MediaZone4K

It seems 4pm is the most important evening show now-a-days. In many markets I have seen 4:00 getting all the new packages and then being recycled throughout the later shows, with 10/11-pm maybe having some fresh nightime news. Despite 6 PM having the highest ratings, 6:00 newscasts are often rehashes of the 4pm. In Atlanta, I've seen 11 Alive and Fox 5's 6 PM newscasts featuring mostly pretaped look live shots. This most likely because a day side reporter's shift runs 9-5ish.

Look AA

Niceeee!

In general live shots at night where the scene is not visible are pointless. The main point of a live shot is to display an active scene or breaking news, the second is putting a report on the air in which there isn't enough time to package. Big markets like Atlanta are the king of pointless live shots. I doubt the audience cares if the reporter is live at an inactive scene, especially if they are consuming news after the fact on YouTube. I had a news director say he didn't want a daytime stand-up for a report airing at night, but the bridge or the cutaway two shots (and the interview) could be in daylight which made no sense.

Not terrible, not remarkable. Gets the job done.

Per the IG page of a News 12 Brooklyn journalist, I see she MMJs. NYC is a chaotic market to do that in. I would imagine the conditions are similar in Jersey, pushing people out the door. I've been told by some Nexstar employee friends that there is MMJing at PIX 11, which could be a contributing factor to turnover.

Late to the party but....the reporter turnover at WPIX along with WCBS and WNYW seems to be frequent. I could not name half the reporters at those stations compared to years past. And this is market 1, imagine the conditions in mid to low markets leading to this same issue.

I agree with your points but I do support the name change as to distinguish the CBS News streaming site from the TV platform. At this point they might as well give in and call it "CBS News +" Lol. My old school mentality says we don't need more new streaming services, but I'll still take the product on those platforms over what we're given on cable news. How are these sites even doing ratings wise?

Employees at WROC (CBS 8 Rochester, NY) are picketing over Nexstar's refusal to recognize their union. From my experience, you need about 75% of Staff support for the union to be recognized. According to the article, Nexstar tried to claim that producers are ineligible for unions because they serve in a management capacity. The National Labor Relations Board however ruled producers were union elligable. Do you all think the unionization attempts will be successful? https://rbj.net/2024/06/10/wroc-union-plans-picket-over-stalled-contract-talks/

Good Morning America has been this way since the early 2010s, even worse after Sam Champion and Josh Elliott left in 2013/2014. It's become a mix of Inside Edition and Entertainment Tonight. Right now, I think GMA's hosts are less of the problem. GMA's story choice, tabloid sensationalized tone, and ADHD pacing are the issue for me Watching a GMA broadcast from 1984 or 2004 versus 2024 feels significantly dumbed down. Today has sucked since Meredith & Ann left but its news element tops GMA. CBS Mornings has its flaws but it's the most mature and news-oriented show among the three.

Yes, sets don't need to match graphics. Sometimes a graphics package looks old but a set looks fine (ex Today updating their graphics but keeping their set in 2009). But, on many of the abc o&o stations, both graphics and set happened to reach its outdated point simultaneously. In that case, they might as well update both to improve the overall aesthetic. The only station that a studio update wouldn't make sense for is WABC since they are moving facilities.

Yup. Right now the NBCs have the best sets of the O&Os I'd argue Hearst and Graham stations have the best sets of the affiliate groups. What ABC O&O would you all say has the best set? KGO? KABC?

WAGA's Sharon Lawson is leaving Good Day Atlanta after 7 years. The reasoning is not clear but her Instagram post says it was her decision. The Atlanta Journal Constitution article notes that two other veteran newscasters left the station after accepting company buyouts. Sucks! Sharon was okay. Welp...this is a creative way to reach a younger audience lol.

MSNBC has been very vocal on matters that could affect company interests. From the Rona McDaniel hiring to this. Loosy related... The only other company I've seen that allows this much criticism on company matters is Fox, with shows like The Simpsons and Family Guy routinely mocking the Fox News Channel.

On a similar note if you notice the time bugs above the station logo you'll see the Biden packages were placed in the A block. What sucks about Sinclair stations is that so much of their local broadcasts are made up of national news. Unless it's a major story, local stations typically resort to nation packages to fill airtime by the b or c blocks. In my market's Sinclair, like these stations in the report, I have seen national packages appear as early the middle of A block. And the reports are usually never from the Affiliated Network mostly from sinclair. The nationalization of local news is another issue. As a viewer I don't want to see the same stories rehashed that I can already get from Network or cable.

Fair points. All in all a job should have no say on when and where you seek employment after you leave said job.

— Except small to mid-market stations do little by way of training employees anymore. In my old mid-market newsroom, there was no formal training for reporters, just learning as you go along. There was no hair, makeup, work phones, or any perks attached for reporters. So their argument that investment in employees justifies post-employment non-compete clauses or contract breach fees is null and void. And so what if they did invest in employees? Why do employers feel the need to exercise control over what someone does when they leave your company? Fear of losing viewers? As Katie Couric leaving Today for the CBS Evening News displayed, talent switching channels doesn't mean the viewers will leave in droves as the CBS EN remained #3 and Today remained #1 in their respective slots. Nonetheless, I doubt audiences will abandon a station because a reporter (a more interchangeable face than an anchor) has switched channels. If it's fear of spreading company intellectual property — cameramen and digital writers who weren't under contract were privy to just as much information as reporters and producers who were contracted. So that policy of subjecting one to contract not the other was inconsistent to me.

The contracts should be shorter. Being locked into a $16 to $20 an hour job for 2 to 3 years is insane. Call me an extremist but contracts should be abolished for all low wage employees making perhaps less than $100K/yr. What the news industry seems to not care about is that their toxic work environments, unrealistic timing expectations, the expansion of the MMJ role and low salaries have all contributed to mass turnovers and low recruitment. Many of these conditions were in place before the digital age so we cannot blame loss of viewing habits for the current generation's disillusionment with the profession. This is the "I quit" generation. Millennials and Gen Z are not as loyal to their jobs and not willing to tolerate crap from their bosses so they will walk away faster than previous generations.

Stepping outside the specific issue--- working for free is a common expectation in newsrooms. News directors fully expect their reporters to come in with pre-vetted developed enterprised pitches EVERY DAY even though they may not have time on the back end of their shift to do so. How can this be accomplished? I worked in a newsroom where the news director basically told reporters "I'm not asking you to work for free, but it does help to be following the news , browsing for stories, and making calls on your off time." Those things may help but when we speak about work-life balance I don't think that's really what you want to be doing after an 8 to 10 hour work day.

From my experience, news directors in mid sized markets are now hiring people who just graduated or are about to graduate from college. I'm not against that as no one wants to start in market 177. The problem is many colleges ONLY teach written journalism (print/online article writing) and theory of journalism (bias, philosophy etc). Broadcast skills like teleprompter reading, video editing, conducting interviews, mastering extemporaneous speech during live shots, mmj cameras and meeting tight deadlines are learned on the job in sink or swim environments.

Just discovered this WTVT open from the 90s and it was excellent. 90s saxophone, love that marimba like instrument, and love the way the set lights up when the announcer Charlie Van Dyke says "Tonight" https://youtu.be/E995_PjHbUM?si=nMkHN7WKJG44jobq

KXAS (not surprisingly for an NBC o&o) is the best looking station in the market.

Wow! The previous graphics looked like ones from a fictional news report on a TV drama.

Thank You! Exactly.

The nerve of the government for preventing companies from monopolizing the public airwaves so an oligopathy of companies can't control the flow of information to the public Pardon my lack of knowledge. So local station owners can't broadcast to more than 39% of Americans, but the national television networks can? Is it legally okay for networks to do so because they don't own all stations they broadcast on?