A View From the Sears Tower's Ledge
Illinois Is Getting Fatter
Mayor Blames Violent Holiday Weekend On Booze, Heat
Kuma's Pats Itself On Back With Block Party
Chicagoan Involved In Mount Rushmore Ruckus
It's been a year since former NBC 5 reporter Amy Jacobson appeared in a bikini at the home of Craig Stebic, husband of still-missing Lisa, a move that resulted in Jacobson's release from NBC 5. Now, she's fighting back against the rival network that aired a videotape of the incident. Jacobson and husband Jaime Anglada filed a $1 million lawsuit yesterday against CBS 2 for airing the infamous tape, claiming she has been unable to find work since the incident because CBS 2 portrayed her as "an adulteress and disreputable reporter." Chicago's personal Smoking Gun, Eric Zorn, has the court papers which claim the following:
- Seven parties, including CBS Broadcasting, several CBS 2 employees, a Northwestern University professor, and the owner of the home from which the video was shot are named as defendants.
- Jacobson's four year-old son still cries when her unemployment is mentioned.
- The tape had 150,000 viewers in its first day and led to "more than a million stories and comments" on the internet.
- The Law & Order episode based on the incident reflected an industry-wide perspective of Jacobson as an "unethical person" and further hindered her career.
- CBS 2 attempted to pass the tape off as theirs even though it was shot by a neighbor, defendant Tracy Reardon, who "had a grudge against Craig Stebic and intensely disliked Amy Jacobson."
The papers turn downright catty at one point: "Even the well-known and discredited CBS defense of 'fake but accurate' won't work this time; because the story is both fake and inaccurate." Rowr. The papers also detail Jacobson's alleged rise from food stamps to six-figure salary as well as some behind-the-scenes chicanery between CBS 2 and NBC 5 regarding each other's coverage of the Stebic story prior to the Jacobson brouhaha.
So who's at fault, readers? Did CBS 2 portray her unfairly? Is the knock to her reputation unfair or did she bring this upon herself? [Trib, S-T]
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
I admittedly don't have a lot of experience with court documents -- do they all start off sounding like a Hollywood script pitch?
And did I read it right, is her husband wanting damages because The Jake isn't having as much sex with him anymore?
If it was Ron Magers in swimming trunks he'd have been mocked for a couple days, lampooned viciously and kept his job.
CBS2 did everything in their power to turn this non-story (about a non-story, except to the family of the missing woman) into something as sexualized as possible. It was gotcha "journalism" with, as Eric Zorn put it, the scent of sexism is all over this.
Amy Jacobson was painted as an adulteress and a schemer for wearing a bathing suit in *gasp* the backyard of *gasp* a man who was *GASP!* not her husband.
If she'd been wearing a ballgown with some cleavage at a formal dinner for the governor and happened to get a tip on a story would we say it was all about her boobs?
I'm not a fan or not-fan of hers, but this whole mess has been more about making something out of nothing than about any actual "wrong-doing". The fictional narrative of the seductress Amy Jacobson is far more appealing to some people than the facts of the matter.
I don't think she's some seductress trying to get a story, but I do think she was behaving unprofessionally and got caught. Too bad for her. A credible reporter does not bring her children in tow to a "story's" house. Wah wah.
A credible reporter does not bring her children in tow to a "story's" house. Wah wah.
You're grasping at straws with that one. Read the story. She got a call from the family, the sister to be precise, and she had her kids with her on the way to the pool. She has two young kids, can't just stuff them in the trunk. They played in the pool, she was in a suit in case she needed to go with with the little one. Why is this such a leap of logic?
"Credible reporter" is some imaginary animal who never spends any time talking to sources about anything but the story or never uses a social occasion to talk leads? That's what she was doing. Far more "credible reporters" have used social settings to get leads and quotes and build stories.
What bothers people, what sticks in their craw even if they won't admit it, is Amy Jacobson in a swimsuit. Filmed, illegally, by a neighbor and edited by CBS2 to look like she was out sunning with the subject.
Funny, I remember her being quite smug about this not affecting her career and now a year later; courtroom time.
Honestly, I think there's way more to this story than we're seeing. The incident itself is nothing, it was off hours, but what's happened afterwards seems somewhat extreme.
She has either really pissed off the wrong person in this industry or is such an abrasive personality that this was a long time coming.
Nevermind the "credible reporter" or "swimsuit" issues, what I have a problem with is a woman knowlingly and voluntarily taking her children to the home of a man who is suspected of murder, no matter HOW she's dressed. I don't care how many relatives or others may be around, that's just plain nuts.
She has either really pissed off the wrong person in this industry or is such an abrasive personality that this was a long time coming.
So, "Bitch got what deserved"? Utter tripe.
How was being hopeful that she could find another job "smug"? Would it have been better for her to a prostrated herself before the cameras and wailed, begging for forgiveness for doing something that was, at worst, slightly less than well-advised?
Again, the sexism running through this whole story is infectious. Did you see what Law and Order did to this story? They made her into a murdering career climber. A show seen by millions, "ripped from the headlines". Her reputation has been destroyed because she was wearing a swimsuit. Again, if it were Mark Supplesa or Warner Saunders, this wouldn't even be a footnote.
The Ron Magers in speedos argument was one for Channel 5, and apparently Jacobson lost that one. This argument is that channel 2 humiliated her, and it's going to be tough to win. Jacobson is a public figure, and TV news has long been about the gotcha. She just got bested this time, that's all.
The brief is really catty, but that's court strategy. That brief is going to get slathered all over the media (*ahem*) so why not make it something worth reading. Her attorney isn't some ambulance chaser, they know what they're doing.
Stebic wasn't, and still isn't, a suspect. He wasn't even a "person of interest" at that point, that was later. His sister and family were there at the time.
This gets under my skin because of how easily she got branded with something like a scarlet "A" and driven into the wilderness.
Albany - regardless of what you say, there is always "more to the story" than meets the eye. It may not have been "fair" how she has been portrayed in the media, but let's face it... it's the media! Since when do they ever portray anything fairly.
A phrase comes to mind... if you can't stand the heat...
Good luck Ms. Jacobson!
Since when do they ever portray anything fairly.
With expectations that low, what do you expect?
If she really was a problem reporter and there was more to it than just this incident (though with a bunch of emmy wins and defenders all over the local press I don't buy that) it still doesn't excuse CBS2 for their game. And the neighbor, and the professor.
I think they'll settle for a big chunk of change just to avoid having their newsroom dragged into court and held up to the light.
I think CBS really played dirty here, but as much as they did cruelly pounce on a mistake by Jacobson, it indeed was just that - a mistake. I agree that there is a serious double standard here, and that's something we need to address, but she should have sensed that she was exposing herself to criticism by behaving in such a manner. Especially given the legs this particular story had.
"If it was Ron Magers in swimming trunks he'd have been mocked for a couple days, lampooned viciously and kept his job."
Nope, not true. Because the main reason why Jacobson was fired is because she was appraising the cops of what she knew, based on her reporting. Take away everything else about this story and that's a major violation of basic journalism ethics: you're making yourself a part of the story and compromising the objectivity of the story.
I know Dateline NBC doesn't see it that way, but it's true.
sensed that she was exposing herself to criticism by behaving in such a manner. Especially given the legs this particular story had.
The whole case hinges on an expectation of privacy, and considering the tape was shot in violation of the law (the neighbor zooming in and confabbing with CBS2 to "go get her" is creepy to say the least.
This incident raises the issue of a double standard, and the privacy and media manipulation (showing Stebic shirtless right next to footage of Jacobson shot 6 minutes apart? Come one) and all at the expense of someone with a good track record as a TV reporter. Is she Woodward and Bernstein working the watergate case? No. But there's a lot going on here.
sensed that she was exposing herself to criticism by behaving in such a manner. Especially given the legs this particular story had.
Or, given her history of "getting a story at any cost," this was the tactic that finally undid her? And I don't think it's sexist in the least to say she shouldn't have brought her kids along, no matter what the circumstances!
And I don't think it's sexist in the least to say she shouldn't have brought her kids along, no matter what the circumstances!
And if she had dropped them off at the magical "babysitter you can find at a moment's notice in the summer during the day" she would have been called out as a bad mother. Adulteress or neglectful mom, these are the choices of the modern career-minded woman?
If anything having the kids along could be seen as the most clever tactic of all. "C'mon, I got my kids here, just us chatting, so what happened that night..."
If it were Warner Saunders, he'd be fired and claim racism. If it were Ron Magers, he'd be fired and claim ageism. That is, if they couldn't get another job.
She was a guest at the home of the main person of interest in a big news story.
The bathing suit aspect just shows that she was off-guard and comfortable in her surroundings. It's symbolic of her relationship with a family that she should not have been consorting with at the time.