The three TV anchors

Ask Darren if they should maybe consider not having industry sponsors for "This Week in Mining." It's a little difficult to consider their coverage of some of the proposed mine projects as being balanced with a show with a blatant pro-mining p.o.v.

A student of mine is reflecting on the relationship between the way a community sees itself, in terms of its values (for example, as recorded in things like the Knight "Soul of the Community" report) and the ways that the media covers the community.

So, when you are deciding what is news, what role does your sense of the community's values play?  You can't cover everything.  Are you more likely to cover something that you think the audience will find valuable, and less likely to cover something that you don't think they will find valuable?  (The answer there is probably "yes.")  If so, where does your sense of the community's values come from?

Dan Hanger got trashed pretty good by former mayor Herb Bergson a few weeks ago on Final Edition. I'd be interested in hearing his response.

This March 7, 2014, Final Edition includes Dan Hanger's comments on his relationship with Herb Bergson:

http://137.81.3.1/MediaFiles/FE2014/FE3714.mp3

My question would be this:  Are they in favor of the current trend of reading facebook comments as part of their broadcasts or is that being pushed on them by their bosses?

I realize I'm in the minority by not having a facebook account so my opinion on this may not be real popular but when I hear a newscaster say "squishybug14 says..."  I immediately get angry and turn the channel.  Please just report the news!

How do they define investigative journalism? Do they have a recent example of investigative journalism from their respective stations they are proud of? What's their take on the balance between investigative journalism and general news items (e.g. filler fluff like puppies and kittens, or OMG it's snowing and OMG potholes) at their stations?

Ask them to spell "investigative."

Thanks for noting that, Dave. Obviously I have some back episodes to catch up on. When the show moved from the 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. slot it greatly reduced my ability to listen as it airs. 

I would second that Facebook question. Do they really think it adds value to the news broadcast to say, "Fred likes the project and thinks it is good for the economy, but Monica thinks it is bad for the environment."

So, upon review, Dan Hanger is clean. Now I'd like to hear rebuttals from Barbara Reyelts and Chris Hamilton, but that's not relevant to this week's episode.

Thanks everyone.  Real good questions addressing excellent issues.   Plus it was a slow news week, so...

Great questions, everyone! Hope you were able to catch Final Edition this evening.

Final Edition "Three Amigos" show is at www.kuws.fm. And yes, I know, it's a very "retro" webpage.