Studio B

Permanently in Studio 57 http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/evening-news-moves-to-a-new-studio/

For what it's worth, CBS has debuted new special report graphics.

Wait how would the LA bureau be much better? Of course they wouldn't be on site but they would clearly say that they are broadcasting from LA due to the Oscars that evening. Does actually being on site really destroy the show's credibility? And say what you want about the Oscars, they are newsy and if people have negative feelings about it, more so than usual, wouldn't that make it more newsy? It's just self-promotion, like any of the morning shows, evening news shows or Sunday shows broadcasting from the Super Bowl. Not to mention that it's only the weekend show we're talking about.

Antwan is a solid anchor, arguably one of the better folks they have. Could've been an interesting pairing with him and Suki on the Wake Up show. He's also reportedly a great guy and easy to work with, unlike Priolo. Lahmers is a mess but she's reportedly connected way up at 1211 so we'll see what happens there.

Looks like it per her bio:

Meanwhile, seems like corporate higher-ups hope to move Brian Williams to a better timeslot than 11pm. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/brian-williams-quietly-conquering-late-night?mbid=social_twitter

As far as I know she is, and the piece seems to indicate as such, but I can't imagine that lasting for long now.

If these CBS rumors are legitimate (consider the source), CBS has to have something up their sleeve in terms of luring somebody to the Broadcast Center because there isn't a de facto replacement in the mix. And frankly, I think Pelley has done a solid job and doesn't really need to be replaced.

They'd probably be relatively late to the game but I'd think she'd be a better fit on 60 Minutes than on the Evening News.

I don't know if such a clause exists but I could see why it would exist. After all even after his credibility went down the toilet, he was still pretty popular and the ratings were still strong. I think that'd be more of an issue early on as he went to MSNBC but a year later as Lester Holt is fully settled in, I don't see why that would be a problem. All of that said, I think MSNBC will continue to go forward with Williams hosting at 11 while also anchoring rolling news coverage as warranted during the day.

I did read the book and Stelter's reporting that preceded it. Bell was the driving force behind firing Curry and getting her off the show. That's not to say that Lauer is innocent because he isn't, he could've stepped in to defend her but he didn't. Everybody knows he didn't like working with her, didn't want her in the first place and that he had complained about her to management. But the reporting indicates that Bell was the first one to deem Curry the problem and decided that she had to go. From Stelter: "By comparison, “Today” had stuck to the same camera angles and scripted intros and outros since the 1990s. Some suggested that the show was getting stale. Others privately wondered if Lauer’s star power was beginning to fade. By January, Bell had another culprit in mind: Ann Curry. So insistent was Bell that Curry was the problem — that she was “out of position,” as he put it in an e-mail to his deputies — that he had been talking about it with friends for months. One morning-TV veteran suggested to him that firing Curry, who had been co-hosting for only about six months at that point, would be tantamount to “killing Bambi.” Undeterred, Bell hatched a careful three-part plan: 1.) persuade Lauer to extend his expiring contract; 2.) oust Curry; 3.) replace her with Savannah Guthrie. According to this source, Bell called his plan Operation Bambi. ... At “Today,” the enmity started at the highest levels, between Bell and the man who was technically his boss, Steve Capus, the president of NBC News. Capus, who was known around the office as “the Rage,” a reference to his short temper, resented Bell, who was adept at navigating NBC’s internal politics and who was perceived to be close to Steve Burke, the chief executive of NBCUniversal. When Capus learned that Bell wanted to force Curry out, he invoked “the streak” and argued that her removal would force the show out of first place. So Bell appealed directly to Burke. “We need to make a change,” Bell told him. Burke ultimately agreed. Operation Bambi was a go." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/magazine/who-can-save-the-today-show.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 From New York Magazine: "Within six months, executive producer Jim Bell had come to the conclusion that Curry wasn’t working out. She frequently stumbled over the words on the teleprompter and her intensity sometimes made her difficult to watch during interviews with tragedy victims. But, more important, Lauer looked awkward and unhappy next to her—a situation that Lauer himself had also diagnosed. He openly complained about her to NBC staffers and to Bell. And the ratings seemed to reflect her struggles." http://nymag.com/news/features/today-show-hosts-2013-4/index1.html

I agree with this. 57 is a great studio and the Evening News does do a nice job utilizing the various video elements there but I still get that temporary solution feel.

But hey, lets let personal animosity get in the way of reporting facts! Lauer will work on Today for as long as he wants but I don't think he has the desire to do it for that much longer, even as he just signed that contract. The fear inside 30 Rock is that once he goes, the ratings would slide especially as there still isn't the de facto next person in line. And since the show is doing well in the demo, there isn't this desire to replace Lauer. I also enjoy the revisionist history about Ann Curry. She never was a good fit in the anchor chair on Today and that was obvious to anyone who watched. The ratings started to dip a little bit, they felt the urge to push out Curry and Lauer didn't offer her a life raft. Stelter has never said that Lauer was at fault for pushing Curry out and put the onus on Jim Bell.

They also happened to do that right after Sen. Frank Lautenberg died after he had been the thorn in Fox's side regarding license renewal. Who knows what happens next, especially as there has been a leadership change at the top of the O&O's with Jack Abernethy moving to FNC.

It would be nice if she could read a prompter.

Dari could be next. If you remember, I believe there was a piece in the Daily News years back about how WNYW became a sort-of recycling bin for FNC and she was one of those mentioned. And it makes sense since she's terrible. But I did like Juliet and she was good (I wouldn't go as far as bc485 as label her as part of the greatest team ever, however).

Heard a rumor that Juliet Huddy is out from a fly on the wall. The timing of it (Ailes I believe is her godfather) is something.

http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/morning-show-ratings-week-of-august-22-2/302923 Today won last week in both total viewers and in the demo, their first non-Olympics weekly win since March.

And the USOC isn't exactly rushing to defend Lochte so why would they get so offended that Roker called him out on this? As I have said before here and elsewhere, I am no fan of Al Roker but I think some are seeing something here that isn't there.

But the thing is, Hayes' ratings are not that bad anymore and much of the replacement talk appears to have subsided. His show is pretty competitive with AC360 ratings-wise of late.

Let's be clear, the reason why ESPN didn't renew his contract a year ago was not because he was a headache but rather because it came as the network was trying to shed costs. By most accounts, he was a team player and didn't cause problems this go-around.

TV Newser reporting that Today will not be replacing Natalie Morales as the newsreader in a move I find wholly unsurprising. The role has basically been rendered irrelevant these days (CBS hasn't used one since the current CBS This Morning launched). http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/the-today-show-wont-be-replacing-the-news-anchor/302624

I do like Bryant Gumbel (and it's Gumbel, not Gumble), but let's not act like he was completely above the fray and above any intra-show squabbles. Just search 'Bryant Gumbel memo' and you'll see what I am referring to. I mean, I love revisionist history as much as the next guy but I love how some here are acting like some of this internal stuff and "big egos" is something new with the edition of the program than it was in prior editions of Today or other news shows in general. There have been big egos in television and television news as long as both have been around, this is nothing new.

Roker has always been a jerk, only now people are seeing it in front of the camera instead of behind it. Don't forget, Gumbel also left because CBS gave him a primetime newsmagazine, Public Eye, which lasted only one season. Then with nothing really to do, they were able to cajole him into another morning show reboot.

Is saying you're a born-again Christian really the same as admitting political beliefs?