Tuesday, February 26, 2013

The Anna Chavez Story: Background to be discussed on the Radio Show Tuesday

Many of you have had your say on the Anna Chavez story that I reported on Monday. A story, I firmly assert is 100% accurate based on sources that worked with Chavez in SF. They only provided the information that I had asked for with the condition that their names not be used.

NOTE: Interesting that the story was picked up by a major LA trade plus the LA Times City Beat blog, and Newsblues, (Paywall), but nowhere in the Bay Area. 

On KSCO/KOMY:

I will address the story, go over the issues, in depth on the radio show today in the 2 pm hour.

There is a lot to discuss. And a lot to go over which I will today.

To listen live and phone in any questions, click here

I'd be happy to answer any/all questions: 831-477-1340 is the call-in line.

*Follow me on Twitter

31 comments:

  1. I had read somewhere,that she was doing work with a charity or a foundation?..teaching or counseling. In other words doing somebody good. She didn't go live in a cave.

    ReplyDelete
  2. No chance to call in to your show, but was the stalker you? You've appeared more than creepy with some of your posts, interviews and comments re many of the local tv personalities who you find attractive. The worse example being the weather person on channel 11.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, not me...but thanks for asking.

      Delete
    2. How about with Miss United Nations on today's radio show. Totally embarrassing.

      Delete
    3. Oh, you're just jealous. ..Go and drink some ginger ale fast.

      Delete
  3. Heard your ridiculous comment today that although you never interviewed Ms. Chavez, "even if you had gotten a hold of her, what would she have said?"

    WELL, she could have spoken for herself and talked about why she left the business.

    You seem to think by talking to 1 or 2 unidentified sources, you can appropriate Anna's legacy and explain to the world why she left the business.

    If she had something to say, she would have said it herself. In fact, she did say something herself which is different from your story.

    We simply have no way of knowing what the relationship of Anna to the source or sources. There is no way of knowing their motivation.

    Unless it's Anna, or someone authorized to speak on her behalf, this is no more than gossip and you do Anna a disservice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok, so you had your say...and I had mine. The story is solid and I stand behind it because I know it's true.

      Delete
  4. I only have a few memories of Anna on the air, but I do recall her as being pleasant and personable. She was professional without seeming manufactured. It's not an easy balance for a News Anchor, I would presume, especially for a woman. I have always heard that female tv viewers are usually the hardest critics on other women who appear on the news or otherwise. I think of Barbara Simpson ksfo 560, one particular woman anchor for whom I have much respect. This professional is still on the air during weekends, and can control her callers without raising her voice. Barbara, a former tv anchor mentioned at one point, that she received a 20 plus page litany of complaints on what this tv viewer considered were poor eye make-up customs. Eye Make up?? You just can't please some people. I'm sure the sender of that great tome stills waits for a response.

    We also have Christine (yes, one name will suffice). Christine is well known on this site by most of us. I don't agree with much of her politics, but I have always found her an easily likeable person, good radio voice, gifted with a finely tuned mind. Inner power levened with resiliance and humor. Christine is one of those people who seem to be their own source of energy. I'm not quite sure how to put it. The word effervescent comes to mind. I've heard her state , debate, elucidate, and prioritize her topics. Isn't she a lawyer? She helps we less educated learn how a lawyer thinks.
    Megan, a reporter on Fox news does this same thing. We have some impressive womenfolk in the North Bay, indeed we do.
    Being on the air day after day, a professional takes a basketfull of risks, risks that are hopefully offsetted by the many perks and fine things that being a televised newsperson can bring.
    I wish the very best for Anna. A little prayer has been said.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Number 1 in Southern CaliforniaFebruary 26, 2013 at 7:22 PM

    Whatever happened to KABC-7 Eyewitness News anchor Joanne Ishimine?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey, San Rafael, nicely said. Anna sounded somewhat exasperated when she told us her female fans wanted to know who did her hair, but she said she always told them. (It was a chain salon in Los Gatos.) By the way, Rich's reporting on the Chavez stalkers is 100% accurate. Too bad what was an interesting "whatever happened to" story turned into a forum for Lieberman haters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous saying the story is 100% accurate doesn't not corroborate its accuracy! Who are you?

      Why isn't there any evidence? Police reports, a quote from an actual person providing their basis for knowing facts.

      Unconfirmed, anonymous reports ARE NOT NEWS, they are gossip.
      Please produce a single legitimate news source that is reporting this story as actual news!

      Delete
    2. Hey, putz. The story is good. You don't have to buy it. And I know the story is good because the people, (sources) are individuals who worked with Ms. Chavez and validated my post. If that's not good enough for you, fine, you had your say.

      And while the SF media ignores this story, the LA Press has picked it up, including the LA Times. That's enough validation for me.

      Delete
    3. All REAL media has ignored this "story." A couple of blogs repeated your story.

      If it's real news, why hasn't SF media picked it up?

      Delete
    4. Because most of SF media is brain-dead and depleted.

      Delete
    5. 9:36: The story was confirmed by at least two sources who independently provided identical information, as Rich made clear on his radio show Tuesday.

      People working in TV news are not willing to go on the record and permit the use of their names because they could or would be fired. KPIX GM Bruno Cohen has said as much. (A counter-productive threat on his part, since many reporters are inclined to monkey wrench any attempt to shut them up.)

      Anonymous reports are not news? Tell that to Richard Nixon.

      Delete
  7. I've had female PRINT JOURNALISTS harassed to the point of stalking, on occasion, in the past.

    What happened to this anchor is extremely disturbing.

    America, Land of the Free, where women risk sexual assault if they go to the beach alone, a park alone, a jog, a walk, in many areas. For years, female anchors have had to deal with stalkers who should be locked up. It infuriates me as a father of three daughters and a grandfather of two granddaughters, and as a husband.

    In regard to another point you made: I'm not shocked it wasn't picked up by Bay Area "media," Rich. Staff cutbacks in print and broadcast have mostly reduced Bay Area media to a ghost of what they used to be.

    Just look at The Merc and The Chronicle with their rampant grammatical errors and misspellings. I know, The Chron has always been that way, but The Merc used to be better.

    Add to that their almost complete lack of coverage of smaller cities and city governments (does any news or assignment editor read city council agendas anymore?), and it sends people like me to European newspapers for U.S. news.

    Why read local newspapers when the majority of news is about violence and political gamesmanship?

    For tech, I read tech blogs or news sources.

    For U.S. and international news, I read The Guardian.

    For Bay Area news, I read blogs and Web sites about subjects that interest me.

    I don't think I'm in the majority, but I also do not believe I'm unique for people my age.

    For people my children's ages, forget it. They never watch TV news or listen to it on the radio. Do you think they are going to listen to news on KCBS that is mostly the same at 7 a.m. as it is at 7 p.m. (as it was the other day when my wife listened in astonishment and turned it off)?

    And people think KGO is bad?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The stalker story is true. Back in the day I worked for a large SF law firm that was hired by KGO to work with law enforcement to (very, very quietly) ensure Anna's safety and coordinate appropriate protection for her. KGO did not want a media fuss about the stalker. The stalker was a real sicko (lived in an attic at his parents' home) and police considered him very, very dangerous.

    Think about it. Beyond the obvious stress of having this weirdo stalking you while having the appear nightly on TV and appear professional, the last thing you would really want as a newsperson is to become part of the news yourself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, so how did quitting her job and losing the protection provided by KGO and "a large SF law firm" enhance her personal safety?

      BTW, if this stalker was so dangerous and such a sicko, why was it impossible for your large SF law firm and law enforcement to take legal steps to prosecute or restrain the individual?

      Delete
  9. Hi responder 11:22. I'd like for you to make something more clear to some of us readers today. Of course you don't have to, you owe us nothing, but I ask anyway. What does Anna's Story mean to you? What "dog do you have in this hunt?" Why are you so adamant that Rich does not have a legitimate story? Do you have other information? Are you simply one who expects technical perfection, with all the i's dotted, all the t's crossed?

    Some people like to be right or correct just for the sake of being correct, whether the difference is due to semantics or colloquialisms of custom. That's fine, we need good editors today.
    I make no pronouncements or snarky remarks to you, I just wish to understand your stridence, or the brusque manner in which you try to stick a pin into everybody's theoretic balloon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry San Rafael,

      I wrote a very long, polite, explanation in response to your request but Rich chose to censor it. It's unfortunate but under the circumstances it would be pointless to write another essay. Sorry Rich chooses to suppress opposing view points.

      Delete
  10. Rich, the responder is clearly uninformed. Anna did not lose protection when she left KGO. KPIX provided essentially the same level. (Her boss at KGO became the boss at KPIX before hiring her over.) Not only were there legal steps to restrain the stalker, there was physical action as required at times. Both KGO and KPIX acted quietly and wished no public attention to be called to the matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rich, you've got a problem!

      Some yahoo (11:06 and 1:56) comes out of the woodwork claiming that back in the day "he worked for a large SF law firm that work with law enforcement to (very, very quietly) ensure Anna's safety and coordinate appropriate protection for her.

      That's great, Anna left KGO in 1992. So sometime prior to that, maybe it was in 1992, maybe earlier than that, a large SF law firm that was hired by KGO to protect Anna Chavez.

      She didn't quit her job at KPIX until 1997. You really want to tell me that this stalker was bothering her all that time? Then in the middle of March 1997, she issued a press statement stating her intention to leave her job in a couple of months, after sweeps were over.

      That isn't the act of someone driven from her job by a stalker. That's someone making a career change.



      If she'd finally had enough and reached a breaking point, she would have just left.

      Delete
    2. More than one yahoo, actually. Those of us with personal knowledge of the events know you are not among us. Your conclusions are ill-informed and incorrect.

      Delete
    3. 5:03--It is obvious that you haven't suffered a stalker. Pray you never will!
      I had one that lasted over ten years...and I still get an email now and then. He tracks me down and figures out where to find me.

      They never stop. I tend to believe this story and am grateful to Rich for writing it. So many women (men too) get stalked and it is very, very frightening. You won't hear most of us talking about it, either.

      Hopefully, a little awareness was raised here. Thanks, Rich!

      Delete
  11. Excuse me for slightly changing the subject, but on the issue of women in Bay Area media, whatever happened to Elaine Coral from Channel 2 and Lori Thompson, Alex Bennett's sidekick from his morning show on Live 105?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Elaine Corral left to do acting. You can google her (use proper spelling) for more details. I didn't look at the links (because I really don't care!) but apparently, there is some hoo hah around this one as well.

      No idea about Lori Thompson, but googling her might yield some information.

      Delete
  12. Can't help but wonder, if this is indeed such a big story, why isn't it being picked up by any local media? Shows up in a couple of LA blogs but that's it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CORRECTION,
      It was NOT published in the LA Times.
      If it was published by the LA Times as you claim, please provide the date and page.

      Delete
    2. http://www.muckrack.com/shelbygrad

      Shelby Grad
      City Editor

      Delete
    3. Clarification: Shelby Grad is city editor of the LA Times and re-ran the original story from Fishbowl LA/MediaBistro in his personal blog which is not LA Times content.

      Delete