MediaZone4K

Surprisingly, MSNBC aired a good chunk Trump's Super Tuesday speech, despite past objections to giving him a platform for inaccuracy. I also noticed network NBC was the only one of the big three to air the speech. Moreover, NBC called Trump's performance a landslide MSNBC mildly labeled it as "victories". Obviously NBC attempts to stay more neutral then their cable counterpart, but it was still surprising to see.

this is why think reporters should get a *separate* friends only social media where they can post almost whatever they want. Keep your public profile clean and brand related. EDIT: and block your job from seeing your IG story, maybe even block them totally if you can.

Agreed. In hearing from reporters, constant turnover usually equals unimpressive pay, a toxic work environment, or burnout from being overworked. WABC appears to have the most reporters with a 20+ year tenure. They must have great pay and a decent working culture.

My thoughts exactly. Instead of having Mary & Chris who start work pre 4:30am doing the noon, they could have used Cindy Hsu or Dick & Dana, all of whom get only 30 minutes of airtime.

Thank you for articulating that respectfully. Everyone is entitled to express their opinions, the key is doing so politely and not being a keyboard warrior, unlike 24994J who consistently disrespects users on these boards despite being a moderator.

Ah yes, your daily dose of condescension and talking to people any way you want in these threds. . "We?" Speak for yourself. IMO This picture is a perfect illustration of poor grainy lighting compared to the more brightly lit, slicker looking appearence of Mornings on 10. Poor lighting compared to the sets of the competition even.

This is what I mean by abysmal. Even if the set isn't great the lighting would elevate it like the Mornings on 10 look does.

Y&R is in terrible shape writing and aesthetic wise but it still pulls an -old- audience and shockingly remains #1 against other soaps. Nostalgia has to be the reason because quality certainly isn't. Despite one of the better performing daytime shows being renewed for 4 years I'm suprised there's still talk about if CBS will put a newscast in the slot. Is CBS is rushing to add midday news as its national product (even the o&o local version) isnt a top performer outside of 60 Minutes and Sunday Morning? Younger demo maybe?

Admittedly Dana isn't the strongest anchor these days (when solo) but this isn't is a solution at all. Maybe it's just me but don't viewers get tired of seeing the same faces on every newscast? That's Maurice and Christine at 5,6, (8 on WLNY?) and 11. I'd think you would want a veteran like Dana Tyler up against Chuck Scarborough and Bill Ritter in the same slot. Dick is great on air and deserves an anchor spot wether it's with Alice or Dana. If ratings ate behind this, Dana and Dick aren't the problem the dry CBS o&o format is. Devil's advocate, maybe this is for the better. There was pushback when Dana and Jim Rosenfield were booted from the 11 in favor of Maurice and Christine, but ratings improved. So we'll see.

Sad. Side track, but they could teach some of these US brands a thing or too about set and graphic design.

Late to the party, so CNN will have News CENTRAL and NewsROOM now? It's clear that NewsCentral will be the main dayside brand but how will this differ from Newsroom? I'm glad to see Newsroom still around but I'm surprised they didn't just MSNBC it and unite all of dayside headline coverage under one brand.

(Skip to 2:32) My knowledge of the Chicago market is still growing so I was surprised to see the legendary Bill Curtis/Walter Jacobson pairing still intact as late as 2013. I wish stations weren't so averse to do male pairings these days.

Nice and clear talent line up too. not confusing to know which time your favorite personality will be on.

Not to turn this into the CBS thread but the issue there is that if their national news brand is not doing well outside of two shows, does that justify duplicating it on the local level? If anything, CBS stations need to be seeking separate identities. I'll save that for it's designated thread. Fox O&Os, like ABC stations, are a prime example of duplicated yet still locally fresh format. WAGA feels authentically Atlanta as WNYW feels uniquely NY with personalities like Rosanna Scotto, and segments covering say Jamaican Dancehall culture... despite both stations being "Fox 5 News" with the same graphics. Again WABC does this well also. Back to WABC, I have to agree. Left to their own volition, Channel 7 has shown us for decades how bad their sets and graphics can get.

True. I see both sides. I agree with the idea of identifying a similar product via aesthetics through several markets. Not to drift off topic but, comparing the more successful ABC O&Os vs CBS O&OS...I don't mind duplicating a look just with added personal touches like KWY doing green instead of the standard CBS blue and white. I know the argument is a similar look for content sharing but the audience does not care if WCBS takes a KYW green graphic. The issue becomes when stations sound like a bland corporate carbon copy and not locally authentic. Look at WCBS with its pharmacy jingle ringtone open and clean corporate feel which doesn't match the vibe of a gritty intense city like New York. In contrast, even though WABC is one of ABC's many Eyewitness News copies, it still feels locally authentic to NYC with its diverse set of long-tenured reporters and its "flashier" (as some have said) format.

Say it louder for CBS to hear.

I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with some of the points Rosanna made. But, she (as usual) drifts into editorialization. Sanctuary "Trap" for example is a loaded title. "This is coming to a city near you, unfortunately" which she said, is also another iffy statement. That's fine for Fox News Channel, but very slippery for her already compromised 'neutral image' role on GDNY.

Yep! I wasn't sorry to see Don go, he was one of many annoying cable pundits. I just didn't like the circumstances under which it occurred.

Pardon me for me for being facetious, but the video *wall* would look better and more seemless without that red thing (a table?) in the background.

Agreed. The concept is not horrible. The L3's just look too cartoonish, flat, fat, and white. The graphics looked better in the CBS News Mornings shot, maybe because it doesn't have the ticker and the upper subject bar weighing it down. Broadstroke: As time advances television graphics are not.

The network keeps making adjustments to this show (and it's predecessor's) graphics that aren't better. The CBS logo needs to be shifted to the right to fill the dead space where the ticker ends. Excluding the ticker, this was probably the only decent L3 CBS This Morning/Mornings has ever had:

Pulling for big names much like Fox 5!

Snippet from Today in New York, 2007. WNBC's looked really good aesthetically here, and they had good talent. So, I'm still trying to figure out exactly what caused them to drop in the ratings to the point of cutting newscast at that time? Was it simply because WCBS made improvements and displaced them for second in some timeslots?

That column was nice and it worked! Embrace it, maybe even stick a Today Show rainbow at the base, similar to the 80s.

It looked better when the camera feed monitor was frameles