Media Coverage of SMU & email to WFAA

Mr Pony and Mr. Mustang1965 both made good points about WFAA coverage of SMU/UTEP last Saturday. Thanks for the email addresses and the email showing your complaints.
I have been disgusted with WFAA and DMNews non-coverage, misplacement, and negative slants in reporting for a long time now. After reading some of the posts in an earlier thread I decided I had been quiet for too long, so I vented on Joe Trahan at WFAA. I will include a copy of my email (sent today) and hope most of you can agree with it. I left out
a lot of things gathered over the years and concentrated mainly on the coverage of the SMU/UTEP game on Saturday night.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Joe Trahan-
Here is a copy of one of your replies to an SMU fan from which I will select specific points and make comments on them.
The items in bold blue are the points for my replies.
Let me start out by saying that I am a graduate of the Univ of Texas 1968 and a graduate of the Univ of Colorado 1961; and I live in the Dallas area.
I think your coverage of SMU has been blatantly descriminative over the past several years - starting with lack of attention overall, putting a negative spin on coverage many times, and relegating even good SMU news to last in your broadcast. (evidenced by the win over UTEP.) I would even go so far as to say this is liking kicking us when we have been down. We are trying to turn that around, and the game Saturday wasn't just a one game win - we beat a good team and knocked them out of the CUSA championship game and possibly a bowl game. This was the culmination of a three game winning streak. The week before we probably knocked Houston out of a possible bowl game on their own field. Given this also includes a season in which we beat a very good TCU team and almost certainly knocked them out of a BCS bowl. And while I know about "ifs" and "buts", we probably should have won the Tulsa game (overtime), the Marshall game (overtime - caused by a referee's bad call in not awarding us with a reviewable fumble at the end of that game)
This is just to say that it would appear SMU is making strides and on this particular day they should have had first coverage on your show. As a Texas-ex - I want you to cover Texas - but you have done that all year - this was SMU's day. As for Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas/Iowa State coverage - you certainly wouldn't be letting them down by giving them their coverage after the SMU story.
SMU is your local team. Texas didn't play on Saturday and you gave them excellent coverage on their win on Friday and their prospects for
the top BCS bowl coverage on your Friday 10pm broadcast. In addition A&M, Tech, Baylor - did not play. Give them coverage when they are
playing, but give SMU its day and then cover the others also.
Keep in mind that I am a Texas and Colorado grad - but be fair to SMU. Many people in Dallas are agreeing with me about your coverage of SMU. Most of them are saying they think the media in Dallas - especially Channel 8 and the DMN are being unfair to the local team. We know alums from Big 12 schools live here. I am one of them. But you are perceived as biased, and I hope you can change that. Now about your responses below:
"There's one thing you left out..... they would finish the year with........ a losing season" -
my answer - covered above. Won 3 in a row -
beat bowl bound teams and knocked some out of bowls. This was SMU's day and should have been covered first.
" weigh that against a team Texas team, that I consider to be every bit as local as SMU"
Many UT fans do live in Dallas as I do - the point is
that the physical location of SMU as a university is in Dallas and deserves proper attention. Plus - you already give UT more than enough coverage
on days when they are playing. This was SMU's day.
"should I service fans in the running for a national title first or those rooting for a team putting the wraps on a losing season."
Who says you can't do both by serving SMU fans on their game day while also giving UT & Big 12 coverage later in the telecast. I think your decision reflects your bias in the organizing of the broadcast. A bias which many people have been noticing.
"once I decided to go Texas/Big 12 news before SMU, that forced me to put Oklahoma in front of SMU to keep the big 12 flow"
What a ridiculous statement. You could still keep the "flow" going by covering SMU first and then following with UT and other Big12 action. Again, your decision only reflects your very apparent bias. Noone is "forcing" you to put Oklahoma ahead of SMU coverage - maybe take a look in the mirror.
I have been disgusted with WFAA and DMNews non-coverage, misplacement, and negative slants in reporting for a long time now. After reading some of the posts in an earlier thread I decided I had been quiet for too long, so I vented on Joe Trahan at WFAA. I will include a copy of my email (sent today) and hope most of you can agree with it. I left out
a lot of things gathered over the years and concentrated mainly on the coverage of the SMU/UTEP game on Saturday night.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Joe Trahan-
Here is a copy of one of your replies to an SMU fan from which I will select specific points and make comments on them.
The items in bold blue are the points for my replies.
Let me start out by saying that I am a graduate of the Univ of Texas 1968 and a graduate of the Univ of Colorado 1961; and I live in the Dallas area.
I think your coverage of SMU has been blatantly descriminative over the past several years - starting with lack of attention overall, putting a negative spin on coverage many times, and relegating even good SMU news to last in your broadcast. (evidenced by the win over UTEP.) I would even go so far as to say this is liking kicking us when we have been down. We are trying to turn that around, and the game Saturday wasn't just a one game win - we beat a good team and knocked them out of the CUSA championship game and possibly a bowl game. This was the culmination of a three game winning streak. The week before we probably knocked Houston out of a possible bowl game on their own field. Given this also includes a season in which we beat a very good TCU team and almost certainly knocked them out of a BCS bowl. And while I know about "ifs" and "buts", we probably should have won the Tulsa game (overtime), the Marshall game (overtime - caused by a referee's bad call in not awarding us with a reviewable fumble at the end of that game)
This is just to say that it would appear SMU is making strides and on this particular day they should have had first coverage on your show. As a Texas-ex - I want you to cover Texas - but you have done that all year - this was SMU's day. As for Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas/Iowa State coverage - you certainly wouldn't be letting them down by giving them their coverage after the SMU story.
SMU is your local team. Texas didn't play on Saturday and you gave them excellent coverage on their win on Friday and their prospects for
the top BCS bowl coverage on your Friday 10pm broadcast. In addition A&M, Tech, Baylor - did not play. Give them coverage when they are
playing, but give SMU its day and then cover the others also.
Keep in mind that I am a Texas and Colorado grad - but be fair to SMU. Many people in Dallas are agreeing with me about your coverage of SMU. Most of them are saying they think the media in Dallas - especially Channel 8 and the DMN are being unfair to the local team. We know alums from Big 12 schools live here. I am one of them. But you are perceived as biased, and I hope you can change that. Now about your responses below:
"There's one thing you left out..... they would finish the year with........ a losing season" -
my answer - covered above. Won 3 in a row -
beat bowl bound teams and knocked some out of bowls. This was SMU's day and should have been covered first.
" weigh that against a team Texas team, that I consider to be every bit as local as SMU"
Many UT fans do live in Dallas as I do - the point is
that the physical location of SMU as a university is in Dallas and deserves proper attention. Plus - you already give UT more than enough coverage
on days when they are playing. This was SMU's day.
"should I service fans in the running for a national title first or those rooting for a team putting the wraps on a losing season."
Who says you can't do both by serving SMU fans on their game day while also giving UT & Big 12 coverage later in the telecast. I think your decision reflects your bias in the organizing of the broadcast. A bias which many people have been noticing.
"once I decided to go Texas/Big 12 news before SMU, that forced me to put Oklahoma in front of SMU to keep the big 12 flow"
What a ridiculous statement. You could still keep the "flow" going by covering SMU first and then following with UT and other Big12 action. Again, your decision only reflects your very apparent bias. Noone is "forcing" you to put Oklahoma ahead of SMU coverage - maybe take a look in the mirror.