24994J

It is kind of amusing how like EVERY promo has to be heavily altered or eliminated because of one person...including the one I was in.

Hell no, and there wasn't the sad mood overwhelming any broadcast like when Sylvia was fired. That, I think, hit a lot harder. I do find it hilarious that some people go on the internet to ask on the Facebook pages where someone is (in this case, Mike), yet can't be bothered to do a Google search to find out for themselves, because you know darn well the station won't respond. It's like those people are nosy enough to ask, but don't care enough/are too lazy/are too stupid to find out from other sources. I'm going to stop now, because I've come across as a little smarmy lately, and don't want to offend too many people.

I agree that public perception might dip, perhaps reflected in the ratings, and a few hundred might leave, cold turkey, but the notion being perpetuated by some on and off this board that they're going to fall like a rock is utterly ridiculous.

1A. I don't see her getting shunned by the staff, both on and off-air. Though, if any team in town could make face for the cameras and be totally convincing, it'd be 7. As for major viewer loss, I don't see it happening, especially viewers shifting from 'LS to 'GN. Skilling is a big draw, and anyone that didn't leave ABC for WGN in September almost certainly won't leave now just because Mike is gone. 1B. Jumping from one station to another in this town on a regular basis is a big culture shock, and one anchor, one theme, or one graphic alone is not enough to cause such a shift. Ultimately, the culture of the station doesn't change, and life goes on almost uninterrupted. Sure, people come and go, but not once have I heard of ABC 7 being some toxic waste heap to work at with miserable employees sending out their resumes...that's down the street at another station. 2. In regards to her being in some sort of mood tonight, should she be damned to hell for not being "on" 24/7? You gotta love Jerry Taft, but I don't recall him having a flawless broadcast day in years. Frankly, nitpicking her personality on a broadcast-by-broadcast basis comes across as incredibly juvenile. Look, I'm not her biggest fan, but finding her every fault is almost worse than blaming her for Mike's firing. I implore some of you to grow up a little.

See, one would think, but looking good doesn't seem to fit this arrangement. How does a poorly-designed, nearly decade-old logo look "really good" or awesome?

Context? What is "it" that looks good?

The 5... [yt]bHy1pwDK9Aw[/yt]

Ever need a list of closings in the state of Maine? Lucky for you, 7's on your side!

Honestly, that involves rolling out of bed before 6:10. Things have been kinda wacky around my house for a few weeks, and as it's settling down, I should get it up soon. Meanwhile, the 5 o'clock will be up in like 10 minutes, if it airs. It looked like crap, so I'll try again tomorrow.

The funny thing is that her shot in the 4 looks far more cohesive than all four talents in the 7 open. Those have out-of-whack lighting and the framing differs greatly than all the shots on the mothership. Terrell's shot in the morning wasn't botched like the WCIU ones, either.

Damn, they got the new talent opens with Cheryl done pretty quick. [yt]qAa5uQ6zhlY[/yt]

Even if men's fashion is their forte, where's SuitSnob when you need'em?

Same ND for over a decade.

I'll be honest, I kind of always thought Emily Barr was the kind of boss that played things very conservative. Remember all the discussions we had when they overhauled the graphics, theme, and general presentation, and how many of us agreed that Ms. Barr was really hanging onto the past for the sake of familiarity? I think part of that "safe" mentality also carried over to the female anchors' fashion. Now, I'm not saying Idler and company are a bunch of pigs that want the ladies looking like sluts, but that they have a little more freedom in what they wear on-air. They've been given longer leashes and are free to wear what they want. Many might equate that to whoring themselves out for ratings, but I would disagree. I'll use a few examples... Kathy Brock: she used to be nothing but jackets and suits, it seemed. Now, you see more dresses, and when I was down there last, even skinny jeans. Nothing has come across to me as inappropriate, but perhaps a little fresher. Cheryl Scott: much of her attire and style crossed stations with her, but even though they lean towards tight, her dresses seem a little less "showy" than when she was on NBC. Granted, it is winter, when skin and such tends to be covered up. Dare I say, she's also 29 and can pull it off. Karen Jordan: while many of her colleagues have spruced up their wardrobes, Karen has maintained her rather modest presentation, and she too, pulls it off well, without coming across as stuffy. A lot of this also relates to current trends. Those tight dresses your mom speaks of are in-style. And that's as far as I'd go, because, outside of WGN, the ABC7 anchors still seem to me to be less daring than the 3 other stations in town.

BAM! Called it! It's Janssen, by the way. My mistake.

Mike Jansen (sp) maybe? Deep voice, dark hair? I haven't watched yet, so I'm only guessing, because I'm pretty sure you'd know Hamernik and McGill.

I'll try and get up their exchange with Ryan, it was pretty amusing.

And then Tracy's doing weather tonight, too. Combined with last night's anchor schedule and the upheaval on Thursday, this have been a weird few days.

So, Dionne's sick this weekend, and Mark and JR are out of town, so Ryan Chiaverini's going to be anchoring sports this weekend.

I still maintain that with having to follow Ginger Zee, there is a pressure on her to find similar success. Eventually, if you hear something enough times, you start to believe it, though I do think she is exceptionally smart enough to realize it.

To be fair, we don't know that WLS people haven't been approached for bigger things. Perhaps those that have fielded offers feel satisfied being at the #1 station in the 3rd largest market. Plus, more than WMAQ (to my knowledge), ABC 7 seems to have several Chicago natives, making leaving their hometown an unattractive proposition. What's happened at NBC 5 over the last few years is the same thing that happened at CBS 2 twenty years ago. They had Elizabeth Vargas, Jim Avila, Larry Mendte and Rob Stafford, all of whom went national. Long story short, a lot of this stuff is cyclical, and I doubt there's any major correlations between big market interest and talent, just good agents.

People aren't satisfied unless there's a controversy. It's only been like 5 months, neither have completely settled into their roles, yet. Could this be an issue down the road? Sure, but there needs to be time for any such frustration to build. Besides, that article was written when the announcement was made. I'm sure all parties had reservations, but things can change. Right now, people are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill (good Lord, I sound like my father).

They'll keep the page. Just because he was the social media maven of the group doesn't give him any intellectual rights to the page. Besides, he isn't the only member of the team posting on it.

Who had Hosea and Stacey? Anybody? Anybody?

Just now..."We have 55 shows a day now! What is this, CNN?" Waddle: "Are you ready for the 7?" Mark: "I'M NOT READY FOR 6!"