Possibly the most worthless, airtime-eating tactic in the history of television news, the "man on the street" interview typically involves some fresh out of college pretty face quizzing some slob with a room temperature IQ and a complete ignorance of current events about issues they have no business giving public opinions on, yet the tradition lives on at local news outlets across America. Occasionally, the person being interviewed will say or do something incredibly stupid, which then leads to a minor comedic moment. It is on these occasions that the "man on the street" interview actually holds some shred of value for the viewer, though it's still utterly worthless as a tangible journalistic tool.

It is with this in mind that we genuflect at the altar of Steve Ryan for refusing to take it anymore and physically assaulting an unruly street person. This, and the resulting looks of horror on the faces of the in-studio anchors at the desk when the director cuts back to them, may be the best moment in the history of television news.

The image associated with this post is best viewed using a browser.

via Wonkette

Monday we heard that WNBC's Chuck Scarborough and KNBC's Paul Moyer, the Kent Brockman and Ron Burgundy of New York, were both potential buyout targets. And now loooooooongtime WNBC sports guy Len Berman—the guy who shows the bloopers!—is getting bought out:

Len Berman, a New York television sports fixture since 1979, including for the past nearly quarter century at WNBC-TV, will leave the station sometime in the next 30 to 60 days.

The station and Berman, 61, had been discussing for months a settlement of his contract - believed to be the most lucrative among his anchor peers with an annual salary one TV industry source estimated at $1 million.

He says he's ready for the "next phase" in his career or something, which presumably involves sitting in a rocking chair counting the staggering pile of money that he was paid over the course of his career, for some reason. You were good at what you did, Len, but it's a new era now. The only media people who deserve that kind of money these days are bloggers. [Newsday]

Armstrong, Google's top U.S. sales executive, has invested in Patch, a company which promises to develop "hyperlocal" websites focusing on news coverage specific to their communities. He's putting in money from his own fortune — money which he made through Google's lucrative IPO — but one must imagine New York Times executives view Patch as a stalking horse for the search engine.

Hence the new Times feature called The Local. Besides Patch's three towns, The Local will also cover two Brooklyn neighborhoods. It will be entertaining to hear the Times spin on why it picked Patch's turf to launch The Local. Milburn's attractive demographics? South Orange's thriving cultural scene? No, the Times is waging an old-fashioned newspaper war — on the still-unfamiliar turf of the Internet, against a Google millionaire. This will be by far more interesting than anything else that happens in Maplewood.

From the great state of Colorado, Schaffer began his political career in the Colorado General Assembly at the age of 25. He served 3 terms in the House. But in 2008 he lost his race for the Senate to Mark Udall. And apparently he has no real-world skills, but he does have his wife's homemade margarita mix recipe (hint: it's lime juice).

And so here he is, explaining that he drank away his embarrassing loss, at home, with his wife, and begging a reporter to join him in some afternoon on-the-job tequila. And we're sure his margarita mix will sell great, because nothing says "authentic margarita" like "Republican from Colorado."

Armstrong, the handsome and high-ranking Google executive who runs the company's advertising operations — that is, the actual business that generates cash — in both North America and South America, is backing a startup called Patch through his personal investment fund. The startup aims to run local websites in small communities. Armstrong's biography on the site makes it sound like this is more of a cause than a cash-in attempt:

Polar Capital Group, Tim Armstrong's private investment company, is an investor in Patch. Polar invested in Patch because Tim believes that Patch should be in every community in America, and wants Patch in his town. He wants to read local news stories done by journalists, make sure that local government is transparent and accountable, see all the ways he can give back to his community, and have his town be as interesting and alive online as it is offline. Tim is also a believer in American ingenuity and knows that products like Patch will help deliver a commercially viable way for communities to support the important work of local journalists, institutions, governments, and businesses. Tim works at Google and his family lives in a Connecticut patch.

The site is presently limited to three suburban towns in New Jersey — South Orange, Maplewood, and Milburn. But the company, based in New York, already has 20 employees.

Will this save journalism? A form of it, perhaps. The big-city dailies have been retrenching from the suburbs for years. But Patch is hiring one journalist per town, to cover local news with a heavy emphasis on charities. That's exactly the kind of starter journalism job desperate grads take straight our of J-school, and work like heck to escape as fast as they can. The difference, in this Google-funded scenario, is that there won't be anywhere else to go from there.

And why is Google letting Armstrong freelance as a startup investor? Google's compliance cops have already greenlighted his investment in Associated Content, an ostensibly independent startup which lives off Google ads. Perhaps it's because his startup experiments may well help his employer.

Could Patch be a Trojan horse for Google to get into the local news business? Google has struggled with local advertising, partly because there's not enough obviously local content online to advertise against. Google would spark a massive outcry if it got into the news business directly. But through a trusted proxy like Armstrong, it can keep a close eye — and move in once Armstrong has discovered his "commercially viable way."

As CJR notes, the study's claim that "hard news with high journalistic standards attracts viewers" doesn't take into account the cost of quality journalism, which may outweigh the benefit in audience size. Also, there is the correlation versus causation conundrum that (ironically!!!) bedevils pretty much all local tv "reporting" on "health" and "science." Like, maybe networks with large audiences and therefore high revenue can afford to do more and better reporting! And if their ratings drop they cut the budget and then can not longer afford real reporting.

But the Project for Excellence in Journalism wishes very much that there was actually a market for Excellence in Journalism. Maybe there is! People always say they want better news. People also say they hate negative campaign ads. People also say they're totally going to eat better and work out.

[Complex Blog]

“I’m kind of relying, my client is relying, on just the inner workings of that station,” said [Brent Williams, account supervisor at Karsh/Hagan, the advertising agency that arranged the deal]. “Not that editorial would ever give a heads-up to sales or be expected to give a heads-up to sales, but these are professionals. They do realize that some businesses’ brands, some businesses’ reputations, could be at stake in terms of how commerce and news are interacting here.”

Setting aside how the deal complicates reporting on certain topics, one also can't help but note how it highlights those parts of the news operation already considered journalistically weakest. For the Las Vegas station, the second part of the morning newscast can be sold for product placement, but not the first, since... the first contains the real, actual, trustworthy journalism? At other stations mentioned in the Times story, the entire morning newscast is marked off this way.

The stations are moving forward with the product placements despite the fact that the national news divisions ABC, NBC and CBS have ruled out such practices as misleading. It's almost enough to make one wonder if the local affiliates care more about ratings than presenting a balanced, helpful newscast.

Now if you'll excuse me, I think I'll take a break from all this journalistic hand-wringing and enjoy a crisp, cool Miller High Life. It is truly the champagne of beers!

[Times]

[Via The Big Lead]

At EveryBlock (now available for Chicago, San Francisco, and New York). I can get news from the whole city, a neighborhood, a zip code, or a specific block. I can see crime reports, Craigslist ads, zoning news, Yelp reviews, and Flickr photos.

I can see local news, which really should be the site's big draw, but I have a feeling there's much more out there than what EveryBlock aggregates. My neighborhood (SF's Mission District) has a local paper that doesn't show up, and I expected more info from the city's several alt weeklies. The promise of a site like EveryBlock is that it could win back the online readers who abandoned local papers for news sources like Drudge and blogs. This is the same problem others tried to solve with "citizen journalism" — but EveryBlock recognizes that the real journalists are still out there. They just need a modern delivery system.

The real scandal here, of course, is the total lack of Christian charity exhibited by the rest of the Big Apple's TelePrompTer mafia—it's past time someone calls them out for refusing to offer Tong shelter even as they berate us night after night with feel-good tales about 10-year-old soup-kitchen volunteers, or the rat droppings found at our favorite delis, or sports bloopers. Understandably, Kaity's Channel 11 colleagues shouldn't be counted on for much: co-anchor Jim Watkins is a vapid, vacuous shell of a haircut; man–boy correspondent Arthur Chi'en is a potty-mouthed lunatic; and ageless meteorologist Mr. (O.) G.'s nightly flapping of his bizarrely winglike left elbow suggests deep psychological trauma of his own.

But the silence from the other stations' "personalities" is pretty close to unconscionable. Surely, Channel 4's Chuck Scarborough, now riding high with his own 7 P.M. newscast that is almost, almost like making it to the Network big leagues, has a guest room or two to spare for a toxic mold refugee? And what of Channel 5's Ernie Anastos, Kaity's TV husband from 1984 to 1986, who's in the middle of a $10 million deal to host a whiz-bang 10-o'clock broadcast that takes at least two good doses of Dramamine to get through? No need to rely on the males, either: Channel 2's Dana Tyler, so shamelessly shacking it up with Phil Collins, must have an open pied-à-terre to lend the Tong–Callahans.

Oh, more names can be named: Sue Simmons; Diana Williams; Bill Ritter: gravitas begins at home, folks, and Kaity Tong is without one! Shameful! Anchors without moral anchor: Bill Beutel would have never stood for this.

I can confirm that "Dr." Max Gomez, Joe Avellar and Jane Hanson all got the boot from WNBC today.

• You have a normal sexual appetite, but your mate thinks you have excessive sexual needs.
  
• There is a decline of sexual activity early in your marriage.
  
• Your husband is repulsed by normal sexual activity.
  
• Your mate admits to having had more than two homosexual encounters.
  
• Your husband reveals he's bisexual.
  
• Your partner visits gay bars claiming he's there only to hang out with his gay friend(s)
  
• Your mate watches porno movies with gay males.
  
• Your mate makes continual homophobic comments.
  
• Your partner's ego appears to be boosted by compliments from gay men.

  Also, "likes taking it in the ass," "big Peter Allen fan," etc. We're particularly interested in meeting a guy who "watches porno movies with gay males" and "makes continual homophobic comments;" it could be like a Sean Delonas version of Mystery Science Theater 3000.

  Gay Husband Checklist [MyFoxNY]
  

Earlier: 'GMA': No One Really Wanted to Hear Hillary Anyway
Dexter Filkins Ain't Got Nothing on Local San Diego