At this point, no one disputes that Jessica McBride had an affair with Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn. The question is when. We can all agree it’s a conflict of interest to have this affair while writing about him, but if the relationship began well after the story ran, there’s no conflict and no news story.
It was a couple of weeks ago that Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Dan Bice called me about this story. "Can you tell me when this affair was supposed to have started," I asked. "I don't know," he replied.
Yet Bice went ahead and wrote an innuendo-laden story that simply asserted – but never proved – that McBride had this affair while working on a profile of Flynn for Milwaukee Magazine. Bice ignored information proving the contrary, and failed to do due diligence to establish the facts. All the evidence suggests the affair began in early May, months after McBride completed the story.
Now, as a result of Bice's hatchet job, McBride has been branded and ridiculed across the country, on countless Web sites and blogs, as a corrupt journalist. It's a tragedy for journalism, all right, but the real shame falls on Bice and his editors.
Am I overstating this? Let me present the background behind the story and the facts left out of Bice's account, and you be the judge.
I've known Jessica McBride since we both worked at the Journal Sentinel. She was a dogged reporter who was highly regarded by the newspaper's editors. Jessica went on to become a UW-Milwaukee journalism lecturer and a controversial blogger. Frankly, I often disagree with her columns. (She'd probably say the same of my commentary.) But reporting is another matter.
McBride has been an asset to this magazine, writing four features to date, all well researched. Perhaps her best-known, prior to the Flynn profile, was her story on the so-called "Smiley Face" killers.
It was my idea to profile Flynn, and McBride accepted the assignment in late October of 2008. On Jan. 5, 2009, she turned in her story. The reporting was terrific. She had on-the-record quotes portraying Flynn as an “itinerant chief” who was likely to leave Milwaukee quickly, verifying the fears of those who didn’t want to hire him in the first place. She had a quote from John Polio, a former police chief in Massachusetts, scoffing at the kid-gloves treatment of Flynn by the press. She caught Flynn at a community meeting where he was unable to name any streets in the area, and saw him way-too-frankly explaining why crime in a certain neighborhood might not get discovered quickly (the neighborhood, Flynn said, was “a land of vampires when the sun went down”).
She had quotes from Tom Scanlon, police union president in Springfield, Mass., calling Flynn a “carpetbagger” and accusing him of pressuring commanders to reclassify crimes to lower the numbers. This intrigued me, and I asked Jessica to nose around and see what she could find on the murder rate, which seemed to be plummeting under Flynn. Jessica did a comparison of city of Milwaukee murders with statistics at the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner's Office and could find no evidence of homicides being reclassified.
On balance, the story was positive, but in the storied career of Flynn, which had generated nothing but adulatory press, it was the toughest profile any reporter had ever done.
When Jessica turned in the story, I e-mailed to ask, as I do of all reporters, what had most surprised her about Flynn. Her e-mailed reply mentioned his intelligence, called him a walking encyclopedia, but also said this: “What surprised me was how off the cuff his rhetoric gets – how sharp, and sly, his humor is – and how constantly he uses humor as a weapon or conversational tool. I sort of expected it with the cops, but it was really jarring in the room of black activists. Almost cringe inducing.”
Offhand, this doesn’t strike me as the language of someone in love.
I next kicked the story back to McBride for a rewrite, which she turned in Feb. 16. During the editing process, Jessica pushed me to include a couple negative quotes, which I vetoed as unnecessary because others in the story essentially made the same point, and the story – at 5,400 words – was already quite long. Once again, this wasn't the behavior of someone being protective of her subject.
The problem of journalists getting too close to their subjects typically occurs for beat reporters, or for writers who spend a long period of time interviewing someone. To fall in love in the course of doing one feature story is, frankly, no easy feat.
Jessica had just one face-to-face interview with Flynn, for six hours in December, with a police lieutenant and the department's communications director, Anne E. Schwartz, present the entire time. After this, McBride had some follow-up e-mail questions for Flynn. That was the full extent of their communication prior to the release of the story.
A few days after our story went to subscribers in mid-April, Jessica e-mailed me to ask if I had heard anything about it from Flynn. I hadn't. I would imagine if she was then having an affair, she wouldn't have had to ask.
Since Bice did his story, McBride has admitted the affair and released a copy of an e-mail from Flynn dated April 23, in which he complimented her story and suggested they get together for coffee. That request eventually led to their first meeting since December, and the first time they ever met alone, at the Brocach Irish Pub & Restaurant on May 1st. The e-mail suggesting coffee is a public record, as Flynn sent it from work. I'm told that Bice requested the chief's e-mails. If he didn't, he should have, and he would have found reason to doubt the affair started while McBride was working on the story.
The meeting at Brocach is discussed in a love letter Bice obtained. Schwartz says she told Bice this occurred after the Milwaukee Magazine story was published. Bice chose not to include this. Worse, he used the loaded word “interview” to describe a chat between McBride and Flynn nearly three months after the story was finished. Without the addition of that one word, his story falls apart.
I told Bice that McBride turned in her feature in January, but he declined to include that in his story. I also told him that e-mails
and exchanges I had with McBride (and I shared the one above with him) convinced me there was no affair going on before the story was done.So when I told Bice, “I don’t think it has any bearing on the story” – a quote he used in his original article – my point was that if an affair had happened, it was long after the Flynn feature ran. But since Bice's initial story left out any evidence the affair began later, it looked like I approved of reporters sleeping with people they cover. Needless to say, the magazine would never sanction this.
After McBride released the April e-mail from Flynn, this left Bice with just one crumb of evidence to prove the affair started earlier. In the love letter Bice obtained, McBride allegedly wrote that she instantly saw Flynn as a good person and "began to struggle – having to give time to vitriolic, baseless attacks."
Let me, at this point, make a confession. I've had the same feelings sometimes as a reporter when writing about someone for whom I have some admiration. Sometimes, the critics can seem vitriolic and baseless in their attacks. But you still have to consider them in writing the story, and I have no evidence – nor does Bice offer any – to suggest McBride didn't give Flynn's critics due consideration.
But beyond this, consider the fact that McBride, if she did indeed write these words, did so at the peak of an affair. People at that point are in their adoration phase: They get gushy, and re-examine and recolor their initial meeting in the most flowery language. Even so, McBride apparently also wrote that she did not initially think of Flynn "romantically, at least not consciously." But Bice, naturally, left this phrase out of his original story.
Reasonably worldly adults are aware that people having affairs are often not the most reliable narrators. Bice and his editors were apparently too naive to consider this possibility. Call me demanding, but I don't think it's too much to ask journalists to take an adult view of the world they write about.
In short, I don't believe this love letter accurately reflects what was going on months earlier, because it stands in stark contrast to the e-mails McBride sent me while she worked on the story and after she finished the story. Nor does the letter jibe with the story she turned in.
Bice's exposé quoted national experts on journalistic ethics condemning what McBride did. But they had no way of knowing the affair started after the story was written. Their quotes, however, help convince readers that McBride was guilty as charged by Bice.
Bice led off his attack claiming people in the police department jokingly dismissed McBride’s profile of the chief as a love letter. But not one officer is named, and not even an off-the-record quote is offered to prove this.
Bice quotes the magazine story's physical description of Flynn to suggest (wink, wink) that the writer must be in love. But Bice offers not a shred of evidence to suggest the description is inaccurate. Of course, the literary style of the passage feels odd in the context of a newspaper story. But this is a narrative feature story; I asked McBride to do a word picture that makes the subject come alive physically, just as I do of all feature writers.
Bice is very smart, and had there been any mush or bias showing in the Flynn profile, he would have pounced on it. You can bet he went over it with a fine-tooth comb – and came up with nothing.
I'm not surprised. In the two months since the story was published, we've had not one complaint from readers of factual errors, blind spots, misjudgments or exaggerations. I wish I could say that of all our features.
Indeed, I’d argue the Flynn feature is far more scrupulously reported than Bice’s stories. You be the judge: Here’s the Flynn profile . And here is Bice's original story and his follow-up piece.
We have nothing to fear from such scrutiny. I’m happy to disclose the details on how our story was done. I wonder if the JS can say the same about Bice’s exposé. It often seems like the newspaper never got the memo that in an online world, you no longer control the interpretation of stories. Online readers and bloggers do. And I welcome their examination of the issue.
I have a lot of respect for Journal Sentinel Editor Marty Kaiser, and I very much doubt he would have approved the Bice story had he known some of the things Bice chose to leave out – or not pursue – in this story. Bice is a very aggressive reporter, and that has resulted in some important stories. And if editors say no often enough, any reporter will start to become less aggressive. But this particular story seemed to scream out for more caution.
Ah, but sex sells. It’s always tempting to publish something like this – if there is a public policy issue at stake. Bice, however, offered no evidence the affair has in any way detracted from Flynn's performance as police chief. But a juicy conflict of interest for reporter McBride would certainly justify running the story. Perhaps that's why Bice stretched the truth to manufacture something that wasn't there.
For the record, we stand behind our story on Ed Flynn. Should any defects be pointed out, we will do the usual due diligence to determine if a correction or clarification is required.
Typically, once Milwaukee Magazine does an in-depth story on someone like Flynn, we’re unlikely to ever feature him again. McBride, of course, would have been honor-bound to disclose her relationship with Flynn had we ever asked her to cover him again. That’s when the issue of a conflict of interest would have arisen.
Back when I started running McBride’s stories, I heard from liberals who were upset, as McBride is a conservative commentator. My only concern, I told them, is how good a reporter she is. I still feel the same way, and still remain happy with the four features she's done for us. But I have heard from folks who believe the magazine should cross McBride off its list of freelance reporters. I’d be curious to hear from you, the reader, about this. I always learn from these exchanges, and welcome your thoughts about this entire issue.
77 Comments
How about a story on McBride, her blogs, her husband and now her affair.
Thanks for clearing this matter up for me. It is sad that the story was not correctly reported.
As usual the facts get tangled up in reality. Everyone of these sex scandals break down into If he/she cheats on their spouse they have no integrity on the job and the equally useless, What were they thinking?
I think that if the reporter was not involved with the chief when she wrote the article than the report stands as written.
If she sleeps with the guy than she can't be writing about him or anything the relates to him.
After that, it's their spouses problem.
My opinion is that Ms. McBride has to go, simply because she crossed the journalistic line when she was a radio talk show host on WTMJ back in the day. She was so opinionated that it is hard for me to accept that she's looking at her subjects in an impartial light in her writings today.
Ok enough is enough - they had an affair - people were hurt - either move on or have them fired for ethics or whatever - let's focus on real issues - murders, unemployment etc.
Besides her being married to Bucher is no picnic................who would blame her?
There was no story for the Journal Sentinel without the hook of "reporter has affair with subject of profile." At that point the chronology became irrelevant. Never mind that the Journal could have written that same story 14 years ago when McBride profiled then married Waukesha County DA Paul Bucher! I think they were just waiting to catch her elsewhere. McBride and Flynn made this mess, not the magazine. Bruce Murphy's outline of the editorial process is credible from my two decades experience of working with him.
I have always been impressed that Jessica McBride could don the reporter hat when appropriate despite everything else about her, so I wasn't entirely shocked when I saw her byline on the Chief story.
But she's ruined it for all freelancers. I think she needs a new career, and probably some help. I'm sure her husband is having a difficult time, and children and stepchildren as well.
Flynn met with his wife this weekend and I hope they get their situation resolved as well.
I suppose McBride can keep writing for the magazine, where there are tight controls on accuracy. But her Waukesha Freeman columns, where she perpetrates most of her nonsense, should go. There is no reason for Conley to keep coddling their stable of extremist columninst.
And UWM should dump her as well, since she claimed she was an "academic" (not a reporter) when she and Flynn had their tete a tete.
What a weird rationalization. The faculty senate will not be amused.
Michael Horne
Look, the whole point is integrity and honesty. If these people can't be honest and live up to the commitment they made to their spouse (it isn't that hard to not sleep with someone), how can they be expected to be honest in their reporting or executive duties, as the case may be?
This followup article does sort of give some perspective on the affair. Nevertheless, May is not a "long" lead time in initiating an affair. SInce McBride teaches a course in ETHICS, she should have known better. (SO should the Chief!)
As a sidebar, McBride is the latest example of a moralistic "conservative" falling off the wagon.
If what you're saying is accurate, then Bice should have done a better job with his story. Be that as it may, I still don't think you can just dismiss the notion that the MM article wasn't tainted by McBride. You pointed out omissions by Bice. Be careful not to do the same.
When McBride wrote that she "Just felt a little protective. Knew I didn't want to do you wrong," that doesn't sound impartial. Plus, if the affair didn't "officially" begin until months later, at Brocach, why would she have said, "I honestly had myself almost convinced that we were going to talk about the police department at (Brocach) that night!" unless she previously felt chemistry between them?
You ask if she should be assigned a story again. If you consider that, won't you first ask yourself, and others in the newsroom, "What will readers think of her credibility on this topic, based on the Flynn article?" How important is the credibility of MM to you?
I was one of McBride's students and really admired her as a lecturer and her work as a journalist. I aspired to be just like her, as she is a beautiful, intelligent female reporter who always knew how to get the story.
Whether or not she fell in love and had an affair with a married man who she profiled before or after the story was completed, she clearly lacks morals and ethics and therefore I would be skeptical about anything she writes in the future. What is more, by tarnishing her own reputation, I would question stories she has done in the past, particularly as a reporter for the Waukesha Freeman, interviewing her husband when she was the county DA.
She erased all credibility in my eyes, and it is a shame that she represents strong minded female conservatives.
At the same time, this juicy sex scandal has given her so much publicity that perhaps having her byline would create even more readership, as people are more interested in her now that ever.
Still, from an ethical standpoint, I would "cross her off your list" of freelancers, even though she is such a great reporter...
Bruce, you are absolutely correct that the article appeared to be well-researched and well-written. There is nothing in the record to suggest that anything in the story needs to be corrected or apologized for.
You are also correct that sex sells and the Journal Sentinel and the other Journal Communications-affiliated media outlets probably wouldn't have given this story the play they did if Flynn's transgression was a failure to pay his taxes or withhold taxes for household workers.
However, perceptions matter. When a former Congressman goes to work for a defense contractor, there are legitimate questions raised. And when writers have affairs with the people they cover, it calls into question their objectivity even when the relationship takes place after the story is filed.
Dan Bice maintains that the letters suggest a romantic interest as soon as the two met. I do not care to spend a second of my time guessing or discussing the private thoughts of McBride or Flynn.
We are all human beings with human failings. For most of us, these are private matters that are between us, our families and friends, and, if we believe in one, our God.
But public officials, and the writers who cover them, are held to higher standards and it is unquestionable that this affair reflects poorly on McBride and Flynn.
You may or may not choose to hire McBride in the future. But to suggest that the matter has no effect on her credibility and to suggest that the harm done to her reputation is "a tragedy for journalism" is naive and self-serving.
Your magazine plays an important role in covering our community. Keep up the good work.
Ethics, shmethics! She may be one great reporter, but where is the journalistic umbrage about a married reporter having an affair with a married man she just profiled? You make little or no mention of the mutual violation of their marriage vows. One wonders what Jessica McBride, blogger, would be saying about some "liberal" reporter who had an affair with the subject of a recent feature article. Probably not .... "he completed her".
I am quite sure there were many affairs that Flynn never was caught at, if his wife thinks it"s fine that"s her cross to bear, but is this what milwaukee needs? A cheif who runs milwaukee with his little head and has trouble with the truth even in his own home?
Apparently McBride broke the law thou shall not become intimate with anybody I wrote about in the past. Why stop there? What about former bosses, teachers, board members, and the like? I don't even think being in love with someone should automatically disqualify some if it's disclosed to the reader. Husbands and wives have written beautiful and touching essays about each other. Children write about their parents. Intimacy has it's virtues too.
The truth will eventually come out about such things... I am not too surprised about
Bices' take - that seems to be his predicable M.O. (He seems to view most moderates and/or consevatives as potential victums of his ink laden dagger.) I do not condone the actions of the adults involved, yet - did we just witness a modern day miracle people in positions of both authority & responsibility admitting that they were acting inappropriately?
WOW! We are certainly not stuck under the Bush Administrations era any longer - are we.
It would be unfortunate to see Flynn depart as a result of this mess - the circles I am involved with respect his approach to Milwaukee's diverse challenges.
Law Breakers!
I'm stunned that no one has pointed out that these two admit to breaking Wisconsin Laws On Adultery.
Adultery is a crime under Wisconsin laws. The crime of adultery can only occur if one (or both) of the parties involved in an extra-marital affair are married to another person. Under Wisconsin law, if a married person has sexual intercourse with a person who is not his spouse, both parties commit the crime of adultery. Under Wisconsin law (WI Statute 944.16), adultery is a Class I felony.
Further, I believe Milwaukee Police Officers are issued a book of rules and regulations in which all Milwaukee Police Officers must adhere to.
In that rule book officers breaking the law shall be/ may be/ discharged disciplined for violating the moral character , and integrity standards and policies of the department.
Is Chief Flynn above the Law?
I work fairly hard at suppressing schadenfreude. It's not healthy it's undignified it leads to all kinds of bilious eruptions.
And, for once, McBride has given me a reason to keep stuffing my instinctive reaction, a reason to think at least neutral thoughts.
Three weeks ago, on the fetid opinion pages of the Waukesha Freeman, Jessica McBride wrote a long opinion titled "Where’s the harm in gay marriage?". It was an uncommonly thoughtful and persuasive piece. It was not what I would expect on that page, nor from that columnist. From a fire-breathing right winger it made for a serious challenge to the thinking of a group I think of as her typical followers.
And, it definitely humanized someone whose profile has been decidedly one-dimensional.
Now, back to work. Nobody ever said that resisting schadenfreude is EASY.
Bruce I appreciated your response. What is not new is the way Bice does his reporting. If you read his stories they tend to be mostly innuendo-laden, filled with half truths, and are frequently hatchet type jobs. Unfortunately the editors of the paper condone this type of reporting cause it sells, There is little regard for truth or the consequences of the people he writes about.
Maybe this sheds some light about reporting, and all the one sided rhetoric that is our news media. I hold MM to a much higher standard than this "style of garbage reporting".
Am I missing something here, but didn't Jessica McBride break up Bucher's first marriage after her "other" in depth story about Busher? I say fire her.
I just want to point out that you wrote a 2,170 word defense of a 5,400 word profile in which the reporter uses quotes comparing her subject to Billy Bob Thornton. You also allow the man to wax philosophical about his "purpose driven life."
The only criticism is from a union (what union doesn't complain?) and a guy who whines that if you criticize Flynn, he gets "sarcastic."
And this, we're told, is a tough profile.
Maybe the JS would have been kinder to you had it not been for your hatchet piece looking at the daily life inside their newsroom, Mr. Glass Houses.
Good work, Bice.
For the integrity of the magazine, cross her off your list. McBride has been publicly labeled an unethical hypocrite and it would be a shame if the magazine’s reputation of high ethical standards gets smeared anymore than it already has.
You are right Kathy. She did break up Bucher's first marriage after she wrote a "glowing" article about him. Is there a pattern here?
Actually, Michel Marizco, Milwaukee was Billy Bob Thornton and Flynn was Angelina Jolie.
I like Brocach. Great appetizers. And beer.
What a load of horse ***** defending the indefensible.
Bruce,
There are several things that come to mind that probably need some exploration. First of all I read the initial story and I never, ever thought it was a tough profile. I thought it was interesting. I thought the reporter included a few negative quotes. But on balance, at the time I thought it was more of the generally favorable view of Chief Flynn. I didn't think it was great and I didn't think it was horrible. I think I'm experienced enough to recognize tough when I see it and this wasn't it.
Secondly, I think that Bice may well have been a little more careful about the issue of McBride's personal feelings influencing how she wrote the story. Certainly every reporter has personal feelings about somebody they are writing about. The art of being a great reporter is to not let those feelings influence what you write. I think that if Bice determined that the fact that the chief and McBride had an affair was the business of the public, then go for the story. But the issue of "journalistic ethics" violations is, first of all, inside baseball, and secondly questionable as far as proof goes.
Thirdly, I think this whole thing that you are defending and that some others are discussing is grist only for the chattering class if Milwaukee has such a thing.There are lots of things in Milwaukee to argue about and serious problems that we have to solve. Whether the chief and McBride had an affair is well down that list. And whether some journalism professor violated an ephemeral ethical standard is even further down the way.
Dave Begel
Here's my prediction - Jessica gives up custody of Paul's baby and she and the CHIEF set up diggs in SanDiego by January 2010.
When was the last time the Journal Sentinel worried about journalistic ETHICS? Please somebody tell me quick!
Mr. Murphy: How long did you know about this? Once you became aware of the affair you should have given Ms. McBride a chance to release a statement regarding what happened. She then should have disclosed the affair, the timing of it, whether she stood by the article, and then perhaps something about the two respective marriages involved. Absent that, then YOU should have disclosed this mess, not Mr Bice.
Normally, you seem to explain the various interests involved in stories very well. You have become something of a balance or check to the Journal/Sentinal. You did not do so here. They are now checking MMs stories.
Yes Ms. McBride should continue to have her work published, but she should think twice about her work with high ranking law enforcement officers as she seems to have a problem controlling herself. No she should not teach ethics to journalism students.
Has Flynn gotten the murder rate down? If so, great. That's what Milwaukee needs.
What is the point of the JS article about an affair of these two? To sell newspapers. This may be what the JS needs but not what Milwaukee needs.
I don't really want to read about the private affairs of married people. I don't approve of their behavior but it's really not my business. It's the business of those people and their families.
I want to see newspapers take on the most critical concerns of our community. This is why they are there. Let Bice put his magnifying glass (though, apparently warped)
on more crucial concerns. Milwaukee needs to focus on improving its neighborhoods, businesses, and environment-not on the private sex lives of our citizens.
So she started to fall in love with him when she was writing the article, but she didn't start sleeping with him until later. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, her budding feelings for him colored her profile? If there was no conflict of interest, why in the world didn't she just respond to Bice's questions and tell him that the affair didn't start until after the article? Do people never learn? Covering up never works.
Or, Flynn is doing a decent job. Let's all trust Bruce and say, "ok, maybe Jessica is a good reporter." And,then, if Dan Bice would move to SanDiego, the Journal Sentinel will solve at least one, jounalistic ethics concern.
I think Marizco hits it on the head. This was a puff piece, not a hard-hitting piece of journalism. It was a feature article about a public figure, and the reporter was either wanting to schtupp him or had already been schtupping him. Who's to say that the email "trail" and the "tough" emails that McBride was sending to Murphy weren't just cover for the fact that she was schtupping the subject of her story? Murphy seriously has the blinders on here. Why should he, or anyone, let alone her students, trust a word McBride says? Even if everything she says is true, which is hardly likely, starting an affair with the guy 2 weeks after the story hits the street is unethical. It's wrong. It calls into question the objectivity of the story. MM should be apologizing to its readers, and rather than being defensive, using its vast resources to get into this story and tell readers the truth!
While no one will excuse what either of these two did the fact is that the Bice coverage comes off as a smear piece. It was obvious at first read that there were holes in the narrative and all the available facts were not on display. The "sex sells" aspect was the driving force behind the coverage but McBride's attack dog conservative blogging surely had the liberal JS newsroom licking their chops to get this in print.
In reality as with most affairs no one wins. All involved come away tarnished by both the affair and the coverage. While McBride may have to face some questions about her personal and professional ethics, Bice comes away with equal damage to his ethics as an "unbiased reporter".
I only hope that this whole mess doesn't cost a city in need of a leader the most effective police chief it's had in decades.
Look, she's a confessed CHEAT. Why believe anything she desperately says now in an effort to save her "ethics" job. The long running rumor here in Waukesha is that she and Paul also CHEATED on his ex wife. Hopefully someone will check that out. That would make her a 2 time trollop. Those of us who have cancelled our Freeman subscriptions because of her narrow minded "coulteresque" extremist rants are hoping she loses that job too. Journalistic Ethics? This is much more about total hypocrisy. Sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman? Spare me Jessica. My thanks to Bice. Well done sir. Keep digging.
Dave-In all honesty I do not think that many people look at Bice as "unbiased".
for the record
not all affairs are equal... Some lead to great marriages. Some lead to the truth and end of lousy marriages. Some are a lot of fun.
The fact that she is considered a good reporter is all well and good, however she and her conservative friends who seem to find all liberals morally bankrupt, are just as morally bankrupt. Her response so far to all this has been rather combative. Right now she seems more interested in getting tenured, than getting this behind her, which when you think about it is not that ethical either. Chances are time will heal the wounds for the general public and eventually she can write again if she is that good of a reporter, but her editor better be a damn good one.
Police Officers including the Chief are held to higher standards of ethics and morals.
When the Chief of Police,who is a Public" figure has an error in Judgement,it should be reported to the Public.
Wow, Is Mil Mag hurting so bad that you have to go to bat for one of your writers? This again is a story of personal lives being exploited for publicity. Let it rest what happened happened. You all at mil mag are grasping for exposure and maybe a few more magazines sold shame on you
Who cares? People have affairs on a daily basis. This indiscretion is only the business of the four people involved. The fact that the media reports on this at all indicates that most news is not newsworthy but when the local media has nothing to report on other than the weather, I guess they chomp at the bit for something like this. Does this information have an effect on either party's performance in their duties? No. Move on.
Sorry Mr. Murphy, but the genesis of this affair sure looks to be when she started working on the article and that taints the journalism. Your own timeline indicates that McBride and Flynn had one meeting in December (about the article) and then didn't meet again until May. Why would they meet in May if something hadn't been kindled in December? Absent McBride working on the article, these two did not seek each other out and it appears they had no other interaction, by chance or otherwise.
While it might have taken six months for the actual tryst to occur, it sure appears that something was smoldering on the part of one or both of them at the time the article was being written.
I don't give a toot about McBride's affair with Chief Flynn. What two people decide to do in a consensual manner is their business. What angers me as a person who was interviewed for the story is McBride's credibility and trustworthiness. I spoke with her for 2 hours and one sentence wound up in the story. This is the cost of doing business. McBride and Murphy have the right to pick and choose what material is the most salient and relevant for the story. Fair enough. What I question is what did McBride say to Flynn AFTER the story was published. How do I know that her romantic feelings toward Flynn did not influence her to reveal things I stated in the interview? I have had problems with her in the past printing things that were not credible or drawing inferences that were erroneous and not supported by data. I don't believe she can be trusted. I will never do another interview with her. Finally, Bruce, while McBride and Flynn can have any type of relationship they deisre, if you believe this affair was not going on before the story was written, I question your judgment wake up and smell the coffee! McBride's behavior in the past makes this current fling completely predictable and even more salacious.
Is it a slow news week? Or is Betty Q. pushing for more readership? Cut the B. S. and report about a new fish fry place or a new doctor or lawyer. Those seem to be what you guys do the best
Now that the Milwaukee Magazine has been caught with it's pants down, it acts just like the Journal-Sentinel when the MM criticizes it. *LOL*
Nope, this is a serious ethical problem involving antiquated criminal laws, like our drug laws.
Stan
The only problem with your theory that the affair was going on before the article is that there are some facts. Drink some coffee and read Murphy's account again, starting with the FACT that the idea for the story was NOT even her idea.
"In short, I don't believe this love letter accurately reflects what was going on months earlier, because it stands in stark contrast to the e-mails McBride sent me while she worked on the story and after she finished the story."
###
Of course it stands in stark contrast to the emails she sent you...you're her editor! Now who's being naive?
McBride should not lose her job over this unless all of the local journalists I know who have had a fling or two also do.
Well, my sympathy for Stan, who is left with the gut impression that he was being interviewed by someone who was no longer nuetral on the subject.
And that, Bruce, is the key - can MM afford to rely on free lancers who early on take sides??
Granted, as Stacy points out, the AFFAIR didn't happen until after the article was in print - but given the chronology, does anyone really think JM hadn't developed strong feelings early on about the Chief??
(Geez, Bruce, how many reporters call you and
ask whether their subjects have responded yet?!?)
Some of the episodes Bruce relies on can easily be interpreted as desparate attempts
to overcome feelings toward the subject, when the correct thing to do would have been to call in and request that someone else
take over the article...
We should be far more concerned with the total ineptitude of another one of Mayor Barrett's appointees: Bevan Baker, the Health Commissioner. Now that people are actually dying from the swine flu, where are the closures...or even public health warnings? We have the most infections in the US, and the only place we're hearing about it is through the national news? What the &^%$? Where's the Bice column about how our health commissioner isn't even a doctor? A friend of mine said it best: Baker doesn't need those goofy bow ties to look like a clown.
One thing that appears consistent throughout the majority of this blog’s comment trail is that regardless of whether commentators are for or against Police Chief Flynn or Journalist Jessica McBride losing their respective positions is that their conduct was unethical, immoral, and displayed poor judgment.
With that in mind I ask the question that if ethics, morals, and judgment are no longer part of the job description of the Chief of Police that should be stated and applied to all similar positions. Recently the MATC Board fired Dr. Cole for lack of similar principals even though they showed he was doing a "good job" yet he was fired? The union did not stand up for him like the Milwaukee Police Union. John Balcerzak, president of the Milwaukee Police Association, said his members simply would ask the Fire and Police Commission for the same kid-glove treatment when they are caught making similar mistakes. "We're just asking for equity," Balcerzak said.
If we have agreed to establish a lower standard for appointed public positions lets be consistent and fair and apply the same criterion across the board. If exhibiting lack of ethical standards, moral standards, and judgmental standards is OK for the Chief of Police it should be OK for likes of publicly appointed officials like Dr. Cole of MATC.
The woman is a train wreck. This is just the latest example. Methinks thou doth protest too much, Bruce. If you have to tie the defense into this many knots, the defense fails.
It often seems like the newspaper never got the memo that in an online world, you no longer control the interpretation of stories. Online readers and bloggers do. And I welcome their examination of the issue.
OK!
http://brewcitybrawler.typepad.com/brew_city_brawler/2009/06/the-brawler-has-long-admired-milwaukee-magazine-editor-bruce-murphys-journalism-indeed-its-ironic-that-murphy-got-his-sta.html
It seems that after two ugly recent incidences of unethical behavior by its freelancers (Christopher Bluhm and now McBride),instead of putting effort into writing huge defenive pieces, perhaps Milwaukee Magazine needs to take a little responsibility for its content and vet its freelancers (and, might I suggest, not hire friends) or better yet, hire another fulltimer or two, pay them a decent wage with benefits, and maybe,just maybe, the magazine will be something that Murphy can be proud of instead of something he is forced to defend.
Lucky for Jessica that her husband Paul is not our Attorney General, and no longer Waukesha's DA. He would have thrown the book at her "criminal" behavior. He used to relish this public limelight, beating up and publicly berating those who fell short of his myopic and highly partisan vision. What a lovely pair. Serial adulterers both. Now we only need ask ... are Paul and Jessica done, and if so, is Jessica destined to be Flynn's new "Mc" Bride? So sad. There are kids here who are her real victims.
You mean you haven't already crossed her off the list? Appalling. Who do I call to cancel my subscription?
Murphy's defense is ridiculously self-serving. How can he think McBride's lust for Flynn began only after the story was published? He also unfairly maligns Bice who simply reported the sordid facts. What he should do is admit he was duped by McBride and pledge to assign an unbiased reporter to redo the story. Not a word in McBride's article can be trustedobviously.
McBride, BTW, is an experienced loose woman, if Web comments I've seen about her having had a fling with Bucher after she wrote a profile about him that led to the breakup of his first marriage are true. Although I'm happy to say I never heard McBride's TMJ radio show or saw her column, from what I've read she is evidently a standard-issue, holier-than-thou, right-winger. Doesn't it just figure that she would be yet another in a long, long line of such people to be exposed as nothing more than a hypocrite?
You might smile to yourself at generating controversy for site visits and commentary, but covering up for a co-worker is plain stupid. The woman is a trollup, say it and believe rather than on the edge of denial as if the company you work for is on the brink of death.
Bruce, you asked for input on whether McBride should be allowed to write for MMag. I've been a subscriber for 10-15 years.
There is a spectrum of political commentary, from the well reasoned to those who are just hacks there are plenty of well reasoned folks on the right and left. McBride wasn't one of them.
Every time I saw an article from McBride in your magazine, I generally skipped it. As a polarizing and abrasive figure, I just did not care to read her prose, regardless of how well written it may have been.
Now, she is branded with some new, unfavorable adjectives.
Please use this opportunity to disassociate the magazine from McBride.
I was also a student when Jessica McBride began at UWM. She was always quite professional and very insightful. I've always been a McBride fan. I don't need to agree with her how she lives her life to enjoy her work.
Furthermore, there is a bias in everything we write, isn't there? It's just a matter of supporting your bias with accurate information and reporting the "other side" and finding a way of accurately minimizing the "other side's" opinion. Just like documentaries - it's never completely unbiased because there is someone behind the camera, providing only one view.
Did America fire Clinton for his infidelities?
BR, the question isn't whether or not people should be punished for infidelity she shouldn't be punished her sex life because it is none of our business. (And the "loose woman" and "trollup"[sic] name calling on here is really sexist, gross, and irrelevant, btw).
NOPE, the real question is if there was a conflict of interest. And the basic rule in journalism (which you should have learned in her class at UWM) isn't whether or not something IS a conflict of interest, but whether it APPEARS to be a conflict of interest, because, as we are seeing now, the same damage is done regardless. This is why true professionals know when to recuse themselves.
Enjoy McBride's work all you like just don't believe a word of it. She may be a good writer, but she's not a professional journalist. If it's fiction you're looking for, might I recommend Margaret Atwood or the short stories of Edward Allen. They're terrific.
Please disassociate yourself with this writer. She should not be teaching at UWM - the program has taken a serious hit with this affair. Anyone who teaches media ethics should know better. She needs to find a new profession. Milwaukee Magazine will lose a lot of integrity if it continues its relationship with her. Certainly, too, whether they actually had sex AFTER the article was published isn't nearly as relevant as the fact that she has a track record. Consider her relationship with her husband - he was in power, very married, and she was covering Waukesha. Lo and behold, he is no longer in such a powerful position and along comes Flynn...she plays up to men in general, and this is no different. Bruce, you're being blinded to a major ethical flaw. Also, ***** Feyrer may have a point - many people, including journalists, have affairs and keep their jobs. BUT, they don't teach ethics. What would Bruce Gill have said? I can only imagine.
Denise, your criticism of my "loose woman" phrase is fair. I should have posted, "a person of low character."
Bruce,
I wish I was still teaching journalism, an article like this would provide a great object lesson in journalistic ethics.
It's a good example of how easily a journalist can get sucked in by his interest in the sensational, and then disguise it with selective fact reporting.
As far as whether or not you should use McBride again...you now know more about her than you did before. Use what you know and keep it in mind for the next assignment.
Thanks,
Copper
Keep Jessica McBride
As the grand-daughter of late, respected Milwaukee Journal and Milwaukee Sentinel journalists, and as the niece of a former UW-Milwaukee's Mass Communication professor (now a UW-M history professor) and, a daughter of an author, Ms. Jessica McBride's journalism career was stoked for opportunity and success early on.
It's a shame that her journalistic work will be remembered by her writing on subjects with whom she was personally involved thus destroying her credibility and injurying those that published her. Timelines don't play a role here. The public knows she acted inappropriately with subjects she wrote about. Period.
And, she is no Bill Clinton. Double standards may be abundant here but she does not play on the same field as an ex-president or chief of police. She doesn't hold the status to achieve the "bounce back" that such roles are often afforded. And, she is not handling this with the PR aplumb needed to even remotely put some rubber on her soles.
Bucher, Flynn, where does it stop? There is something, underlying, very wrong here. Where there should be apologies and reflection, there is defensiveness and denial. Where there should be candid responsibility, there is resolve to point the finger elsewhere.
How can Ms. McBride continue to write with credibility and respect? Suspicions are permanently raised. Future subjects will be clouded with her byline. UW-M, Waukesha Freeman, Milwaukee Magazine or any other media outlet will lose luster with her continued employ.
With the foundation that her relatives set for her, it is a shame that she took to building her career in such a manner. At the heart of this are opportunities lost, careers and relationships ruined and black marks where there may have been Pulitzer's.
While I am emphathetic to the human short-comings and suffering here, Ms. McBride's included, it is time to step aside and start anew with lessons learned in the forefront.
Dear Cheesehead editor:
Next time, don't write a headline about another journo getting it "dead wrong" unless you're absolutely sure he or she got it "dead wrong."
Last time I checked, both Flynn and McBride issued written statements admitting that the underlying facts of Bice's story McBride was rolling in the hay with the subject of a profile were accurate. Murph,do you need an editor to explain the figurative and literal meaning of "dead wrong"?
That said, I think that you, Murph, has penned the most brilliant rejoinder in the history of "ethics cop" journalism. How counter-intuitive can you be when every intelligent editor outside of Wisconsin would 1) either say not a damn thing until this story blew over, or 2) put out a statement that you take the allegations in Bice's story seriously and are forming a coalition with an advisory board to look into the matter and will take all due action once a report comes down from the advisory board.
Noooooooooooooo, ol' Murph cuts loose with a diatribe GUARANTEED to provoke discourse on a web site that is geared to get a lone comment about the prime rib special in a new Milwaukee slop joint. Murph, hats off to you. You're an idiot, but a smart one. Don't ever leave Wisconsin, bucko.
Oh goodness.
You say that she asked you whether you had heard from the chief following the story, and that "I would imagine if she was then having an affair, she wouldn't have had to ask." Really? This is your defense? This is a person who successfully deceived her husband for at least a little while. Do you really think she didn't deceive you too?
Hola! Mcbride should be replaced. UWM...EMBARASSING!!! Milwaukee Mag has been taken. She is manipulative and pathetic. Ask her husband.
At what point in this episode of "Drama in Milwaukee" did the affair become Daniel Bice's fault? When people are reporting things, they are reporting them on what information they found out at the time. Whatever information was not known or important at the time, was obviously not in the article because he didn't know of it. Bice is an experienced journalist who doesn't need to be criticized for writing about what other people did. Bice even admitted that he didn't have certain information in his article. No one at any point in time should blame Bice for any wrong doings. All the wrong doings were done by Flynn and McBride.
I agree, Audrey. The fact that Daniel Bice did not have sufficient information was not entirely his fault. It is reported and true that he asked for information (second paragraph), even more than we are supplied with in the one example.
No, McBride should probably not be fired, but she should be given a very strict warning. She has been punished enough as it is already, what with getting national bad publicity and many of her other credibilities going down the drain. UWM and her other employers should keep an eye on her, though. You can't deny that.
McBride's article was excellent, objective - and very well written. Despite not having been a fan in the past, I have always respected her work and continue to for her work on the Flynn article.
I get tired of hearing sensationalized stories about other people's personal lives. Both of these individuals have to deal with consequences of their decisions individually and I suggest the rest of us focus on the MANY other issues in this city that deserve our more immediate attention.
No one is trying to disagree with the poor judgement on either of these individual's parts but at what point does it cross the line of just being another sensationalized story to boost readership?
They admitted to the affair and I moved on as of that day. Can you?
i can hardly believe i'm saying this, as a non-believer, well, actually paraphrasing the bible let he not be the one to cast the first stone. i am amazed at the vitrolic responses. first, who cares if they had an affair. except i suppose the chief of police should know better, however, isn't he in good company, two recent senators confessing and maybe a run away govenor.
can we hold paul b. just as responsible for his actions as you all seem to want to hold mcbride soley for that relationship. and maybe i'll stop too as it all gets to silly for words.
oh, thanks bruce. you again explained things clearly and thoroughly. i cannot believe you would support the reporter unless you believed in the sequence of events.
Hey Bruce, who said anything about being "in love"? Besides you, nobody's said that seriously, let's not romanticize this too much. These were two (married) adults who chose to have sex with each other maybe it was casual sex, maybe not...but love? Nobody said that...Ms. McBride said it got "romantic"...who knows what that means? People have sex without love all the time. So you've chosen to defend this obviously biased reporting (she admits she struggled with her feelings) by explaining she was someone who later "fell in love". Why don't you just admit that you were duped by your reporter, just like she duped all the rest of us? Don't blame it on love.
Poor Milwaukee, it must be shocked when it wakes up every collective morning to find out there's a world out there with more on its mind then an "affair," or more "shock radio in print." What matters is whether Flynn does his job and whether McBride does her job consistent with the ethics each position requires. Our County Parks would be so much better off right now if all the self-righteousness took the time to pull weeds, buckthorne and other invasive plants from the Parks and the Parkways rather then spout off about somebody else's abundance of or shortage of morals. As for Bice, I usually like to use the Journal to wrap my garbage, I'll just make sure from now on that I start wrapping my garbage with his column first.
Bull. I read the article (before news of the affair broke) and urge others to do so now. I got the uncomfortable feeling that something was going on while reading the piece.
The fact that you go to such great lengths to defend yourself and your publication suggests you too suspected as much and now feel guilty as a professional.
get a grip people. you have two consenting adults who decided to do the wild thing in the privacy of a room somewhere. they chose to screw up their PRIVATE lives. what gives other people the right to condemn them by saying the act of sex somehow magically destroys any other good things in their lives and negates their ability to do anything else well. let the record speak, muders and other heinous crimes are down in milwaukee, overtime hours and the costs associated with it are down and she did a very articulate and well researched expose on the man who is responsible for this. as Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" and i will add shut-up and mind your own house.