The one issue that has often bothered me about Oklahoma is Tulsa and Oklahoma City's boiling rivalry and the constant argument over 'who is the better city'. The problem with this rivalry is beyond the general public. From my personal accounts, its foundation is the local media in both cities. That is the single biggest problem.

I don't want to pick on Tulsa, and I'm not siding with OKC just because I am from here, but I believe the bigger problem lies with our sister city. I have noticed what both cities are equally responsible for, and that is the oureageous claim to "Oklahoma's Newschannel 4" and "Oklahoma's Newschannel 8". (For those not from Oklahoma, KFOR-TV 4 is Oklahoma City's NBC affiliate. KTUL-TV 8 is Tulsa's ABC affiliate.) Wouldn't this be a conflict of interest resulting in a court case?

Well, in any case, I was in Tulsa visiting family when I was watching KTUL. I noticed that no one from Tulsa calls it "Tulsa, Oklahoma". To them its "Tulsa, Green Country." And the news anchors on channel 8 follow that claim. The meteorologist says "Currently in Green Country" instead of "Currently in Northeastern Oklahoma." I understand nicknames, but I question this because Tulsans often talk about seccession from Oklahoma. Besides, Green Country wasn't so green last Sunday.

See, it shouldn't be "Oklahoma's Newschannel 8". It should be "Tulsa's Newschannel 8". Oklahoma City shouldn't make the same claim either. It should be "Oklahoma City's Newschannel 4".

Yet, I am still very much bothered by Tulsa's talk of seccession. I've seen it in Tulsa's newspapers, from people on the streets, and even on Tulsa's forums.
I understand, empathize and even agree with Tulsa's frustrations over getting shortchanged by the Oklahoma state government, however seccession is not the answer. I know it could never seriously happen, but it sets a bad example and resembles juvenile behavior instead of becoming vocal on the issue. Don't get me wrong, Tulsa is a great city and with wonderful people, but the media can do wonders in influencing the populace. I mean really, do you ever here Gary England say "Right now in Frontier Country...". If I recall, every other state goes by geographical region.

Oklahoma City media isn't quite as bad in the rivalry push, however our local media should set a better example of state-wide unity. Showing other states how split we are on issues will only make our image worse, and can make outside interests feel uncomfortable.

I'm not trashing Tulsa (not until the Blazers/Oilers game, which sports rivalries are NORMAL), but there are better avenues of communication that our northeastern neighbor should follow, and show more originality. There is room for improvement here in Oklahoma City as well.

If we want to survive as a state in this country, this needs to end. Indeed, the rivalry has subsided over the years recently, and that's good. But there are still some miles to cover. For our own good, this rivalry can't continue, and our media outlets need to realize this. At least a lot of people have.

I think many of those in the Tulsa area have good reason to think of themselves as superior. Here are some valid reasons that they think that OKC has been wasting their state tax revenue -- and they're probably right, I believe that the Tulsa area has become a donor county to the rest of the state.

1) They never needed an urban renewal program because they took care of their urban environment. Businesses have actually located in their downtown and it's thriving. They have great things down there like the opera house.

2) Their schools have already done what the rest of the state needed to do a long, long time ago: Consolidated. It's been a long time since a non-Tulsa school won the 6A championship in football. That's bigger than you think.

3) Their city is more of a "city" than OKC. It's better planned (although, OKC is doing a nice job playing catchup). They have some excellent art museums up there that are truly world class, their parks are big and beautiful.

There are many reasons they probably feel left out though:

1) They were not allowed to have the state's 3 largest universities within 45 minutes of their metro area.

2) They were not rewarded for being smarter with their school systems and few people ever point to their success.

3) The success of Tulsa as a city is rarely acknowledged by people in OKC.

***

I think their "Green County" comments are somewhat justified. I can understand a degree of animosity. I think the rest of the state really needs to look to Tulsa to discover how a lot of our problems could be solved.

I'd feel the same way if I was from Tulsa. I'd don't think I'd want to secede, but saying you're from Green Country, does separate you. Anyway, I think they are allowed some bravado because they've had to do so much on their own -- without the use of institutions as central OK has needed. I still think they have some racial issues to deal with, but on the whole it's a gorgeous city.

I concur about their racial issues. I used to listen to 740AM a lot. They still have sour grapes over the race riots of the 30's. Reparations were a huge issue a few years back. I think many in the AA community are upset over how that turned out (I had no problems with it). It's still a very divided community. However, no more so than OKC. It's just that our media doesn't give the attention to racial tensions and our school districts are even segregated (see: Millwood).

There is a simpler reason for the “Green Country” moniker, Tulsa’s media market and commercial region is larger than just it’s metro area and does not lie entirely in Oklahoma, it spreads into Arkansas, Kansas and Missouri. So Northeastern Oklahoma, besides unwieldy, is not fully correct.

As for Tulsa’s pluses, while midtown is fine and never needed urban renewal or restoration, downtown has suffered, it’s never sunk as low as OKC’s downtown did, but it always has been better supported by the very healthy midtown region next door. And the current Vision2025 projects are Tulsa’s second pass at major downtown urban renewal, after the Williams Center and Main Mall projects in the 1970s. That effort was a failure due to not fully incorporating residential development.

Failure may be a strong word, the Forum Mall failed, but so have most malls, it did bring a major hotel and a massive office complex into downtown that could have been built elsewhere in Tulsa.

What burns me is when the national networks call Oklahoma City "Oklahoma City, Oklahoma." DUH!

Plus. Did you notice they just call Tulsa, Tulsa?

That is as bad as calling the Murrah bombing "the Oklahoma bombing." Yes. It happened in Oklahoma, but it happened in Oklahoma City. Plus, it is obvious Oklahoma City is in Oklahoma. It is not like Springfield where there are several in different states.

Tulsa DOES get more national attention. Why, I do not know.

Anderson, I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion? Yeah, they had the whole plot action in Friends where Chandler was supposed to move to Tulsa.. but other than that, I don't really see how you think they get more attention.

It seems every time Oklahoma is mentioned in a national news report, it is Tulsa.

Of course, it really is not EVERY time, but a large majority of it.

I never watched "Seinfeld," so, I would not know. Over the years, Oklahoma City has been mentioned on tleveision programs. William Daniels as Dr. Mark Craig did mention some doctor from Oklahoma City on "St. Elsewhere." I think he described the doctor as a hick (not that term, but implied). Of course, Dr. Craig was a pompus prima-donna anyway. Plus, a character on "Dragnet" was arrested in Oklahoma City. There have been others over the years, but these are theones I remember... Not including "Promise Land," which filmed an episode here after the Murrah bombing.

However, a mention on a television program, although good, is not as good as having your city mentioned on the network news in the lead segment.

The main point is simple. There is only one Oklahoma City... It is only in Oklahoma, so, leave the state out of it. It is somewhat redundant to begin with.

A little hijack..

But your comment about "Oklahoma City, OK" reminds me of my HS days when I worked retail. I'd be calling in a credit card application and our conversation went something like this:

Credit Card Rep: City please?
Me: Oklahoma City.
Credit Card Rep: State please?
Me: Are you kidding?

-- happened more times than I can count :D

I guess they don't get into that line of work through their stellar academic success though.

Speaking of exposure, Tulsa comic and resident Rodney Carrington has a new show on ABC that I have not seen. The show is called Rodney and is set in Tulsa.

And you guys should get out more. Kansas City for instance, at least the big one, is NOT in Kansas. So people can not necessarily make the assumption that OKC is in Oklahoma

here is the story

http://newsok.com/article/1316277/?template=entertainment/main

Kansas City is the exception to the rule. It is also partially in Kansas.

Off the top of my head, there's also Iowa City, IA.

Can't think of any ___ Cities though.

Texas City, Arkansas City (although pronounced r-kansas and not r-kun-saw). There are probably others. Texas City, I think is in Texas, Arkansas City is in Kansas.

Oregon City.

Anderson, I dont know where you are looking but OKC gets way more national coverage than Tulsa. Only the Weather Channel places Tulsa ahead but that is only because in the forecast, spelling Oklahoma City out would not be as asthetic as Tulsa with Memphis on the East and Dallas on the West. OKC gets the current weather listing, which is shown more often anyways.

CNN has OKC listed in the major city lineup, as does NY Times. USA TODAY used to but for some reason they love to place Billings and Boise in those; I dont know why as neither are major cities over 1 mil - neither are over 200K metro. I can only think that it is balance, so many cities in the east (yes, OK is considered east as if you look at the US major cities, the line runs from MSP, down to KC, to OKC, to Dal, to SAT; east of there is east west is west).

In Seattle, we hear about OKC much more than Tulsa - even though Tulsa is a major supply facility for Boeing Commercial (OKC has military Boeing), OKC is considered the major city, like Denver and Seattle.

I think this is why Tulsa has always acted like they had. They always had something to say or prove. People nationwide listened. But when you say OK, you automatically assume OKC - nationwide and statewide perspectives. That is why Tulsa just says Tulsa.

Another point, I have NEVER heard OKC consistently mentioned as Oklahoma City, OK. Perhaps that is a southern thing, as I have lived in WashDC, New York, Denver, and Seattle - I have never heard OKC in the media consistently titled as OKC, OK. It is always Oklahoma City. Tulsa, on the other hand, is ALMOST ALWAYS listed as Tulsa, OK.

For one, spelling out OKC, OK is a lot of letters; and OKC is a metro over 1 mil - typically they lose their state designation. Nobody says Seattle, WA anymore; Portland, well there are two but when someone says Portland, they mean the one in OR not ME.

Dont get so bent out of shape about this. I agree that the two cities should begin to work together (from a media perspective). I often find it weird to have to go to Tulsa media to get good news reporting about Oklahoma City, and to OKC news (especially NEWSOK) where Tulsa stories make front page (online, that is). I think this is weird, I mean, both should promote their own market first, the state or sister/brother city second.

Here, Seattle media reports our stuff FIRST, then we move to Vancouver BC and Portland news, then to state news. then everyone else. But Seattle and Tacoma are always FIRST here. I dont know what is up with OK from that perspective.

I think it just varies with the media source...some cover OKC more, some cover Tulsa more. Seems like with MAPS and all, OKC has been getting more national media attention lately.

Anyways, Midtowner, that's hilarious that they actually asked what city OKC was in. Are some people just flat out ignorant or what? Sure, there are cities named after states that aren't in those states (like Kansas City, MO), but OKC should be well known enough nationally....afterall, it's the capital of Oklahoma. Did someone forget to learn the state capitals in Jr High? LOL!

If the timing is off on this, I am sorry. However, I am curious.

To the out of state people. Did the fatal fire in Oklahoma City get media attention in your city?

Six people in one building killed is surely a national story, but I heard nothing on the networks.

I don't believe that it really is a nationwide story. In fact, that has local written all over it. Want proof? Check out this link:

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=fire+deaths&btnG=Search+News

Then look at which sources are carrying these fire death stories and how these stories relate to their sources. Here's a hint: They are ALL local stories.

In a time when terrorism has managed to inflate the price of oil to $50.00/barrel, kids are dieing in Iraq, etc., I just don't see how this rises to the level of national media attention.

If you can find some examples using search engines about how Tulsa gets more media attention, pleas share. Otherwise, I'm unclear.... Are you just complaining for the sake of complaining? Do you seriously want OKC getting attention for fire deaths?

Yes. However, on your example, only one had more than three victims.

That fire, in Columbus, Ohio, I remember hearing about... On CNN.

I don't necessarily want OKC to get attention for 6 fire deaths, however, I feel that if this made national news, that maybe it will help other people decide if they should buy burglar bars for their house.

Although it is a local story, many people need to know the dangers of burglar bars, and that they make it difficult to escape a fire unless you have a special release on your bars. I understand that most people are intelligent enough to realize the dangers of having burglar bars, but some aren't as intelligent and don't really think about it.

lol.

We were all wrong on this one :D

It did rise to the level of national attention:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/27/fatal.fire.ap/index.html

Of course, that's an AP story. It appears that it was hot enough to make the national wire. That means that the powers that be decided it was an interesting enough story that it could be picked up in other markets.

It would appear that this story was picked up by nearly ALL of our local media outlets. But also it was picked up by the Washington Times, The State (South Carolina), Winston-Salem Journal, the North County Times (Cali), and KTOX (Texas TV station).

I think it's fairly safe to assume that it wasn't exactly front page material for the papers, or a lead story for the news networks, but it did get some play in the natinoal media.

Just to be fair, I checked the same type of story (searched for "Tulsa Fire Deaths") and found nothing having been covered by the national media anytime recently. I'm sure there have been Tulsa fire deaths, but it didn't rise to the level of national attention.

Then to be even more fair, I did a google news search for Tulsa. I found far less national media mentions of Tulsa.

So it would appear that if anyone has a right to complain about a lack of national media attention -- it's them.

From Google:

Total web page search hits

Tulsa 3,880,000
Oklahoma City 4,110,000
Kansas City: 7,170,000
Dallas 19,100,000

Total news story hits

Tulsa 5,240
Oklahoma City 4,410
Kansas City: 53,000
Dallas 45,600

The news story hits are skewed due to Google News not hitting the Tulsa World since it’s a pay site. So Tulsa’s number would be higher if the World were not so short sighted. Google News will hit NewsOK since it is not. Dallas and KC are helped a lot on both tallies by having major league sports.

What I was looking at (and what is even relevant to this debate) is how much national coverage each gets. Whether the Tulsa World with stories about Tulsa gets counted by Google or not is absolutely irrelevant to this topic.

Just plug the name "Oklahoma City" or "Tulsa" into Google News. Then, examine what the sources are. I know there's no way to quantify exactly how many sources pick these stories up outside the state, region, etc., but a cursory glance at the first few pages, you'll find Oklahoma City originated stories are picked up from the wire on a far more regular basis than those that originated in Tulsa.

What I'm suggesting is not the best sample ever (unless you actually want to sit there and count sources), but your above data is completely outside the scope of what we're discussing.

Umm, I did not hear about the OKC Fire up here in Seattle, but then again, I really have not beeen watching the news much.

Pretty much, I have been drained away from it for a while due to the Presidential and state political elections. We have some very bad commercials here so I watch the cable channels/shows and college football (GO OU!) more than the news (local Seattle, national networks).

By the way about OU, it was GREAAAAAAAT to see the new Memorial Stadium. It is HUGE!!!! My fiance saw it on tv and we compared it to other games on TV. She noted what a better quality and larger facility OU has compared to others on TV. I told her there are larger ones, like Michigan and Ohio State, but OU definitely has big league atmosphere and quality in its stadium. I remember when I was in high-school, we would trek down and even then the feeling you get looking at it was something to remember.

Also, I liked how the commentators called it Memorial Stadium, and not the official title - Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium. While i appreciate the Gaylord Family finally investing in something in Oklahoma, I think it was a dumb idea to have them put their name on the stadium. They should have been given naming rights to special events rooms or suites. Those suites look AWESOME!!!! So many!

OU Memorial Stadium looks better than any NFL stadium if you ask me!

And yes, we have been able to see EVERY OU game thus far in Seattle! They have either been on network or cable, with great coverage here. OU gets better coverage than University of Washington (Seattle based) but hey, OU is a much better program with tradition and heritage. I am so glad to see OU on TV. :)

I think having both OU and OSU at 4-0 is great for our state. I hope both schools can keep this up. It might bring our state a tradition similar to what Florida has....they have FSU, Florida, and Miami. Hmmm....3 schools....if we could only get Tulsa into the match somehow!!! I know this is really off topic, but I just thought I'd mention it.

...jeez...I'm a dumbarse...I didn't even know there was an argument over who was better....always assumed OKC...I haven't been to Tulsa since I was probably 7...and apparently I do not pay attention...to anything...

Make the trip to Tulsa you will LOVE it.

I noticed something along this same topic the other day. I picked up this free magazine that was called Oklahoma Life or Oklahoma Magazine or something very general like that (it was not Oklahoma Today), thinking I had discovered a new, very professional magazine about culture in Oklahoma. But I was very offended when I read it cover to cover and it was all TULSA. All the feature articles were about Tulsa restaurants/events/museums, etc. There was a best of Oklahoma thing and every single thing on it was in the Tulsa area. All the ads were Tulsa businesses. But yet they had the gall to call it Oklahoma Magazine.

I noticed something along this same topic the other day. I picked up this free magazine that was called Oklahoma Life or Oklahoma Magazine or something very general like that (it was not Oklahoma Today), thinking I had discovered a new, very professional magazine about culture in Oklahoma. But I was very offended when I read it cover to cover and it was all TULSA. All the feature articles were about Tulsa restaurants/events/museums, etc. There was a best of Oklahoma thing and every single thing on it was in the Tulsa area. All the ads were Tulsa businesses. But yet they had the gall to call it Oklahoma Magazine.

Imagine that.. :LolLolLol

I picked up this free magazine that was called Oklahoma Life or Oklahoma Magazine




Imagine that..

They had to put something on the cover to make people pick it up! LOL


( Now Flyingcowz - I'm just joking, I've never been to Tulsa but I want to see the Lion King, maybe you can recommend a restaurant or hotel nearby and play nice?)

Imagine that.. :LolLolLol

That was rude.

I will have to say, I do not like Oklahoma Magazine for that very reason. You cannot call it Oklahoma magazine and have all of its content focused on Tulsa. May as well call it Tulsa Magazine.

Oklahoma Magazine is based and published in Tulsa, which explains its unbalanced coverage, or lack thereof, in other parts of the state. Quite frankly, it makes the magazine look biased.
It is a nice magazine, but not an Oklahoma magazine. Only for Tulsa.

Oklahoma Magazine is based and published in Tulsa, which explains its unbalanced coverage, or lack thereof, in other parts of the state.

Now, this concept can be used on our state government being based in OKC.

What about the Jokelahoman? Isn't the tagline "The State's Newspaper"?

What about the Jokelahoman? Isn't the tagline "The State's Newspaper"?

I think the circulation numbers for the Oklahoman back up their claim.

Well, it isn't called something like 'Oklahoma City Times, The State's Newspaper'. That would be a better analogy.

I think this is the perfect analogy.

First off, I'm not offended by the tagline or the name of the Oklahoma City paper, but that IS what the Oklahoman is, it's the Oklahoma City metro paper.

It's not a newpaper that has much reporting at all about this part of the state, the articles and ads are focused on central Oklahoma, where it is based. You can buy it many places statewide, but then you can the Tulsa World too, but that does not make the World the state's newspaper either.

Oklahoma Magazine is based in Tulsa, so most articles and ads are from the Tulsa area. How is this different?

The only difference is your own bias.

Why are you offended by this anyway?

The Oklahoman bases its claim of state newspaper for two reasons:

1) Circulation - it has the highest in the state and is considered a Major Metro paper.

2) Coverage - the paper has news offices throughout the state and provides coverage that otherwise would not be given.

Honestly, I see much about Tulsa in the Jokelahoman. Often times, it seems like Tulsa news gets reported by them moreso than OKC news. This often made me mad, as there is plenty of news in OKC that does not make it in the paper (online edition anyways). As an expat, I like to keep up with what is happening there but it appears the focus is not on the hometown.

Therefore, I would argue that the Jokelahoman - irregardless of their lack of quality reporting (as I have seen them publish an "article" that only had two sentences - hence Joke LAHOMAN) - that the Oklahoman IS a statewide paper.

Tulsa World has some state coverage but it is mostly on the capital (govt) issues or headlines from OKC. That hardly qualifies for state coverage.

AND - as for OK Today, clearly they are PRO Tulsa. This coming from an outside prospective - if it were an OK prospective, then OKC should have more coverage. There is more there, the city is much larger, and OKC has a MUCH greater presence on the state of OK than Tulsa. Just look on the airline web sites or drive close to OK and you begin to see the presence of the major city - Oklahoma City!

Not to knock Tulsa, but that is just the way it is. And it seems that Tulsa - quite eloquently I may add - slapped OKC back in the face with this publication, and others. In fact, it seems Tulsa does this often, beating OKC to so called OK based forums online or web sites or discussions. I guess people in OKC are too busy to keep up or Tulsan's have way too much time on their hands.

Probably the reality is, Tulsa has an intelligent syndicate that keeps up with the times! (see there, I said something nice [and probably correct] about Tulsa).

Hopefully as OKC tastes the major leagues, you will start to ACT LIKE IT! (cause, Tulsa's beating you as far as initial impression).

Thanks for the last part, but I have a question.

You said,

There is more there, the city is much larger, and OKC has a MUCH greater presence on the state of OK than Tulsa.

What kind of presence? I know you can't be talking about taxes.

Actually, swake, I am not offended at all, really. Just an observation. Besides, I can't stand The Oklahoman anyway. I prefer a newspaper with Oklahoma City's name on it, and more better... well... news.

As far as presence, well, I don't think it's a MUCH greater presence. Oklahoma City is the largest tax generator in the state (I know, I've seen the tax rolls from Oklahoma City and Tulsa) but it isn't a huge difference.

I'll close this post with a quote that fits Oklahoma.....

It takes two to tango. Oklahoma doesn't dance without either city.

But I was very offended when I read it cover to cover and it was all TULSA. All the feature articles were about Tulsa restaurants/events/museums, etc. There was a best of Oklahoma thing and every single thing on it was in the Tulsa area. All the ads were Tulsa businesses. But yet they had the gall to call it Oklahoma Magazine.

That sounds offended, a lot,


I will have to say, I do not like Oklahoma Magazine for that very reason. You cannot call it Oklahoma magazine and have all of its content focused on Tulsa. May as well call it Tulsa Magazine.

Oklahoma Magazine is based and published in Tulsa, which explains its unbalanced coverage, or lack thereof, in other parts of the state. Quite frankly, it makes the magazine look biased.
It is a nice magazine, but not an Oklahoma magazine. Only for Tulsa.


and then you agreed, and accused the magazine of some sort of bias, the magazine is about people and places in Oklahoma, same as the "Oklahoman", that it is more about the area where it is published and where most of the copies are distributed is natural. The only bias is from those that would be offended that , or the area they are from, was left out.

Yes, swake, I agreed, but not offended. And, as I have pointed out, I don't like The Oklahoman, but if it should exist, it should be called the Oklahoma City Times, and the phrase 'State Newspaper' should be deleted.

If you are going to name a publication, it is your obligation to your readers that you follow through with the coverage related to the publication's name. If that doesn't happen, then you are not satisfying all readers, only a group of readers. As a result, you end up with a smaller audience. If you're trying to sell Oklahoma Magazine to a bunch of Oklahoma City readers, and most if not all the coverage is based in Tulsa, then readers looking for Oklahoma City coverage are obviously going to look elsewhere. Those looking for coverage in Tulsa may not pull Oklahoma Magazine off the rack as their first choice. That's what I was taught in English Comp & Lit.

Believe me, swake, I also have an issue with the Oklahoma Gazette concerning this very argument. It is an Oklahoma City weekly independent publication, yet it bares the state name.

The Oklahoman is in no way equal to "Oklahoma Magazine" as far as the bias goes. This so called statewide magazine had nothing about anything outside of Tulsa. The Oklahoman is considered the state paper because it covers issues for the whole state. Take for instance its continued front page series on OK roads and bridges or its many stories on water quality in NORTHEASTERN OKLAHOMA. Obviously, it makes sense to publish the state paper in the capital city, so thus it does have a lot of Oklahoma City news and advertisements. BUT, it's impossible to read it cover to cover and find only OKC stuff. That is the case with Oklahoma Magazine and Tulsa. And like someone said, it was a clear slap in the face to Oklahoma City. Don't expect me to ever pick that magazine up again. I might also add that I got it inside Full Circle Book Store in OKC.

The Oklahoman is in no way equal to "Oklahoma Magazine" as far as the bias goes. This so called statewide magazine had nothing about anything outside of Tulsa. The Oklahoman is considered the state paper because it covers issues for the whole state. Take for instance its continued front page series on OK roads and bridges or its many stories on water quality in NORTHEASTERN OKLAHOMA. Obviously, it makes sense to publish the state paper in the capital city, so thus it does have a lot of Oklahoma City news and advertisements. BUT, it's impossible to read it cover to cover and find only OKC stuff. That is the case with Oklahoma Magazine and Tulsa. And like someone said, it was a clear slap in the face to Oklahoma City. Don't expect me to ever pick that magazine up again. I might also add that I got it inside Full Circle Book Store in OKC.

Then gripe to the bookstore not us, we don't publish it.