Arthur Chi'en Back On The F***ing Job!

Our dear friend Arthur Chi'en, last we heard, was still reeling after his unjust dismissal for reacting like an average local New Yorker to two average local New York morons on a local New York newscast. Today, justice is done, Gothamist points out, as Chi'en gets his due at Channel 11. Chi'en's twelve years in broadcast journalism (and gritty insouciance) were clearly too much for the WB to resist. You can look forward to his general-reporting debut on Monday at 10, and read more about A.C.'s new gig in Newsday's coverage.

arthur chi'en-ish , speech-ish by tangentialist at 04:51 PM on 17 Aug 05 | Perm-a-link | TrackBack (0)

Chi'en Continued: WCBS Replies, or: What's So Profane About It?

The triumph of evil over good that tossed Arthur Chi'en to the broadcasting curb like so much bundled newspaper continues. After sending a quick note off to WCBS, encouraging them to suck it up and rehire Chi'en, I received this terse note in my inbox today:

Thank you for sharing your concerns with us. The Viacom Television Stations Group has a clear policy regarding the use of inappropriate language. All employees are informed of the policy and are expected to conform their conduct to it. We appreciate knowing your viewpoint and hope that you will continue to watch WCBS-TV.

After having been the target of penalties for both Janet Jackson's gilded nipple and Howard Stern's unfettered mouth, Viacom have clearly given in. They've been punished, and they've got a rule: No Bad Words.

But would the FCC really have levied a fine for Chi'en's use of the so-called F-word? It seems much less provocative than most other profanity issues on the airwaves today. Take Stern, for example; setting aside any particular definition of "profanity", Stern's show uses rough language and sexual references to explicitly provocative effect--and while he has used profanity judiciously in the past, he could succeed brilliantly without resorting to Carlin's Seven Forbidden Words. Even Bono, whose "fucking brilliant" elicited a questionable flip-flop reversed ruling from the FCC, could be said to have used the word in a more direct and intentional fashion than the WCBS reporter's spin-and-drop-the-mic use of "fuck". Certainly, the "Crazy Cabbie" guy from Stern behind him, with his raised middle finger, was an small order of magnitude more offensive than Chi'en. Don't even get me started on Jackson's nipple.

While Chi'en clearly lost his cool and Viacom has warned their employees about using naughty words, the fact that an accomplished reporter with no prior record was fired on the spot for reacting to on-camera provocation in a understandably angry but relatively less provocative fashion is absurd--and more than a little worrisome. If Viacom's not willing to examine the facts for at least a day or so before taking action, what kind of message does that send other networks, the FCC, and the general public? That a single word is more powerful than a reasoned decision?

By the way, where, in all this live TV, was Viacom's celebrated seven-second delay?

arthur chi'en-ish , speech-ish by tangentialist at 05:39 PM on 24 May 05 | Perm-a-link | TrackBack (1)

Chi'en Revolution!

It was going to happen, anyhow. I am particularly partial to the Arthur Chi'en Revolution tote bag.

[Chi'en Revolution Store @ Cafepress]

arthur chi'en-ish , geek-ish , t-shirt-ish by tangentialist at 03:30 PM on 20 May 05 | Perm-a-link | TrackBack (0)

Arthur Chi'en Fired: Why He Had No Choice

Have people forgotten what it means to live in this city? Do we not hold our media to the same standards that govern our own social interactions? Why, then, has WCBS fired Arthur Chi'en for turning around and dealing with two Opie and Anthony snipers as any good New Yorker would? Let's consider a few alternative reponses, and why Chi'en went with the money:

  1. "Hey guys, can you please cut it out?" Standard fourth-grade teacher material. It's the kind of thing you're urged to say "next time", rather than throw sand in someone's eyes when they're clearly coming for your goodies. We've all seen reporters use this one, and it's totally emasculating.
  2. "Stop it", a.k.a. "Quit it" We all know where this one is headed.
  3. "Go away." Now, on one hand, this is probably the response of choice--a demand for relief, unambiguous, clean, and humiliating. Still, there is a much better version of this one, and it suffers from the same vocabulary issue that got Chi'en fired in the first place. Compared with "fuck off", "go away" sounds like what you say to ghosts when you're ten.
  4. The Non-Response The "gold standard" of anti-heckling, non-response has a reporter taking the high road. This should, in principle, work for the duration of a fifteen-second standup; let the morons do their thing, confront them during the cutaway, leave the dirty work to the producer. A network expects this sort of thing from their reporters, the stoic face of impartial reportage. The problem with that is, you have two guys waving an Opie and Anthony poster around behind your head, toying you and your network like elementary school crossing guards, and you're going into your segment with millions of New Yorkers going, "Man, Arthur Chi'en's a dork--why doesn't he do something? Maybe he should have stayed at NY1." No, Arthur Chi'en grew up here, and he says "fuck that".

Yes, given the options, it is clear that Chi'en did the right thing. Confronted by brown-nosing radio interns on a dare, our man on the scene finished his sentence, turned, and asked the appropriate question: "What the fuck is your problem?" Why fire the guy? CBS should have given him a fat raise.

[The footage]

[Gawker's take on Chi'en's firing]

arthur chi'en-ish , speech-ish by tangentialist at 12:05 PM on 20 May 05 | Perm-a-link | TrackBack (1)