Kane Hoax

William Taylor was standing at the corner of a busy intersection in Tyson’s Corner holding a sign that read, “I cheated. This is my punishment.” As cars whizzed by, they honked, they yelled, some practiced sign language, and the buzz began to spread through the area. Local radio and TV stations sent crews to get a quote from the adulterer. Soon, the story was picked up by national news organizations and by 6PM, it was on every station’s website and ran on many evening broadcasts. Taylor began receiving calls from Today and GMA. He spoke with The Kane Show on DC’s Hot 99.5 radio station.
On Wednesday, September 02, 2009, after allegedly being accosted by a local reporter, Kane, from The Kane Show, admitted the entire story was made up and “William Taylor” was actually an intern for the radio station. Kane explained that the idea had come to him about 6 months prior, after hearing about a mother who made her son wear a sign admitting to bad grades and smoking marijuana. The ruse, according to the radio DJ, was meant to expose the lack of research and truth in a lot of news stories. He said he decided to execute the plot last week because of the death of Ted Kennedy. The timing was meant to prove the ability of a fluff story to supersede that of a true news story.
Perhaps the point of the deception is a valid one; but, really, was Kane’s hoax an attempt to bring to light a lack of journalistic integrity or was it meant to feed his seemingly insatiable ego? As with many of his segments, Kane came across as self-righteous when revealing his hoax, lecturing on the need for journalists to check their facts and use truth in reporting. Though, in the same hour in which he addressed his moral “experiment”, he also trivialized the truly heinous hazing at a Colorado State University sorority, commenting that eating cat food is “not that bad”. And when a caller admitted that his frat brothers were asked by their sister sorority to color the parts of pledges’ bodies that they didn’t like, Kane responded such an act is “not going to hurt you”. I guess having previously dismissed his journalistic responsibility, saying simply, “I’m not a journalist”, releases him from any accountability in encouraging degrading behavior that can lead to serious emotional distress. The hypocrisy of lecturing others on principled reporting while claiming his liabilities are nil, because his show is for entertainment, seems to be lost on him.
I have listened to Kane for many years, having been in Florida during his tenure at 93.3FLZ, and for the most part he comes across as an arrogant individual who admits to his faults only as they benefit his ratings. I’ve heard him defend asking a spouse to flirt with your boss to get a raise, but condemn a woman for making pornographic tapes with her long-time boyfriend. He’s punished his wife for keeping old love letters from an ex-fiancé by reading the letters on air, but has admitted to looking up ex-girlfriends on the internet. He was enraged at Ashlee Simpson’s rebuttal to claims she was drunk during an interview with his show, claims that cast him in an unflattering light, yet defended the ‘right’ of his co-host to accost a woman who was smoking a cigarette while wearing a Live Strong bracelet. He claims to be pressing for more journalistic accuracy, but has a Celebrity Dirt segment on the half hour that regurgitates mostly fabricated stories regarding celebrities. (Sarah manages to quote from the National Enquirer without even a hint of sarcasm in her voice.) Kane is a walking contradiction and far from being in a position to dub himself a moral compass.
Maybe I’m completely off base, maybe Kane’s only motives were those of a concerned party, but to me this practical joke seemed to feed Kane’s ego more than teach a lesson to the unethical news journalists. From the conception of the plan to the news storm that ensued to his dramatic admission that the story was bogus, Kane seemed to relish more in his ability to dupe everyone than in the principle he was supposedly trying to convey.
After the revelation, Kane commented on Twitter, “MEDIA: ur getting it ALL wrong. if it was publicity, I'd have my name on it. YOU made it a story by not checking your facts. Don't blame me”, but it’s hard to believe such a thing when he had his hand in it the entire time. He didn’t send his intern to the busy intersection and then sit back and watch how it played out. He promoted the story. He posted about it on Facebook and Twitter, interviewed the “adulterer” and “wife” on his morning show, and timed the big reveal, purportedly to thwart harassment by a reporter, to serendipitously cause The Kane Show to be splashed across the internet.
Kane is a good radio DJ. He markets himself well and keeps his show fresh and interesting, a prime example being this story. He reels his listeners in with current events that get them fired up. (On more than one occasion I have spent an hour in the car, yelling at my radio.) He tells just enough about his life to make the audience feel as if they know him. He, Samy, and Sarah have an easy connection, one that leaves you thinking you’ve been involved in a 4-way conversation, rather than having been a mere listener within the masses. As a morning show host, he gets the job done. As a beacon of integrity, however, he is sorely lacking.
If Kane does not wish to be categorized as a journalist, then he should stick to what he does best, reciting other journalists’ stories on air, giving away concert tickets, and playing music. Leave the ethical checks and balances to those who have a leg to stand on.

A Little To The Left...

In recent weeks of the health care debate, much attention has been given to the town hall meetings turned screaming matches. In theory, these meetings would explain the intricate details of a jargon-filled bill that most Congress members are having trouble deciphering (I don’t even think Schoolhouse Rock would want to tackle this one), but in practice they have become little more than a partisan debate over which side’s ideals are more un-American. The fiascos are a chance for one side to convince the other why they are wrong. With each side standing up and asking preposterous questions of the other (Do you really believe the Health Care bill is a communist plot?) and nutcases attempting to disrupt the entire event with their in-your-face tactics ranging from screaming over Senators to bringing a weapon to the affair, these meetings serve as satirical fodder for newspaper columnist and late night hosts, but have managed to accomplish little else. And in the end, most Americans on both sides of the aisles, see it going to the way-side with little changed, as was done with the Health Care Reform bill of President Clinton’s time. We all have the same hopes and prayers at the end of the day, that we and our loved ones will go to our graves having lived such healthy lives that we will never really be affected by Health Care Reform, or the lack thereof. It seems are ideals for accomplishing the unpleasant task of caring for our ailing and sick fellow Americans are so different, however, that we can’t even manage to be in the same room with someone that won’t be brought around to our side of the argument.
But are our ideas really that different? In the end, don’t we all want good doctors, with reasonable costs, that won’t turn us away because we would have to file for bankruptcy once we finished paying for our procedures (if we paid at all)? That’s what I hear, at least, from people on the right to the left to those who like nothing more than to have something to discuss around their dinner tables. So why has finding a solution to a common problem become a passion-filled, fear-inducing, shout fest that has no hope of considering either side, let alone coming to an amicable end?
I’m reminded of a tactic my mother used to keep things fair in our house. Being raised with 3 siblings gives you a perspective on fair that most people don’t have until well into their 20’s, fair doesn’t really exist at all. But in an effort to delay my knowledge of this fact, my mother would allow one of us to split what we were fighting over (usually a candy bar) and the other would be get to choose their side first. And while splitting everything evenly isn’t always the best course of action in adult matters, the sentiment is still the same; represent each side and each side will feel represented.
“I’m not saying Health Care doesn’t need reform, but this isn’t the way.” Or so I hear from any random person on the street who doesn’t agree with my belief about the Health Care system. So, what is the way? That seems to be the million dollar question that our town hall meetings have yet to answer. And with the exception of a close friend who filled several boxes of comments on my Facebook, no one person has seemed to be able to articulate this for me, either.
The true issue of this debate isn’t that we don’t agree, but rather that we can’t manage to come together as mature individuals with a common goal (better health care) and brain storm a solution. I’m sure the highly intelligent, opinionated men that became our founding fathers had their disagreements, as well. But they managed to hammer out a couple of life-altering documents in their time. Hopefully, we can do the same.
Imagine what we would come up with if the screaming subsided, the name-calling ceased, the dramatic, look-at-me tactics were set aside and everyone just listened. Maybe you would hear something you never thought of before. And maybe, just maybe, it would be coming from the opposite side of the aisle. That debate may just produce some results, a little from the left, a little from the right, some from the middle. And then, we might just have ourselves a Health Care Reform bill that has a little bit of hope to reform health care.

**Published 09/23/09 in Eldersburg Advocate