Leaderboard

I think the hyper-fixation on brand and music changes being some kind of driver for viewers to "get upset" and stop watching the station is kind of absurd, when you consider all the other things that can change in a TV news broadcast that the station really doesn't have much control over. Talent is a more important draw for viewers than music and brands, and retirements don't often move the ratings needle much. WPVI didn't see a massive ratings drop after Jim Gardner left, despite his status in the market. The same is looking true at WGN after Tom Skilling left, and I can't imagine a music change or branding would actually lead people to change the channel permanently. It's not 1996 anymore. I'd also like to point out that a lot of these old 90's era "people were MAD!!!" claims come from newspaper columnists at the time. We cannot know for certain what they embellished on to make their column more interesting. "People were upset" that a station changed their branding the same way people get upset that Judge Judy was interrupted for severe weather. This doesn't mean the whole market was "rioting in the streets" like people around these parts like to think would happen if WPVI modernized MCTYW. On that subject, the 1996 orchestral MCTYW was arguably just bad and was an abrupt, noticeable change. WPVI has been using new cuts of MCTYW from different composers for years at this point (there have been some new ones since the graphics debut!) and I have a hunch nobody but people involved with this community have noticed, largely because they don't sound as wildly different as the orchestral package did.

I'll back this up with a line I heard repeated in research presentations at TV stations across the country under multiple ownership groups in an era when viewership was higher than it currently is: The most reliable viewers in the key demographics stations target watch one or two quarter hours of a newscast a week, across all stations and all dayparts. I am sure that time spent watching has only decreased since I last heard a research presentation just before 2020 turned all 2020.

Even though this was kind of an "emergency" rebranding, that was a purposeful little nod to the site's history. That, and the fact that the media we talk about is growing beyond "TV" in the traditional sense. I think there's something wonky going on with the caching (we're behind Cloudflare now, something else I've wanted to do for a while) that is causing this, I'm going to look into it further.

Why? Because they are dropping a name that hasn't really meant anything since Bill Bonds got fired 30 years ago? Good lord, this fandom is so unbelievably out of touch with reality.

My lord...Bill Bonds is probably drunk cussing from his grave about this....

Branding is important in every industry, but there is such a thing as overthinking it. Of what viewers we still have, I think all they really care about other than the news content is that the branding isn't distracting. I think all that most viewers care about is that the news content is of quality, that the anchors and reporters look decent, that the lighting in the studio is crisp, and that the newscast isn't riddled with production errors. Viewers no longer care or have any attachment to anachronistic branding devices. I'll never forget a conversation I had with two acquaintances in Los Angeles a few years ago. They were musicians and did not watch television and thought that "KTLA," "Eyewitness News," and "Good Day LA" were all the same station, and they assumed that local TV news was still stuck in those 70s-era trappings.

At Scripps, nothing is trapped in amber. It's a virtue and sometimes a vice. Television stations are like any other business, especially given that they are facing the biggest change in consumption habits in their history. Scripps knows this. Their hometown headquarters station is feeling it. John Kiesewetter got these figures from Cincinnati: Scripps has very good values, usually, in journalism. They probably have the most value-driven approach to news operations of any major operator (aside from Sinclair, where the values are not beliefs about journalism but often about national politics). The broader problem is that tools originally conceived to make the process of assembling newscasts, or building out news extensions, are turning into tools to reduce headcount, which seems to be causing morale issues at some stations. Ion Media has done okay, but national advertising has been soft. There's a story there. Scripps has higher exposure to the national advertising sector than its peers, and that has been an underperformer because digital has been cleaning TV's clock as advertisers that are not political rethink and retrench their budgets. A decision this big is not done without studying the market. At some point, TV news cannot go on doing the same old things. You would have to assume, and I'd want to hear about this, that research was conducted. Perhaps people identified the Action News brand with an older style of newscast or one that didn't appeal to them. Perhaps adding "Detroit" was seen as necessary for SEO reasons. That said, if "7 News Detroit" is installed without a brand proposition or other points of differentiation from its competitors, then it will get lost in the sea.

General reminder that the "Action News" trademark is owned by Cox (and "Eyewitness News" is owned by CBS!) and stations have to pay to use them. Why should Scripps keep paying for a brand name for a format that hasn't been properly used in decades? I know folks have a weird affinity for these two brands, but come on. This is, by far, a better logo than some of the other Scripps rebrands over the past few years. Why should they pay Cox for this name? Why should they pay Nexstar for The CW? These are all competitors. People love to think talent at these stations treat each other like this is Anchorman, and while that's not true, there's no good reason to give your competition money for a tired old brand or a second-rate network affiliation.

If stations have these "fans" who are concerned about their branding, music, and graphics, then it stands to reason that the less popular (at least around here) newscast formats we've seen lately also have fans. Somebody's watching Scrippscasts, somebody is watching Tegna stations. Maybe that's because they like what they see. If viewers "cared about tradition" the way some of us like to think, we wouldn't be seeing 45% of the news audience disappearing into thin air.

I hate to break it to you but all three major stations in Detroit will have now rebranded at least once. It happens. Folks in this market seem to like the hype of WDIV and absolutely nothing 7 has tried seems to work. They have been stuck in second since 2009 and there for 22 of the last 28 years. Even though their newscasts are really well put together now they spent years in the doldrums quality wise and never really followed the format to begin with even in the 1970’s. Their newscasts weren’t so different from KABC or WABC or WLS that we should say they reinvented the ABC local news wheel. It’s not the tradition it is in Philly or something either. If it means better graphic elements and a new voiceover and maybe talent opens and a new style that’s probably a positive on aggregate. Their focus is gonna be on using 7 and Channel 7… they don’t even have a slogan anymore. I’m looking forward to seeing what they come up with.

Excuse me? You really think Joe Sixpack of Anytown, USA, really gives a damn about the set design of Channel 2 News or the graphics or the music or if the station has the network logo in your preferred use? Come on. The TV fandom is a fringe community of people who have a massively oversized feeling of self-importance they don't deserve and posts like these are ironclad proof of this. And for the record, I am not an executive. But at least I have a job and a life. With all due respect, this is just ridiculous. The local news audience—what little of it still exists altogether—would not care. At all.

Spoken like an executive out of touch with the audience. You'll be surprised at what the audience actually knows about the stations ins and outs. You have a segment of the audience that a hardcore fans of everything about the station. If WABC or KABC ever dropped Eyewitness News-wonder what would be the take on this board, but the audience would definitely have something to say a well too!

People always notice that funny part thinking they will forget. People will always remember. People were upset when WXIA dumped 11Alive moniker in the 90s.

Anyone know how much WPVI shells out for it? You'd think ABC would make a move to buy the TM from Cox (Or tie an affiliation renewal to it?) Side thought- PVI probably pays way too much for the rights, but history tells us what happens if you change that brand (MCTYW revamp, exhibit A)

Amy has not returned yet

THIS!!! I remember randomly discovering this site and it felt like a safe space and knowing that there are so many people around the country and world who geek and nerd out on TV news. This site continues to Thrive and Grow!

I've lost all respect for Scripps at this point.. They just really want to screw everyone: employees, viewers, etc...

Funny you should mention Spectrum. Gregg Palermo is a KTVI/KPLR alum; They also appear to have an executive producer, a digital producer, a meteorologist, and a reporter, too. A small team, for sure, but more than KDNL, and it's comical The National Desk.

David Smith is a prime example of someone who has too much money and no idea (or malicious intent on) what to do with it. While the rest of the world is scraping for pennies trying to keep oligarchs like him from ruining anything they touch with all of their money.

The filing cites other issues including past FCC violations (fines for violations of children's programming and non-disclosure of paid programming), evasions of local and national ownership caps (including through sidecar companies), the lack of diversity among Sinclair's Board of Directors, executives, and local station GMs, efforts to undermine union organizing among local employees, editorial bias, anti-competitive employment practices (restrictive non-compete clauses, nondisclosure agreements, and liquidated damage litigation against “employees who have pursued other career opportunities and as a way to limit criticism of its business practices”), contradictions of being unable to continue local news investment despite high executive compensation and profits that could be used to invest in the stations, the Bally Sports bankruptcy, the recent announcement of Univision’s removal from KUNS in favor of The CW, retrans disputes, and “moral terpitude” issues (the aforementioned prostitution arrest of Smith). None of this rises to the level of license revocation, either.

Because if I already can’t trust Sinclair to do the news, I can sure as hell trust them with grandma.

The CityPulse format effectively died in 2005, right before Moses sold it. Or it died with Mark Dailey in 2011. It's not really good to pretend to be something you are not and have not been for a long time. And given the absolutely sorry state of Canadian television, chairs for CityNews anchors is far, far down on the level of importance.

WXYZ Will be rebranding from 7 Action News to 7 News Detroit starting Monday morning at 430am. The morning show will be “7 News Detroit This Morning” which doesn’t have much ring to it. This is the first time they’ve rebranded their newscasts since 1972. They even have a nifty new logo that vaguely looks like it means hard news: