Confusing Themes That Dont Add Up


In another veiled attempt to show that they are impartial to coverage of police abuse, Mike Beaudet took a cheap shot at local police for their initial missing of Boston Marathon Attack Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.  This runs consistent with Fox Undercover Monday morning quarterbacking of what someone should have known, done or prepared for.  Whether it is investigating every thought  and hobby of every teacher to try to guess if they are safe around children, or blaming the government for something that maybe they could have prevented if they had unlimited money, time and permutation to cover, Fox Undercover will always capitalize on people's desire to blame and accuse after the fact.  The reality is that police train and prepare for so many different things, you can only prepare so much before you have to rely on the experience, dedication and resourcefulness of the men and women to solve problems as they come. 

But more importantly, this is not an investigation of police waste, abuse or cover up.  Mike Beaudet seems to cover criticism of police, but never actually gets inside something that is going on, which seems odd given that he claims to be an undercover reporter.  Perhaps Mike Beaudet simply doesn't have inside access with police, but simply relies on the ignorant tattletale and a bunch of interns surfing websites.


Fox Undercover ran several stories this year on various police issues, ranging from the accidentally online dissemination of private information to police missing a robbert (which does happen as police are not perfect).  Yet none of these stories actually uncover police abuse, as the "spa investigation" almost did.  Instead it simply reports on police having allegedly done something wrong.  Which begs the question why Beaudet won't actually investigate police departments and the State Police, but simply make a nod to stories about police (especially in uber liberal towns like Newton and Brookline).

Fox Undercover Boston appears to present their theme as an investigative outfit which exposes corruption and scams.  And some of the stories do fall within that theme (mostly quite loosely until very recently), looking at expensive and wasteful government projects which appear to be costing needless taxpayer money. Many of these segments spend more time ambushing someone who works legally for the government in these projects, asking them questions that don’t really get to the heart of the solution, but at least they are consistent with the theme.  However they have never covered the millions of dollars wasted on police details.

However, as of October 2012 a good half of Fox Undercover segments fell far outside of this theme.  Fox reports on mafia figures, even though it had nothing to do with their arrests.  They cover police benefit stories in spite of the fact that the police unions in Massachusetts are very strong and advocate brilliantly for the rights of our officers.  They covered a Veterans Memorial oversight, which they admitted was “for a friend”.    They tried to cover Lt Governor Tim Murray’s car crash, which had already been covered by all major local media, uncovering nothing new themselves and in fact failed to get Mr. Murray to sit down with Mike.  They simply ambushed him, and suddenly Tim Murray was added to their belt as another “Fox Undercover subject”.   But when a Mass State Trooper ran into the law with a DUI allegation, he didn't cover it.

And most commonly they cover virtually any story that involves sex in some way.  They cover rapist trials that they had nothing to do with, long long ago, sex offenders who were not in the process of reoffending nor uncovered as doing so – and they covered people who weren’t sex offenders at all but maybe were accused of doing something that had some sort of innuendo attached to it.  They covered a story about a statutory rapist (ie – one who had consensual sex with someone who was over 14 but under the legal age as set forth in the law) having rights to see their child, but it was a public issue with nothing to undercover.   And they failed to balance this with the rights of the child to grow up with a father.  And in every case, it was not Fox Undercover who really uncovered anything, but a Fox Undercover informant, whose motives generally don’t pass the litmus test.  Yet legitimate stories about police involved in sexual misconduct, from cops being allegedly serviced in a former health spa to a state officer who allegedly forced himself on a toll worker, are treated with the gentlest of kid gloves if treated at all.
The confusing mix of story choice should make every Boston Area resident suspicious of the motivation and integrity being Fox 25 and their continued love for Fox 25 Undercover.  The pieces just don’t add up, even if one does take into account the need for Fox just to hitch an audience during primetime shows.  After all, police involved in sexual misconduct should be a golden opportunity for Fox – way more than a Lt Governor who maybe fell asleep at the wheel.  Police details are costing the Commonwealth millions, as on duty officers stare down manholes or text on their phones. 
And if Fox Undercover is not out to truly uncover government waste and corporate corruption and protect communities, how can anyone trust them when they happen to appear to do so?

Finally, a very astute viewer seemed to catch Mike Beaudet lying in an online blog or interview, talking about him always asking for interviews before he [ambushes] someone.  Yet the facts don't support that at all.  In fact, it seems to most viewers that what Fox 25 Undercover prefers is an unprepared target.

No comments:

Post a Comment