Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, June 26, 1995 TAG: 9506260096
SECTION: EXTRA PAGE: 3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: FRAZIER MOORE ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: NEW YORK LENGTH: Medium
Stranger still, it pledges to uphold them.
The issue is checkbook journalism. John Tomlin and Bob Young, who created ``Affair'' eight years ago and recently were brought back to run it again, have announced they are putting their checkbook away.
``We're not going to pay for interviews,'' says Tomlin, who has paid for plenty of them in his time - ``and if we do on occasion, the audience will be told about it.''
Clearly, it's no longer business as usual.
According to Tomlin and Young, their policy of virtuous restraint (or, in lieu of that, frank and full disclosure) becomes an integral part of Twentieth Television's ``Affair'' as this grandaddy of syndicated news magazines tries to recover from a poor third place against King World's ``Inside Edition'' and Paramount's ``Hard Copy.''
An early sign that ``Affair'' wants your respect: These days, an entire half-hour can go by without so much as a mention of O.J. Simpson. Even more telling, longtime senior correspondent Steve Dunleavy, who embodies all that is brash and squalid about tabloid TV, was fired two weeks ago.
Now Tomlin and Young promise that with the start of its ninth season Sept. 11, the more current ``Affair'' will boast a new emphasis on investigative stories (averaging three per week), a new 20-person investigative unit and a brand-new Washington bureau keeping a hungry eye on government wrongdoing.
And not only will ``Affair'' not engage in checkbook journalism, it will blow the whistle on other shows that do.
Vows Young, ``If there is an interview that we know some other show, be it network or syndicated, paid for, we'll still do the story - but we'll say, `We wanted to get so-and-so's opinion, but he wanted $10,000 to speak to us ... and ``Hard Copy'' paid it.'''
But can an interview be purchased other than with cash on the barrelhead?
As you just might recall, June 14's ``PrimeTime Live'' devoted the entire hour to Michael Jackson and his wife, Lisa Marie, and got its hugest ratings ever. In fact, odds are roughly one-in-four you tuned in.
Sure, no money changed hands in landing Jackson for the live interview. But did some other form of checkbook journalism hold sway?
``That two- or three-minute `commercial' for Michael Jackson's new product - how much was that worth?'' Young says. ``Millions!''
Young was referring to the video for Jackson's song ``Scream,'' actually four minutes and 45 seconds in length and showcased in its entirety by ``PrimeTime.''
Yes, the deal with Jackson included showing this video from his new album, and showing it whole, acknowledges Phyllis McGrady, ``PrimeTime'' executive producer.
But she contends there also were sound editorial reasons for its airing.
For one thing, many members of the audience wanted to get a look.
Besides, the video complemented Jackson's interview, she says. ``That particular song is a piece of who he is and what he is, and reflective of what the last two years have been.''
On the other hand, ``PrimeTime's'' viewers might have liked to know that forces other than journalistic governed what they saw on this ABC News magazine. But the viewers got no hint of any quid pro quos.
``All we say is, be honest,'' Tomlin urges. ``Tell the audience, `Jackson agreed to sit down if we played the video, and here's the video.'''
Granted, there's little indication that those at ABC News, or anywhere else, look to ``A Current Affair'' for moral guidance.
Still ... good advice is good advice.
by CNB