Amy Jacobson Redux

"600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

It takes a lot of guts to relive a humiliating – and very public – professional embarrassment. But, hey, Amy Jacobson has got guts in spades.

I was in a Chicago newsroom one year ago when the story broke of how Amy Jacobson came to be suspended from WMAQ-5 in Chicago after she was caught on tape at the home of presumed-killer Craig Stebic in a bikini, and I can tell you the comments and snickers from both male and female journalists were both highly sexist and vilely cruel – and this was before anyone had even asked for Amy’s side of the story.

According to Jacobson, then a popular reporter who’d been with WMAQ-5 in Chicago for ten years, she had been on her way to the East Bank Club for a swim date with her two little kids when she got a call from Craig Stebic's sister inviting her –and her kids – over to the house to talk.

On July 10, 2007, a few days after CBS-affiliate/rival station WBBM-Ch. 2 aired video of her in a bikini top with a towel around her waist at the Stebic home – where perky suburban mom Lisa Stebic had lived with her two kids and presumed-guilty husband until her April 2007 disappearance – she got fired from WMAQ-Ch. 5.

This week Jacobson filed suit against Channel 2, seeking more than $1 million in damages – and some vestige of her professional dignity – for portraying her as "’an adulteress and disreputable reporter.’" According to Jacobson, her reputation was tarred and feathered such that even though a year has passed she hasn’t been able to get a comparable job in a comparable media market and had to sell her house and move her family into a small apartment. They’ve already said the suit has no merit.

How Channel 2 got the video was never made public and Amy’s side of the story was literally laughed off by both media people and Chicago viewers. Not only was she made the butt of countless tasteless jokes, but she was highly criticized for not exercising "better judgment" though she did what most reporters would have done.

It’s a jungle out there in the media world. Even a year ago the journalism career path was a fool’s errand, and the adage that you’re only as good as your last top story or front page piece will never die. What they don’t teach you in Journalism school, however, is that no one cares how you get that story.

Good judgment? Journalists are not trained to exercise good judgment, they are conditioned to squeal "how high" when editors say "jump," and even when they aren’t blessed with the obedience gene, they instinctively run toward the gunshots, toward the burning building, and toward the lunatics. And if the family member of the summer’s hottest wife-murderer story happens to call and you might get the scoop of the city YOU RUN.

After hours or on your day off? Of course! In a bikini? You grab a towel. With your kids? Hmmmm…are there other kids there? According to Jacobson, she was told she was walking into a family get-together and decided it was probably ok, little did she know she was the one in danger.

And now, she’s living the nightmare over in a quest to clear her name, and she should get a medal for courage in the line of fire.

There’s no question in my mind that if any of the lead reporters on the ex-cop Drew Peterson story were called by a family member with the promise of a break in his young wife Stacy Peterson’s disappearance case, they’d be on it like white on rice under any given circumstance, and no one would bat an eye – such are the pressures to drive a news story that reporters are under these days.

But if you happen to have a pretty face attached to a hard-nosed reporter’s brain it seems there’s a double standard that opens you up to every dirty insinuation in the book.

Bravo to Amy for sticking up for herself, even if she loses the lawsuit, she’s won her integrity. No, scratch that – she never lost it to begin with.

Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact

eejaycee@600words.com

Comments

[Carlton Blanchard]

David,
You're right about at least one thing. Having reread my own comments... they are a little on the mean side. Truthfully, I don't think you work at a drive-thru. I suspect you are a 50 year old, well read, professional who is articulate and a decent writer. Having said that, I apologize for the "stick up the butt, etc.."

I won't back off my defense of AJ. I'm sure $1 million is her loss for this year. But who says she'll be employed in a major market next year? And what is the price of a reputation these days? I'd say a good rep is worth more than a cool mill.

[david durham]

Blanchard,

I tried imagining Amy telling the truth as you suggested and had no trouble with it at all. In fact, if I were a betting man, I would bet that she is telling the truth about being on her way to the EBC when she got the call.
I laughed out loud when I read your suggestion that Amy's boss would have sent her to see Stebic while wearing a bikini. I believe she would have said that as well. The point is, I doubt seriously that Amy was wearing only a bikini. She chose to display her bikini, as most bikini-clad swimmers would, when she got to the pool.
Regarding the lawsuit business, I neither stated nor implied the lawsuit was over whether Amy's judgment was sound or not. Neither is it over whether the way she was portrayed caused her financial harm. It certainly did.
The suit is over whether CBS' coverage portrayed her as "an adulterer and disreputable reporter."
Again, that is laughable. No one, and I mean NO ONE, believes Amy is an adulterer because she was shown in her bikini on, and that was my point, pure and simple.
I actually do have sympathy for millionaires. I just have a hard time imagining how one year away from such a great gig would have put her in the poor house. But no, I do not feel sorry for AJ, a reporter, for the way she was portrayed by other reporters.
Bitter? I am not in the least.
Carlton, your response was downright mean. I had no idea that my thoughts on this subject would elicit such attacks.
I wish you the best.

[Carlton Blanchard]

David,
First... I suspect strongly that EJC did not mean that Amy's reputation was literally tarred and feathered. I suspect she was speaking figuratively. In which case...why can't a person's rep be figuratively tarred and feathered?

Okay. Now try this. Try for one moment and imagine (I know this will be difficult) that Amy is telling the truth. She was driving to the EBC with her kids to go swimming. Is it really that bad to stop for a chance at the big story?

I too have a little experience at the news game and I'll bet you that if Amy had contacted her boss right then and said.."Hey Stebic wants to talk but I'm wearing a bikini. Should I not got?" He would have said...go! go now! hurry!

And Drew Peterson? I'll bet you that other reporters would still show up there today in a bikini if they thought they'd get the scoop! Hell... I'll bet you Chuck Goudie would run over there in nothing but a smile if he thought he could break that story.

Okay. Let's talk about this law suit business. AJ's law suit against Chan. 2 is not about whether her judgement was faulty or not. It's about how she was portrayed in the news and whether that caused her financial harm. There's nothing legally or morally wrong with wearing a bikini. Anywhere. So the fact that Chan 2 has cost Jacobson a rewarding and most likely lucrative career is the issue. I suspect she has several legal legs to stand on in the case.

So what's your problem with AJ? You say you have no sympathy for millionaires? What does a person's income or financial net worth have to do with whether or not you should feel sorry for them? Sounds like sour grapes to me. Maybe your career isn't what you'd always hoped it would be? Is there just a little chance that you're jealous of AJ's success?

I'm imagining you right now standing there with a big stick up your butt, asking yet another customer if they want fries with their order. In that case...I can understand why you're so bitter.

[David Durham]

Dear Esther,
A few points..
I couldn't disagree with you more. Jacobson clearly used poor judgment in showing up at Craig Stebic's residence in swimwear. It gave the appearance of a complete lack of objectivity absolutely required for a reporter.
Sexist? Laughable. People would have laughed even more at a male reporter in a Speedo.
People are tarred and feathered, but reputations? Sullied, perhaps, but tarred and feathered, no.
In no way did I, or anyone else, conclude she was an adulterer as a result of wearing a bikini at the accused's residence.
Naturally, the defendant (CBS) would say the lawsuit has no merit. That is most often what defendants say, true or not. And in this case, it is true.
A medal for Jacobson? I agree. Dunce of the Year.
Drew Peterson's house for a story? You betcha. In a Speedo or bikini? Not on your life.
Jacobson has lost her integrity, unfortunately for her, and this is why she will not work, at least for now, in this town. Peoria, Springfield, etc...Of course. NY, LA, Chicago, not now. And never unless she stops feeling sorry for herself.
Does living in a small apartment mean life is over? I think not. Amy, go out and start anew. If she has what it takes, she'll do fine. But feeling sorry for millionaires, which she almost certainly is or was, I do not do.

[Chris]

Esther...I'll set aside whether I agree or not with your column in order to encourage you to continue to follow this story...I think the theme "reporters as media subjects" is quite fascinating and it makes me (and many of my PR colleagues) amused when we see reporters or media outlets act just like the very organizations or sources they excoriate during a crisis or when bad news hits!