Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Revisiting Our Identity Crisis

We've discussed this before, both on this page and in dozens of emails. The last time we addressed the issue in a post (back in February), we were averaging just over 100 readers per day. With current levels reaching about ten times that figure, this might be a good time to restate a few things.

First, let's look at what we wrote back on 2/25:

Omaha is too small a town to write this sort of stuff under anything other than a pseudonym, especially if we want to keep our day jobs. We're still working on the pseudonym part. Here's what we can tell you: we are longtime Omaha residents who do not work in television, radio, or advertising. One of us possesses a master's degree in English. One of us may have worked in radio on a couple of occasions, but not recently. We are not writers or entertainers by trade. We have never been employed by a carnival, circus, or casino. We are not attorneys, and our advice should not be used as a substitute for professional medical care.

Why are we writing this blog? Apparently because we have nothing better to do. We began because no one else has and we grew tired of waiting; in short we are writing the kind of blog that we'd like to read. We hope you like it, but if you don't, feel free to cast it aside at your leisure.

So what can we add?

For starters, we can say that our hunch regarding the need for a pseudonym seems prescient, especially if you read the tone of the speculation in the MediaLine discussion board thread devoted to us. Weird wild stuff.

Second, we will underscore that none of us, including Ted, has ever worked in television. Ever. In any capacity. Ever. Swear to God, hope to die, stick a needle in our eye.

But seriously: we're really NOT TV or media types. You wouldn't know us if we listed our names here in 24-point bold-faced font. We're just viewers writing a little blog that keeps track of what's going on in Omaha TV. We started it out of frustration with two things: that the daily newspaper here in town can't seem to find space for such news, and that local TV seems to be getting worse, not better.

People we are NOT:
  • Sean Weide (this is the most frequent guess we've received). We didn't even know Sean existed when we started this. We now know who he is and we've even corresponded with him on occasion, but he does not write for OMAnews.
  • Jim Fagin (this is the most surprising guess). We hope we don't sound like the kind of people who would cut their own hair. But beyong that, we didn't even know Fagin was still in town until he sent us an email noting that he had been accused of being Ted. Ouch.
  • Mike Sigmond (we hear this is the top guess at WOWT). Sigmond was recently absent for a week or two, we assume, on his honeymoon. If you examine the amount of writing posted in that same period, you'll quickly conclude that either (A) he spent his honeymoon within reach of local broadcast signals or (B) he is not associated with OMAnews. (Hint: Choose B.) Beyond that, if Sigmond were writing this, do you think he could've left his mom out of it for this long?
There are six or seven billion other people that we are not, but listing them all here would be tedious. No one has a clue who we are, and that's the way (uh-huh, uh-huh) we like it and expect it to stay.

14 comments:

janetdoe said...

You (one or many I guess) were also "identified" as Todd Clark from KETV (formerly WOWT) at one point.

bandit75 said...

I think Ted is the walrus. Does it really matter who he and the gang are? Not really. If these people that keep wondering really want to know, why don't they call Mike McKnight and have him investigate it. That would be hilarious, given Mike's technical prowess and super-sleuth skills.

kitty said...

Mike McKnight ... that is pretty funny!

How come you don't tear about Cox's CBTV?

http://www.iwcc.edu/cbtv17/

Corby said...

I enjoy the blog. Glad to see somebody's doing this sort of thing on the net. Todd and Tyler do a great job on the radio ripping local crap TV but hearing an educated voice in the blogosphere is also refreshing.

Everyone involved, keep it up...and consider giving an anon. interview to Todd and Tyler. I'm sure they'd love to swap stories with you!

-Corby-

pia said...

I have to laugh because every reference I have ever made on this blog to Mike Sigmond and his Mommy side kick have been deleted. I have never seen "the blog" go after any of his lame reports as it has others. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Ted Brockman said...

Pia's refs to Sigmond were removed due to their defamatory content.

Ted Brockman said...

We'd forgotten the "Todd Clark" phase of the guessing game. He's not one of us, either.

Will said...

Why does it have to be a man?

Methinks Rebecca Kleeman. She doesn't seem to do much more than those annoyingly vacuous remotes on Saturday mornings. She has plenty of time to do this.

pia said...

Funny you judge the defamatory content and never edit janetdoe! One in the same eh?

Ted Brockman said...

I'm not going to get into a nit-picky audit of everything anyone has posted. I deemed your comments out of bounds and removed them. I've got a product to edit and that's what I did.

whatever123 said...

Hey Janetdoe....shouldn't you be appraising a house somewhere?
And JD's best friend Ted, you crack me up with the "defamatory" comments routine. Everything you have to say on "your blog" is defamatory. I know it's your blog. I'd start my own, but I actually have a life. I know....I'll be deleted.

Ted Brockman said...

This one isn't being deleted because it's not defamatory and it allows me to make a distinction. Critiquing on-air performance is not defamatory. Impugning someone's personal reputation is. Learning the difference will make you sound much smarter in future posts. Thaaaaat's for what it's worth, of course.

gradstudent said...

pia, you are my hero.

gradstudent said...

pia, you are my hero.

You are visitor number