Leaderboard

A warm, charismatic, 60-something Black woman, a hard news guy with a long European name and a great head of hair, and a cool, younger, former NFL player who also appears on a Sunday morning football panel show, all broadcasting from Times Square, in a studio with gaudy exterior signage, but seemingly doesn't like showing off the iconic views. Don't know where you got the idea that they're ripping off GMA.

Personally, I wouldn't ever boast about beating taped programming on two nights the NFL buried anything with a (live and on-air and not involving home shopping) pulse, but for NN, I guess beating a taped show about the 'war on Christmas', on Christmas, in a very asterisk-heavy demographic manner, is an achievement in something, something enough to have your classic TV network being forced to acknowledge it on Facebook.

The hard sell of "CBS Deals" is really not helping. It's enough when your local advertorial show is doing it, but when a national morning show is pushing Wish refuse, it's absolutely intolerable. It might be making some money, but it's doing cheap and dirty damage to a brand that certainly doesn't need more.

Graphics aside, CBS This Morning was fine especially when it was more hard news oriented. Nora, Gayle, and Charlie were a solid team. All they needed was a solid replacement for Charlie and the anchor line up would've been fine.

The entire business world has operated under some misguided theories this past couple of generations. One of them has to do with creative destruction. A lot of people's livelihoods have been ruined in numerous consumer businesses because this mentality has been allowed to run rampant throughout our economy. It has killed the broadcast industry and made it irrelevant (although technology and a multitude of choices is also part of that). There has been a lot of unnecessary sacrifice and disruption in our economy, mostly borne by employees of these takeover targets. Screw the banksters, I hope this transaction fails. Just for reference, I am about as pro-business and conservative as they come. But that's not what happens these days. It's very little about building a better mouse trap and all about plundering what someone else built. They decimate every industry they touch and they've been a big part of the reason our economy has been hollowed out. Broadcasting has been destroyed enough by these people.

Speaking of the 96 theme…Gardner was quoted in this detailed article looking back on the incident https://billypenn.com/2015/08/12/phillys-action-news-theme-song-has-survived-10-presidential-elections-and-20-olympic-games-and-isnt-going-anywhere/

I had a feeling she was going to Detroit at first, but then she started talking like she was going to be staying in Columbus, so that threw me off. Always go with your first instinct.

Probably Bianca Goldiryga is okay, but I couldn't see her prominently, be a fixture. Maybe if Jeff Glor could've been good there number #1 one Saturday mornings. That could've been a okay not so bad demotion, from CBS Evening News.

Honestly, I feel that the logo would be more effective if each individual feather was outlined with a VEEEEERY THIN white border. Emphasizing the feathers, but still keeping them separate.

CBS Mornings is just a toned down rip off of Good Morning America at this point, right down to the talent selection and their professional and personal backgrounds.

That was when CBS This Morning launched nearly 11 years ago. They slowly moved away from that with more celebrity interviews. I think one reason they relaunched it as "CBS Mornings" was to signal that they were no longer as heavily focused on hard news. It's softer like CBS News Sunday Morning. I'm not a fan. And I still don't understand the purpose of putting them in Times Square if they're not going to use a real window or make use of the location.

I personally like CBS Mornings more than CTM. The flow is better and it's less boring... it feels fresh and less stuffy.

Not usually around a TV during the morning news- but some time off this week gives me the opportunity. Landed on CBS Mornings. Wasn't the whole point of this show to "put the news back in morning news" and differentiate themselves from Today and GMA? The time I spent watching was just a store-brand version of the other two shows- Same gossipy host-chat, "CBS Morning Deals" giving some paid-placement to product no one really needs, using songs like "Bye Bye Bye" as the closing bumper music, and that was just the 15-20 minutes that I caught. I feel when the show was still CTM before moving to Times Square, they had a solid, and reasonably unique product, despite still being in third place- what happened?

Here is last night's Gardner retrospective:

Even in the 1980s there was minimal difference between the two brands. Look at Bill Bonds at WXYZ with Action News, and it was basically all centered around Bill Bonds and his on-air presence. Ditto with Irv Weinstein at WKBW; they used the EWN name but it wasn't anywhere close to the Al Primo EWN. The brands were never uniformly applied and mean different things to different people. @HulkieD has brought up how CapCities slowly (even if unintentionally) morphed WABC into... if not a Xerox of WPVI, then obviously a station with WPVI's Action News in its' blood. It still used the EWN name, but it wasn't the EWN pre-1986. WOIO's usage of Action News is mostly associated with the "last-place, last-chance news" uber-populist format that Bill Applegate---the same person who presided over WABC's late-80s changes---put in, almost out of desperation by Raycom, having admitted to overpaying for WOIO/WUAB when they bought out Malrite. It is a tainted brand in the market. EWN means nothing in Cleveland and hasn't meant anything since WEWS gave it up in 1990, and even then, NewsChannel 5 meant nothing when they gave it up a few years ago, aside from people likely confusing WEWS with WPTV on social media. If WOIO used EWN, it would feel tacked on and meaningless. (Yes, channel 3, then KYW-TV, originated EWN from 1959 to 1965 but it predated Al Primo or even Westinghouse's full treatment of the brand. Because of the passage of time, few are alive to actually remember when it debuted in Cleveland.) It actually says a lot that none of the stations in Cleveland have a so-called "brand" for their newscasts: 3 News, News 5, Fox 8 News and 19 News. But does it matter? I'm from Cleveland and I can tell the four news operations apart fairly easily.

Another noteworthy example is when WXIA debuted their new logo and this forum attacked it harshly. The 1993-debuted serif 11 with the blue boxes needed to go, it didn't fit the design language of neither the G3 graphics package nor the current TEGNA package. Plus, it was a change in direction for 11Alive; you could tell they wanted to target more urban, more city and more underserved neighborhoods, and be more activist journalism. Where Atlanta Speaks isn't just a slogan, that is a philosophy. Theoretically, this format is a modern day Action News or Eyewitness News, in that it is intended to be different than what the other stations are putting out. The problem is that their target audience isn't watching the local news. But, back to the logo, it definitely is not as inspired of a design as the 1993 logo, but it holds up really well given the autonomy that WXIA has been given to modify their graphics and opens to take advantage of the 11 shape. They couldn't have done any of that with the 1993 logo. That 11 can be scaled up, scaled down, and people would still recognize it. Honestly, it did what it was meant to do. And as far as still branding as "11Alive," they learned in 1993 that if you have a unique brand, don't fix it. Don't break it. It makes them stand out from every other "Channel 11" out there, it's been tested and futureproofed.

I still would've wished that our digital transition in the US would've solidified network channel numbers hell or high water. Fox has different channel numbers and managed to work things out, but it would've been a lot easier if we had went the Mexican transition direction, let a network pick a number nationwide and CBS was on 2, NBC on 4, Fox on 5, ABC on 7...etc. (and if you lost your affiliation a la WJMN, WZMQ got 2 and WJMN would be bumped down to whatever number Fox scrounged up for MNTV). Even the Canadian direction where all the networks/systems pretty much killed channel numbers altogether would have been better. Sadly outside a couple of outliers who tried (Tribune with that channel 72 attempt that died the moment WGN, WPIX and KTLA 'lol no'ed the idea, though I think that was more for interactive services that never panned out), it just never took root and the PSIP system in the US, instead of allowing a one-time remapping opportunity, just had the virtual channel system hobbled with legacy numbers and ideas like KCEN trying to move from 6 to 9 for a year and somehow getting 'feedback' that they were wrong and had to reverse back. Or those who did try to move from an absurd channel like 65 get yelled at by the FCC and other broadcasters for daring to take channel 10 even though nobody else in 150 miles had it. PBS is finally forcing their stations to have a unified logo and identifier, something that's been long needed, and it might be time for the major networks to do the same. And when most pay homes these days just tune to the network identified on YouTubeTV or Hulu, or say, channel 604/1004 for NBC in HD instead of 4 in SD...is there any need to hold onto 2-69 numbers?

What's so cool about this is that for the first time ever in America (please correct me if I'm wrong), we have a local and national media outlet sharing a design language with the graphic packages. From the CBS Evening News, Streaming, and the locals, they match together. Great identity system.

Also, I don't get all the disappointment. All the signs of what this package was going to be have been laying around since the start of this thread, and should have become clearer when CBSN was launched and the overhaul of the network package. If you thought it was going to be anything else, you weren't paying attention.

The peacock isn’t the problem there. The rest of the logo is. Local stations need to get with the times and update their logos instead of holding the networks back.

I know it gets its share of critics #onhere, but I don't hate the current WABC look. It's simple (without being too simple), clean, and well-executed. Not everything has to be elaborate and splashy. (Of course, there was the NEWS YORK'S #1 NEWS incident, but...)

Look, I’m not some sort of sappy royalist who thinks the American networks should cover nothing but the British Royals for the next ten days. I’m not a fan of the American obsession over British royalty either, and while Queen Elizabeth II was a remarkable woman and head of state, the institution of the House of Windsor is extremely flawed. Also, Prince Andrew can kiss my Royal Irish A$$™. That being said, when a 70-year head of state passes away and news outlets from the UK, the Commonwealth nations, the U.S., and all around the world cover it on the *day* of her death, that isn’t obsession; that’s news. “American obsession” isn’t an excuse for one network’s gross incompetence, ineptitude, and stupidity from the top down. When every network, news outlet, newspaper, idiot with a camera, and their mothers are all reporting on this story, that means it is an event of *international* (a word that NewsNation’s staff likely had to look up in the dictionary) significance. It is not the time to run a Blue Bloods rerun and bitch about the whole thing in prime time. That being said, I will admit to having one obsession: NewsNation itself. As I write this, I am well aware that I am spending WAY too much time and energy on a channel that gets outpaced by Newsmax in terms of both viewership AND news coverage. Yes, even Newsmax, which was born out of an opinion magazine and has always had serious credibility issues, is more of a news channel at this point. NewsNation is not a serious news outlet, and unless there is some cataclysmic event at the network itself, it does not warrant any more of my attention, time, or energy. I imagine many others can say the same. One last thing and then I’ll shut up about this farce of a channel for good: Even NewsNET did a better job with coverage today. They ran this story on their channel at 2:30 PM ET. YikesNation indeed.

Someone asked if Cuomo's left-wing CNN material is designed to balance out the Shine influence. I believe it's worse and more pathetic than that. Between Cuomo's attempted comeback story and Abrams' constant bitching about the state of (cable) news, they seem to be setting up not an "Us v. Them" political bent, but an "Us v. The World" attitude, where they think the viewer will see them as a sympathetic underdog. I can't even make fun of how lame and sad that is, because they're even sucking at playing the victim.

To be fair, she was officially the queen of those countries as they’re part of the commonwealth, so it makes sense they would prioritize coverage. Still, your point stands. France 24 and Germany’s DW had live coverage all day. Anyway, back to NN. Covering major events raises a news organization’s credibility. It means viewers will instinctively turn to them whenever something breaks. If they continue to miss news that break between 10am-5pm, like this or the July 4 shooting, people will be conditioned to not tune into NN for breaking stories in the future. I had faith in NN, but going from “the most impartial unbiased news you’ve ever seen” to less rabid political shows and indifference to major stories just isn’t it.

I just tuned in to "Dan Abrams Live." Hopefully what I'm about to say answers questions as to why NewsNation, as always, was asleep at the wheel when it came to breaking the news as soon as possible, especially during their sweet spot of off-net reruns. Okay, here it goes... the show just ran a story that basically went like this: "Don't get me wrong: We all loved and respected the Queen, but cable news seems to be obsessed with the British royal family, as they covered no other stories except the Queen's death for hours on end! They even ran nonstop coverage relating to the Queen before news of her death was announced, simply because her doctors were 'concerned' that she was in poor health!" Far be it from me to go into full context on the topic at hand, but the Queen's death was far from the only story covered, as news outlets (like Fox News, as mrschimpf said) were covering other news stories to balance out the time. These were all earlier in the day before her death was announced. It wasn't until the saddening news came that the news cycle came to a screeching halt. Even international news outlets far beyond America and the UK were covering the death endlessly after initially focusing on a wide breadth of news stories earlier in the day, like Seven Network in Australia, Newshub in New Zealand, and CBC News in Canada. Believe it or not, the PBS NewsHour was also business as usual at first, as it too covered a wide variety of stories (one of them including the Queen's death) before finally devoting an entire special report on the Queen's legacy at 8pm Eastern after the NewsHour was over. It was the Queen's death that led to a ton of last-minute scheduling changes being made on very short notice, both globally and domestically (even though this was expected to happen sometime). Too bad no one at NewsNation got the memo, and it was planned all along this time around. Why? Because they just had to prepare a segment on Dan Abrams Live questioning why cable news felt the need to cover nothing but the Queen's death and how we Americans are so "obsessed" with the British royal family. I mean, this is just sad.

Good Day Sacramento uses graphics that don't look like the O&O package on purpose. They don't want it to look like the news graphics because it's not really a news broadcast. It's a morning show with news.

Just because the preview of the new graphics may look tacky does not mean that the content and/or format of the show will change. I'm going to college for graphic design and I've seen things designed worse than these graphics for CTM (and that's really saying something).

They sure did. People had complained about them similar to the infamous 1996 updated opening, so the WPVI quickly dropped them.

Didn’t they run them and then a week or two later ditch them (because they sounded so rough) for generic nameless opens until they went with Charlie Van Dyke?

Here it is, from my NBC affiliate KWWL. Sports Anchor Mark Woodley’s winter weather rant.

Turns out there was a reason Studio K (the small midday studio) has been off the air for the past 10 days. They have revamped the space. With the new look, the entire show is done with both OCMs seated at a small coffee table-like desk. With this setup, there are no standup weather map segments anymore, as they used every inch of space on this new set layout. Every weather segment is done via double-or-triple boxes with the OCM seated there, just talking through the maps. I think the wide-shot of the set looks good, but I don't think there's any way it's worth the trade-off of having to do all of the weather maps while seated.

I mean, WPVI kept Jefferson Kaye for far longer than necessary out of traditional alone. The last VOs he recorded for them were borderline tragic to hear.

I realized that after I posted, of course. Thanks for reminding me of something I felt trauma from hearing (no offense to those in the actual videos).

Missing the point. "Action News" and "Eyewitness News" are extremely dated brands, and are more or less cliché at this point. It's nearly 2023, it's time to find new ways of branding local news outside of two 60's era news formats. The formats themselves are barely even used anymore. I sure don't notice any difference between an "Action" or "Eyewitness" newscast and... every other newscast out there.