized and respectful tone to explain what she had said earlier about there not being any terrorists in Afghanistan, and what's really interesting here is that she turned to listen to him, took in the whole question, but when it dawned on her that it would be rather tricky to explain the absurdity of this statement, she immediately chose to ignore it and, at this exact moment, her aides behind her can be seen scrambling to get her out of there pronto, including Meehan.
McCormack did nothing wrong. In fact, he showed his wares as a reporter by having the doggedness to pursue the less-than-courageous candidate to re-ask a follow-up to the question she had shunned.

Matt Marriott, Photographer

	Tampa \| FL \| USA \| Posted: 3:52 PM on 01.17.10
	->> Yes Jim, I do a lot of PR photos for my clients but you don't hear me claiming to be a "real journalist!" That being said, when I do shoot for publication in newspapers and news magazines I stick to the NPPA guidelines of conduct. You are defending the indefensible position.

Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer

	Lexington \| VA \| USA \| Posted: 6:00 PM on 01.17.10
	->> Can we change the title of this thread to "Jim Being Obstinate and Those Taking the Bait"?

Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer

	McAllen \| TX \| USA \| Posted: 7:04 PM on 01.17.10
	->> The only thing that the right-wingers at BigGovernment.Com sought to do with this "expose" was to try and stir up trouble for the Democratic Senate candidate in Tuesday's election. They did it for political reasons, nothing more and nothing less. It isn't news, it's dirty politics.

Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer

	Lexington \| VA \| USA \| Posted: 8:04 PM on 01.17.10
	->> OK, I'll take the bait... Jim, that's their Constitutional right. Sorry, but it's true. The Constitution doesn't give you, or, thank God, our government, the right to say who is a "real journalist" and who is not.

John Germ, Photographer

Wadsworth | Oh | USA | Posted: 8:24 PM on 01.17.10

->> Wow, this cracks me up. Jim's take on this really represents what is wrong with the media today. And not because he's assailing right wingers it's that so much of the media is biased one way or the other. That the 'leftist' media thinks anything the 'right' does is wrong and things are always 100% one way or the other and the 'rightist' media does the same with the left. With politicians I get it. But so much of the media shows a bias one way or the other in the stories they cover, those they choose to ignore or just how they cover it. I wish I could find the links, but a friend provided them a couple years ago from two different news organizations writing about some conference on global warming. It was obvious reading both of them that they used the exact same information provided at the talks. But the blatant spin both pieces wrote was amazing. These weren't editorials either - just amazing how much both publications allowed their bias to influence how they told the story.

Maybe I'm naive in thinking this has gotten a lot worse over the last decade. Maybe it's always been so biased. But, in my opinion as a consumer, Mr. Colburn's comments speak to a lot of what is wrong with journalism today.

Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer

Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 12:51 PM on 01.18.10

->> I think if you go back in history, you'll find that the media started biased, became more biased over time, and only in the past 100-120 years or so became concerned with being 'neutral.' Hence my earlier reference to Thomas Paine - clearly a partisan, but also one of the pioneers of a free press. The first true 'newspapers' in America emerged along with the nascent political parties and generally parotted their agendas (and many still carry their political party names on their mastheads).

I'd much rather have media bias in an overt fashion than masked by a code of ethics or sense of neutrality that simply isn't possible to achieve - we are human beings, after all. Even Walter Conkrite chose sides on Vietnam. (I'm not faulting him for doing so; simply stating that even our most respected journalists haven't been able to keep their personal biases out of their reporting.)

Randy Janoski, Photographer

	Washington DC & Nashville \| TN \| USA \| Posted: 1:05 PM on 01.18.10
	->> Jim...you showed your ass on this, just drop it before you dig yourself in deeper!

Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer

	Lexington \| VA \| USA \| Posted: 4:26 PM on 01.18.10
	->> Ah, but it's his best side! And I think he enjoys showing it off! ;)

Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer

	McAllen \| TX \| USA \| Posted: 5:37 PM on 01.18.10
	->> Children, children... Settle down. The conservatives here (and there seem to a few) are having a wonderful time doing what they usually do, take the discussion from one about the event to ad hominem (i.e. personal) attacks against me. Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh would be so proud of you guys.

Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer

	Lexington \| VA \| USA \| Posted: 5:53 PM on 01.18.10
	->> Oh, lighten up, Francis.

Return to --> Message Board Main Index