Leaderboard

Going to play devil's advocate here. I have seen these type of graphics before. I feel that ABC News was trying to convey that the correspondent was reporting out of the ABC News "New York" bureau/HQ. I don't think it was meant to be misleading.

They clearly find this to be a better way of doing the debrief/anchor toss that used to be exclusively at the anchor desk, which is largely saved for stories that benefit from some anchor-reporter crosstalk. They're never saying that the reporter is actually at the site of the story. Can't help it if a viewer is dumb enough to not understand the difference. It's really not that complicated.

The whole concept of a live shot is deceptive 99% of the time. A reporter is “live” somewhere hours after the actual news event has occurred. Nothing newsworthy is shown to the viewer in a live shot. All the newsworthy content is shown in the prepackaged report with footage from hours ago. Whether they are live at the scene, on a generic street outside the studio, or at a place somewhat related to the location of the news story, the whole concept gives a deceptive sense of presence and urgency.

I would argue that it's the equivalent of being in studio/the newsroom, but instead, they're outside. For example, WFLD has often had reporters right outside the studio doing standups instead of 'at the scene' or in studio. I want to say WMAQ has done the same over the years (i.e.. having someone live right outside the NBC Tower). It's not as uncommon as it may seem. At the end of the day, what's important is that the news/stories these reporters are reporting on is accurate, true, informative, etc.. and not necessarily where/what place they are saying it from.

It's not new. WNT has had correspondents doing live shots on West 67th St or Columbus Ave outside of ABC for years.

"New York" refers to the city, not the state. It is the style of most news organizations not to put the state after a large city. I agree that it does seem weird to have a reporter standing outside in Manhattan to do a live shot on something that happened in Albany if there is no tie-in to the location. Like you suggested, they could say "we're outside a synagogue here in New York, where security has been beefed up after what happened in Albany." But I don't think they were trying to imply New York City = New York State = Albany, NY.

A BIG FIND! Part of Your Life Image Campaign and Theme!

Considering the debate's other iffy sponsors...they lucked out big time in getting their logo as visible as it was since the Free Beacon and Rumble were its main sponsors and them, along with Megyn's SXM show, only got bookend mentions. Could have been a lot worse for them.

I thought the centered logo looked silly, but this logic actually makes some sense to me so maybe NewsNation thought it through more than I originally gave them credit for.

Sooooooo..... day 2?

Personally, live shots are only necessary when there are visual elements to seen, details to a story that are still developing, or when an event happens so close to a broadcast that there is little time to assemble a package. Big market stations especially love to have a reporter standing at an already wrapped up story at night where the scene is barely visible. In an era where we watch news on our own time rather than live tv, the impact of going live for live sake becomes dulled.

KDKA 11pm October 1989 They had started using some refreshed harder hitting cuts of the mid 80s KD and You package for the bumpers and close - no more jazzy sax for the close.

Something I've noticed on WNT as well as NNN. After the synagogue shooting in Albany, NY, none of the networks had time to send their reporters there as it happened so close to their broadcasts. Instead of presenting the stories from the newsroom or studio, ABC had a reporter standing on some unspecified street with a heavily blurred background and a locator graphic marked "New York". At least the background on NBC was more visible and the reporter is infront of what looks like a synagogue --- which they didn't bother to specify. It's perfectly acceptable to stand in front of a synagogue in Manhattan to talk about anti-semetic incidents across the country. But to have the background be indecipherable and ambiguously labeled "New York", without specificity for state vs city gives an almost deceptive sense of presence. I like the "portrait mode" effect, but it defeats the purpose of a live shot if the audience cannot see what you are standing in front of. Nothing to die over, small critique.

Lurking for a minute on this post and decided to throw my change in the bucket: I think the moment Kate Snow announced prior to launch that Daily wouldn’t be an “opinion show,” I was on board. It’s very old school CNN Headline News(or OG CBSN with a better budget), something I feel the daypart has desperately needed for about a decade since it opted to slowly phase out of a lineup of serials. I’m one of those “four hours of news” junkies… doesn’t suck for me. It makes the workday go by faster, I catch great health and lifestyle segments, and I’m more curious to research news after hearing their take. I usually autopilot on streaming at work(or WFH) because it’s softer around the desk than music, I like following any real breaking news that comes up(ex. Mitch McConnell’s freezing spells), and they do a good job of keeping it straight with very little fluff. I think entertainment talk shows and even serials are great, but there’s only so much you can do with those in 2023 and in the case of the serial, the networks aren’t making huge profit margins from shows they don’t own. Local stations are seeing a desert of new syndicated options and aren’t willing to pay high licensing fees for anything that can’t sell ads. I agree with whoever said the Daily Team should only be in charge of network special reports during those hours. I’m a CBS News guy, so I usually flip to Norah if Lester Holt pops up on my screen. I have no doubt because of Daily’s success that CW(infrastructure in place thanks to NewsNation and their abundance of local affiliates) and CBS(by shuffling Y&R out of 12/12:30AM if they even keep it past 2024) will want to foray into afternoon news at some point. Let’s hope they’re taking notes from NBC on how to do it right.

The viewers in St. Louis have spoken… they hate the new brand. https://fb.watch/oQ4xwXcG2n/?

The large video wall in Studio 9, which was made from 16 monitors and was in need of replacing, has been upgraded with a new video wall. I believe they might also be replacing the older smaller video walls made up of mutiple monitors, as they were not using that part of the studio today. The old wall from November. The new video wall from today.

KWQC has new logo on this promo:

They also replaced the two other video screens, made from four monitors, on the sides of the desk and the video wall behind the desk.

Honestly, I won't be surprised and will laugh hysterically when this has consistently better ratings than News Nation.

Talkback 16 strikes again with hard hitting discussion on the issues affecting all of Northeastern and Central Pennsylvania. Todays topic: Pronouncing Wilkes-Barre Talkback 16: The gift that keeps on giving.

I’m not sure I see news as low effort. People do put in work to do their parts and do it well. No one I know in that space dials it in. Are there exceptions? Heck, of course. There’s not an industry where that isn’t true somewhere. But people put in the effort to present content that gets viewers in a world where viewership is ever-more fragmented. But that’s just me.

C'mon WABC.

I see "Local 8" as a natural transition there with "Local First" as their slogan, and since they already have one "Live Five", it wouldn't be out of the ordinary to see KVVU become that too. And I don't understand why dumping network branding is a bad thing at all.

Easy, they change to “WVUE 8” or “News 8” or something along those lines.

Not a big fan of the look. So many things to touch but I'll keep it short. I like the fact they are trying to go for a clean futuristic feel but it's just executed horribly. If you're going to a super wide scorebug, at least find a way to put the school logos in with all that space. Another annoying thing is the network logo placement, I don't get why networks like NBC do this but you shouldn't have your TV logo in the scorebug and as a screenbug in the top right corner. Makes it look repetitive and a mess. Just make up your mind and keep it in one area in order to keep it simple and effective. The last thing is the font, not sure why they made the clock use a skinny font and the period and shot clock bolded. Makes it very hard to see for viewers. Overall, they definitely have some work to do but at least they are finally going their own creative direction. I'm glad to see that the ESPN graphics was just a temporary solution just to get their ACC broadcasts up and running in a short time frame.

From what I have heard, Hearst and Graham run their stations well. Also they don't own as many stations when compared to Gray, Nexstar, or Sinclair, which allows them to invest in the quality of their stations.

The former package definitely was influenced by local news. This one, meanwhile, screams loudly 'we have a guy who used to produce GMA'...way too big, way too much wasted space, designed for the older folks rather than anyone under 60, and Perry's Flag Corner screams post-9/11 Fox News Channel (and I loathe that newsorgs just fell lockstep into the new Twitter branding rather than most normal people just still thinking it is Twitter). Also if you don't even carry any business news, stock index tracking is less than worthless. It's pointless decoration for the sake of decoration and for the UFO/true crime crowd they have now might as well be Thai in its 'news you can use'-ability.

All I am going to say is that George should have saw this coming a while ago. Even if George was the better "serious" anchor, it wasn't realistic for him to continue being their "Chief Anchor," when David, (like him or not) is number 1 in the evening. It was rather confusing how he would come in late in the evening when David was already their whenever breaking news occurred. I could see the last few months David did not like taking a back seat during breaking news to George. Also, I do find it curious what rival network would he gone??? I would've advise him take a look at the careers of Josh Elliott, Sam Champion, and Bill Weir. George is good but I don't know if he would fair out like Chris Cuomo (in a sticky situation now), Jake Tapper and Kate Snow which took some time for them to pop at their respective networks. Lowkey now I wondering did this also weighed in as to why Tom Llamas left?!?

They dwelled on Tiger Woods a little much last night. Why do we need a rehash of the guys last win at the Masters and how everybody felt about it that lasted almost as long as the original report? The other issue is revealing so much in the teaser they are literally repeating themselves word for word in the newscast. I’ve been watching some of the old ABC newscasts lately and this kind of sloppy stuff sticks out like a sore thumb.

BUT DAVID MUIR IS THE DEVIL! IT MUST BE HIS FAULT! The show was completely perfect and flawless with Diane Sawyer! Remember, David is also responsible for CBS's anchor instability, Nightly's shitty graphics, Fox's abuse lawsuits, CNN's inability to create a watchable morning show, NewsNation's non-existent ratings, and he destroyed the documents that prove Brian Williams was on that helicopter.

I'll bite. Just had a nice little glass of bourbon, so let's see what we can come up with: When I first started working for TEGNA, I felt like they didn't get enough credit for what they were trying to do. They were investing a ton of money into the brands of these stations and bringing in some interesting people to shake things up on the marketing side. It sounded really exciting and I got sucked into it, leaving a well established market-leading station to jump into this mess. It's no exaggeration to say when I was sitting in the hotel the night before my first day watching WUSA9, I felt immediate regret in my decision and I started working immediately to leave. (It took nearly three years to get out... woof.) When I look back at it all, I think one of the biggest problems is that the news and production folks at these local stations have absolutely no idea how to make good television. Is that really their fault? I don't know. Local news has looked essentially the same since the 1940s. Desk. Chair. Backdrop. Want to shake things up? Have the anchor stand. That backdrop? It's now a monitor. That's about as groundbreaking as these people know what to do. (And that's not just TEGNA, it's an industry-wide issue.) So now you want to revamp your morning show and you bring in a comedian... again, not exactly revolutionary. It's been done. But news leadership is really afraid to lean into this concept, so it's just another straightforward mediocre newscast with a comedian randomly dropped in. The comedian has no one to play off of. Your news anchors and reporters aren't funny, they don't know humor. So you have awkward interactions throughout the show. You blow millions on marketing this 3rd or 4th place show to get folks to "sample" it. Sure, there is a slight spike in ratings - people drop in, have a look, say "what the hell is this?", tune out and never come back. TEGNA would fly in folks from various departments from their stations all around the country every few months for "innovation summits" at their HQ. I got invited to one. A lot of interesting ideas. Absolutely no way to execute it. An idea I had got piloted in Cleveland (of course, I never saw a bonus, not that I expected one ). They flew out the comedian from DC to host it. It was awful. You know why? Your producer who graduated from Elon's school of journalism has absolutely no clue how to make good television. They know how to copy and paste from the wires and re-write stories from the 11p to drop into their AM shows. (Just kidding, that gets copy and pasted as well.) I could go on and on. I haven't even started in on the mediocre general managers with sales backgrounds - that might be an even bigger issue. You think the guy from sales who got the corner office knows how to make good television?? They have an eye for talent? Absolutely not. Local television news isn't dying, it's dead. You're just watching zombies now. Waiting until the next hedge fund comes in to turn the lights off.