WBZ doesn't go with Flo on story (radio reporter fired after flap about FBI)

Boston Herald ^ | 08/04/05 | Greg Gatlin

[raccoonradio]

Flo Jonic's story on potential security risks at the FBI's Boston offices never saw the light of day. WBZ (1030 AM) didn't run it after the FBI complained.

And today, Jonic is out of a job.

Lashing out at management in a memo sent to the entire newsroom staff may not have been the best idea.

Until 8:02 a.m. yesterday, Jonic was a general assignment reporter for WBZ, respected for her aggressive and hard-nosed brand of journalism. But insiders also say it's not the first time Jonic has gotten herself in hot water for speaking her mind.

Jonic was suspended a year ago for a similar outburst. Her reaction to management's decision not to run the story on the FBI building may have been the last straw.

Jonic, who started at 'BZ in 1993, was fired yesterday. She declined to comment.

But here's how the episode went down. Jonic was assigned a story on potential security issues surrounding the FBI's Boston offices at One Center Plaza. She began digging in a week ago and put together what one insider said was a very strong report.

But the FBI told WBZ that reporting such a story would be reckless and could put lives in danger. Indeed, the FBI was antsy enough yesterday that they quizzed me and other Herald editors about what I planned to write about security issues.

``Our concern was that by talking about any kind of security issues that are in place or not, it's incredibly irresponsible,'' FBI spokeswoman Gail Marcinkiewicz told me. ``You're alerting adversaries to what weaknesses there are.''

That message was sent up the chain of command at WBZ and higher to parent company Viacom's New York offices. And the story stalled.

Jonic responded by sending an electronic message to Program Director Peter Casey and Assistant News Director Paul Connearney – and copied it to the entire newsroom. The message essentially said that they had caved to pressure from the FBI and had lost standing in the newsroom.

Some WBZ insiders are wondering whether the radio station did indeed cave, or whether higher-ups actually liked the story and opted to hold it until a period when ratings would be higher – perhaps September.

Some insiders say managers made the wrong call by not running the story.

WBZ General Manager Ted Jordan said, ``The story/non-story was not the reason Miss Jonic was let go.''

Jordan declined to elaborate, except to say: ``We disagree with that interpretation of the events. We're not going to comment on a personnel decision that has to do with one of our employees.''

The mood was sullen in the 'BZ newsroom yesterday. As a reporter, Jonic could be blunt, but she was good, and will be hard to replace.

Still, insiders are not defending her reaction. As one staffer put it, embarrassing management is generally not the best way to keep your job.

[raccoonradio]

WBZ is a highly rated, CBS/Viacom/Infinity owned, news and talk radio station in Boston. Wonder if this will be discussed on their talk shows tonight?

>>But the FBI told WBZ that reporting such a story would be reckless and could put lives in danger..."``You're alerting adversaries to what weaknesses there are.''

Hmm...Yes, maybe there was concern of terrorists/ enemies of the state pouncing on security flaws. But you also have the FBI pressuring a news outlet to kill a story--what's more important, our security or the press being able to cover a story like this (if it indeed is true)? A "slippery slope", to use a talkradio expression, here.

>>whether higher-ups actually liked the story and opted to hold it until a period when ratings would be higher – perhaps September.

So, ratings a high motive? Remember this station is owned by CBS/Viacom/Infinity!

>>As one staffer put it, embarrassing management is generally not the best way to keep your job.

That's for sure.

[Fierce Allegiance]

I thought only ladies with chronic diahrea were named Flo.

[Amalie]

"But you also have the FBI pressuring a news outlet to kill a story--what's more important, our security or the press being able to cover a story like this (if it indeed is true)? A "slippery slope", to use a talkradio expression, here."

These are the types of things that people used to get shot for treason, especially at a time of war. It would indeed have been very reckless for the media (any media) to run a story to simply expose weaknesses in our law enforcement system. I have no "love" for the FBI, but this type of "journalism" is simple sedition packaged up in a First Amendment fish wrap. She should be glad that all it cost her was her job.

[rhombus]

This sounds like another reporter too full of herself to stop and think for a minute. I listen to WBZ every morning. They take much of the CBS anti-Bush crap right off the wire and read it. It had me chocking on my Cheerios during the election.

[rabidralph]

I can understand the FBI's position but I would have asked them to delay the story until the FBI could start the process of closing the security holes. I hope the FBI will be proactive and fix those flaws anyway.

[raccoonradio]

>>I would have asked them to delay the story until the FBI could start the process of closing the security holes.

Yes. My job is with the U.S. Postal Service and we have to worry about things like anthrax (2 D.C. postal workers were killed be exposure to it, post 9/11). We had a drill that showed us if the equipment (supposedly goofproof) detected anthrax. Get into that decontamination tent, don't even think about leaving, and the facility will be closed a good year or two. Civil libertarians complain about a "police state" but in these times such things are necessary.

[cloud8]

> This sounds like another reporter too full of herself to stop and think for a minute.

I thinks she wants to wake up in NYC.

>I listen to WBZ every morning.

Too many commercials :)