KCBS Isn’t Only Station That Merits a Critic’s Eye

While I certainly welcome constructive criticism and new ideas, I can’t understand what motivated Times television critic Howard Rosenberg to blast us yet again with his latest diatribe (“KCBS: The Good, the Bad and the Unsavory,” Calendar, Feb. 11). His broad brush and blatantly hostile haranguing of our most recent restaurant reports, including a personal attack on award-winning special assignment reporter Joel Grover, was an all-time low blow. He even acknowledged his bias by saying there’s “something about them . . . “ and “what is it about Channel 2?”

Having a full-time critic at a major daily newspaper to provide meaningful commentary about the community’s television stations is a good idea for everybody. After all, TV is more pervasive in our lives than ever. It can be excellent at times, awful at others. Somebody ought to watch and react. This market, in particular, is ripe for critical observation, given the number of stations multiplied by the number of stories they do. Some station, almost every day, is bound to create something worth criticizing.

Our high-profile restaurant series deserves both praise and critical attention. Grover’s exhaustive 15-month undercover look at sanitary conditions resulted in a major overhaul of health department inspections and far greater accountability to the public. While the series generated controversy, it reported the facts. Our overall agenda-balanced news, “What’s Right With Southern California” and “Special Assignment” also deserve both accolades and critical appraisal, which we gladly accept.

What turns my stomach is the lack of attention Rosenberg pays to everybody else. For whatever reason, he and his management are not watching our competitors very closely. I’ve never seen him devote an entire column to demean an individual station--except ours.

Ironically, he’s attacking us at a time when we’re trying to take a leadership role in providing programming that’s more positive and different from everyone else’s. Meanwhile, the other stations remain unscathed. Gory, reactionary spot news coverage appears on some of the other stations. Cheap, insignificant sweeps series and promotions appear on some of the other stations. Silly, content-less, morning newscasts appear on some of the other stations. Yet a disproportionate number of his columns focus on how “irritating” he finds us in one way or another. That’s fair game. It’s just that we’re not the only game in town.

Take on television. But, while he’s doing it, Rosenberg should switch channels more often. Look for any other attempt at leadership--besides ours. He won’t find it. And, next time he throws out mean-spirited comments about a reporter or a station, let him pick on one of the many who aren’t doing a single thing to improve news reporting and the quality of life here in Southern California.