Wednesday, February 5, 2014

How Did Newsrooms Ignore Such an Obvious Story?

As is being reported everywhere, CVS is going to stop selling cigarettes.   Congratulations CVS.   

But how did newsroom after newsroom not go after such an obvious story before?  Why weren't reporters questioning  an industry supposedly concerned with health about why they continued to sell death?

Now they can do that story.   Go interview the other drug stores.   Easy story.   Excellent business story.  Excellent health story.  Excellent local story everywhere.  And with today's technology, every local newsroom can do a videoskype interview with the corporate official.
Ask them to explain why making money from selling death is more important to their corporation than taking the same step as CVS.

Congratulations CVS.

###

23 comments:

  1. Beer, wine and liquor next?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly, it's a health care company, not a supermarket!

      Delete
  2. So can you link us to your earlier post asking why this story wasn't being covered before now? Since it's so obvious, I assume you already pointed this out.

    Or did it just become "obvious": to you after the fact. Second-guessing is so much fun.

    ReplyDelete
  3. by this reasoning, we should question every drug store, because they all sell smokes. Why not question why cigarettes and other harmful products aren't illegal yet?
    This post was a waste of time to read.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why did your parents name you Anonymous? What a wonderfully unusual name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My name is Dan Mitchell. I'm a working journalist. If your sign-in included profiles that people actually used, (Facebook or Twitter), fewer people would probably choose anonymous. They do so because that's the easiest course you offer.

      That wasn't me asking, but I will request, using my real name, that you answer the person's question. Is there anything you can point to showing that this "obvious" story had ever occurred to you before today?

      When journalism fails, indeed.

      Delete
    2. Thanks - I'll check the settings.

      Delete
    3. Dan Mitchell is an idiot. He already got pummeled in a Facebook discussion earlier in the week, so now he posts anonymously.

      Delete
  5. Does the Chicago Tribune count? http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-05-05/business/ct-biz-0505-phil-20130505_1_tobacco-products-walgreens-michael-polzin

    ReplyDelete
  6. What about the Wall Street Journal?
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB121729138312691695

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sir: whether or not drugstores large or small sell cigarettes is both a moral and business decision that each will make. Please also recognize that another story exists for these businesses that journalists should explore -- the impact of prescription drugs in multiple cases of addiction, abuse and death. In that regard the sale of prescription drugs may be no different than the sale of cigarettes, and journalism has an important role to play in shining a bright light on how many narcotics are over-prescribed or "shopped" by addicts. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This kind of self-aggrandizing pap is so tiring. But it seems par for the course around this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  9. When journalism on journalism fails.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There are always some reporters who do excellent work. But here's a story that could easily be done in every local market. Similarly, every local reporter could be asking their members of Congress why the United States is number 1 in healthcare cost and rated lower in performance than all other industrialized societies. Had journalists done their jobs instead of playing cheerleader we never would have had a war in Iraq nor a steroid era in baseball.

    When journalism fails, bad things happen.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh, good lord. You really are a piece of work. This is your response?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Did the Chicago Tribune did some excellent work - absolutely. How many newsrooms across the country did the obvious story? You won't find many. Were there a few journalists with the McClatchy group who questioned the rush to war - absolutely, they did what what journalists are supposed to do. Most of the press played cheerleader and as a result, off we went to Iraq.

    Watch your local news tonight and see how many stations have followed up with questions to Walgreen executives. It won't be news in San Francisco which banned tobacco from pharmacies in 2008. http://www.no-smoke.org/document.php?id=609

    ReplyDelete
  13. Each successive post further reveals how addled and clueless you are.

    First, you insisted that no stories were done. Now that several have been pointed out to you, it's not enough (and you're pretending only the Tribune has done such a story, even though everybody reading you knows that that's a lie, because it's RIGHT UP ABOVE THERE, and there are more examples on Romenesko's page.

    Iraq is absolutely irrelevant to the point you made here.

    If you search Google News, you'll see that all kinds of reporters sought comment today from Walgreen's, Rite-Aid, etc. One of the first things I heard this morning was an NPR report citing Walgreen's response. Those chains either aren't talking, or are issuing statements that they're "evaluating" their tobacco sales. You're just making stuff up, and not bothering to run simple searches before publishing -- with an insanely tin-eared, ridiculously misplaced arrogance -- the stuff you're making up.

    And I'll repeat the question that someone asked above: where are your stories about any of these topics? You're the journalism expert, right?



    ReplyDelete
  14. There are of course stories that lots of stations do. Conan often features them.

    http://www.avclub.com/article/once-again-conan-catches-local-tv-news-people-recy-106580

    What's disappointing in when local news organizations don't ask questions they should be asking, like why are the drug stores selling cigarettes, like asking their members of Congress to explain why U.S. healthcare is so much more expensive than in any other industrialized country, like asking college presidents why their universities give more full scholarships to athletes than to academic students.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I had never heard of Karl Idsvoog before this post brought him so much (perhaps unfortunate) attention. Prof. Idsvoog, you seem to have been wrong in your impression that newsrooms were ignoring this story, and the evidence indicates that you weren't any better than they were at pointing out this "obvious" story before the fact. Maybe you can redeem yourself: Now that this obvious story has been covered, please list the top ten other obvious stories that newsrooms are not covering. (This time, you can CYA by Googling before you post your claims.) This isn't snark -- if you really do have a good eye for spotting obvious but ignored stories, you will be helping journalism, humanity, and your own reputation by listing them during this moment of relative fame, so that journalism may benefit from your insight.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Karl, instead of opining on the news (which is clearly beyond your mental capabilities) you should focus on what you claim to be good at: Being "versatile and cost effective" and bragging about your "superb education."

    http://www.kent.edu/jmc/faculty-staff/profiles/index.cfm?profileitem=kidsvoog

    Karl Idsvoog is a highly versatile and cost-effective multimedia trainer/consultant. Having worked as an investigative reporter/producer/manager in local, network, syndicated television and online journalism, Idsvoog moved into training/consulting and education following the bankruptcy of APBnews.com in New York where he got a “superb education in the online world.”

    ReplyDelete
  17. So what's the bottom line? CVS has sucker-punched the mainstream media into giving them millions in free advertising. Much ado about nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete