Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, February 12, 1993 TAG: 9302120534
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
`DATELINE'
NBC'S EXTRAORDINARY apology to General Motors for airing an "unscientific demonstration" of one of its pickup trucks bursting into flames is a needed warning to the television industry. News programs and entertainment are a volatile mix. Separate them.The network's quick retreat before GM's challenge has overshadowed the legitimate safety questions the report set out to publicize - one might say sensationalize, given the ground that NBC was forced to concede: It knew of sparking devices under one of the trucks to ensure a fire if the gas tank leaked, but did not explain this in the report. It would not dispute that the two trucks in the demonstration were going faster than the report indicated. It could not dispute that the gas cap on one of the trucks was the wrong kind or that the gas tank had been overfilled.
The demonstration, broadcast on "Dateline NBC" in November, showed a truck with "sidesaddle" gas tanks, mounted on the outside of the frame, bursting into flames after a collision. An Atlanta jury last week ordered GM to pay $105.2 million to the parents of a teen-ager who died in a fire in a truck with the sidesaddle tanks.
GM put 4.7 million full-size pickups on the road between 1973 and 1987 with that fuel-tank design. The company steadfastly maintains it is safe, while a consumer advocacy group is pressing the government to force a recall. Obviously, there is a safety question here of great importance to the public.
Which makes NBC's sloppiness all the more dismaying. "Dateline" co-host Stone Phillips said he thought the report as a whole was balanced. And the segment made it clear that the demonstration was unscientific. But seeing is believing on TV, and without a full explanation of conditions of the demonstration, the image was misleading.
As Phillips said at the end of NBC's apology for the segment, it "was not representative of an actual side-impact collision." It did not advance the reporting of the story. So why show it? For dramatic visual effect.
All providers of news, including newspapers, try to offer information that will attract the public's interest. In making a presentation as lively and provocative as possible, though, all is lost if slick production overtakes the honesty and integrity of the report.
We don't expect or advocate a return to the days of talking heads on a gray screen. But NBC, in failing to maintain high journalistic standards for what is presented as a news magazine, has hurt the credibility of its news organization. It deserves better; the public needs better.
With its re-creations, re-enactments and real-life dramas, TV for some time has been blurring the line between fact and fiction. It's time to sharpen that line and - where news is concerned - to rely on facts to astound viewers, not visuals.