KOTA anchorman temporarily sidelined after tea party appearance

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Kevin Woster Journal staff | Posted: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 10:15 am

KOTA TV newsman Shad Olson will be back on the air soon, following a disciplinary suspension from his news anchor duties in the Rapid City coverage area because of his speech at a tea party rally.

Olson was taken off the air locally a few days after his April 15 speech at the Citizens for Liberty tax day rally in Memorial Park.

“Shad’s speech to the tax day rally was a lapse in ethics, so we took appropriate action,” KOTA news director John Petersen said.

Petersen said Olson will resume his anchor duties for KOTA at some point in the near future, but declined to offer a date. He also declined to discuss specifics of the disciplinary action taken against Olson.

Olson also declined to discuss specifics of the disciplinary actions, but did say he has continued to produce news shows at KOTA and appear on air for KDUH TV in Scottsbluff, Neb., a KOTA sister station under Duhamel Broadcasting Enterprises.

Olson said he met with Petersen the day after the tax day rally, when his supervisors learned of the speech through a news story in the Journal. Olson declined to say whether he agreed with Petersen that his tax day speech had been an ethical lapse. He did say that people who believe that his tea party speech reflects a political bias that could affect his news work should watch and judge for themselves.

“The fact that they didn’t realize until now the passionate feeling and beliefs I hold about the history of our country and its values should be evidence enough of my ability to provide an unbiased news account day in and day out,” Olson said.

Olson, 37, has been with KOTA for 10 years, seven as anchor. Olson said he agreed to appear at the tax day rally weeks in advance and that he was motivated to speak there and at previous tea party gatherings and civic meetings by his belief that Americans have “a flabby understanding of the history of the founding of our country.”

“I want people to fall back in love with their country based on what the founding principles are and the legacy left by the people who fought and bled and died to establish America on this continent,” he said.

Olson said he is non-partisan in his advocacy and believes that his personal beliefs coincide with the tea party movement in general.

Petersen said Olson is entitled to those beliefs but crossed an ethical line in his tax day speech.

“A journalist should not participate,” Petersen said. “A journalist should report the news, not make the news.”
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Was he there on assignment by his employer as a reporter or was he there as a private citizen? That seems to be the determinent of which side is/may be in the wrong.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
“A journalist should not participate,” Petersen said. “A journalist should report the news, not make the news.”

Uh... NOT.

Show me where this is true.

So by his standards, Dan Rather should have been stripped of his credentials, CBS should have not paid him his severance pay and he should have been ignored by the people because he was directly involved with politics by trying to sway voters based on a lie.

There isn't any one journalist standard, there are opinions, like this guy's opinion. Without real standards we end up with the NYT printing secrets, the Washington post talking about watergate be a traitor and so on.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
Was he there on assignment by his employer as a reporter or was he there as a private citizen? That seems to be the determinent of which side is/may be in the wrong.

You just can't make this stuff up, it is so laughable!!!
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
I remember a topic and you guys were adament about the bias of the press....someone said the same words...that they should just report the news not make the news...

I'd bet that it was something they didn't agree with, if they agree with it then it is okay. Again, you can't make this stuff up.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
I say that a lot, the point is when journalist need to justify something, they change the rules to suit them.

For example, they don't view privacy of the individual citizen as an important tenet of our rights and report some of the most sensitive and damaging stuff about an individual but they will go kicking and screaming to jail to protect their confidential source who may be a mass killer and will be killing again.

It is something that I think the founders may have thought would always have had some common sense when they worte that little clause about government and the press. It seems common sense is gone with the idea that the journalist is the citizen and the citizen is the journalist thing. Anyone can be and should be considered a journalist, not an exclusive elite sub-society where entry is only made through a ritual of reporting and judgment of peers who also are only part of the elite sub-society.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Nobody has answered if he was there officially or on his own though. If he was working then yes, he should report only. If he was off duty he's entitled to his own opinion so long as he doesn't represent it as him employer's opinion.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
Nobody has answered if he was there officially or on his own though. If he was working then yes, he should report only. If he was off duty he's entitled to his own opinion so long as he doesn't represent it as him employer's opinion.

Kinda like the lesbian Supreme Court nominee.......:confused:
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
We already are, its called the blagoshpere. That's part of the problem if you ask me, all you have to do is read the soapbox daily.

No, I think you are on the wrong track there.

Blogs are one thing.

Forums are another.

People who are asking questions and writing about it are a third.

The point is not about blogs or forums but people, it goes back to prior to Pulitzer and Hurst and big news business that took over everything. It is about how we have been segregated within the first amendment.
 
Top