MediaZone4K

Add Eric Braden (Victor from The Young & The Restless) to that list as he's currently battling cancer.

I know there's an 'In Memoriam' thread, but this might be appropriate here too. With all the changes happening in daytime television it's crazy that Jerry Springer passes away today. Normally I would decry a talkshow like what Jerry's became, but at least it knew what it was. A designated space where the lowest form of television could exist for one hour. The behavior of the people on the show was not to be praised or encouraged, but just observed, cautioned against and --let's face it-- to be amused by. His show was a guilty pleaseure. You knew this was bad but couldn't help but watch. RIP. https://amp.tmz.com/2023/04/27/jerry-springer-dead-dies/

Tucker will either start his own youtube/social media channel, go to OAN or Newsmax, or we'll see if News Nation is willing to take someone as polarizing as him. As for Don Lemon, I'm not sure if he's that popular to command a social media following. Maybe BET might be interested in him for network coverage of political matters (unless they opt to similcast CBSN like they did for the Chauvin verdict).

Not to verge too off topic but....Since I see Sinclair constantly (and with good reason get negative reviews), which large station group do you all feel manages their affiliates the best?

Looking for some clips now. WABC's website doesn't include the toss back to the anchor in their youtube clips, where most of Bill's side comments are inserted (at least from what I've observed).

woah this is huge

Jon Stewart clearly has his biases but he usually presents a fair arguement and this was no exception. He displayed how the right wing media takes overblown talking points and perfectly executes them into national movements and conversations. Conversely, he showed that the admittedly left leaning mainstream news media (and further left CNN and MSNBC) idealize themselves as the "seeking truth to power" alternative, but poorly execute that mission. He used CNN and MSNBC's over coverage of the Mueller Report --- which resulted in nothing --- as evidence. He even took a jab at his own streamer Apple Tv. This was a pretty good analysis, finding that even though Fox News gets most of the heat, MSNBC, CNN (and to a lesser extent the big three) all have their isssues.

WPIX fixed their mornings and fixed their set. Now their central issue is consistency. Part of cultivating an audience is viewers getting used to seeing regular faces on a particular show/timeslot. The constant shifting: Betty/Hazel, Chris Cimino, John/Kala, Kirsten Cole and more, is all over the place. Find a talent lineup that works and fight the compulsive urge to re arrange every few months.

There is a difference between "happy talk" comments like you stated and Ritter's snarky side comments which delve into outright stating his opinion. Yes but again, Beutel's segment was identified as commentary, evidenced by signature below the screen (I would have still opted for a clear editorial graphic). Some of his opinions weren't even direct, just generic wise sentiments such as below: Wether or not the ratings are affected, it's the principle if it. News is supposed to be straight fact and repoters must minimize their opinions as much as possible unless it's an editorial or analysis segment. Cable news teaches us what happens when too much opinionated content seeps into news. Alex S. Jones of Neiman Reports (not THAT Alex Jones) had a good take on this: "Enemies of objectivity argue that because journalists must be free of bias to be objective, and because this is impossible, it follows that objectivity is a false ideal...But objectivity does not require that journalists be blank slates free of bias. In fact, objectivity is necessary precisely because they are biased". In short, because we are all biased we need a source of outright fact, which in turn helps us create informed opinions.

CBS & their excessively long brandings. "WCCO News & CBS Minnesota". Interestingly enough, the multiple ABC 7 Eyewitness News stations have worked for ABC though.

WABC has the strongest weekend team which is especially good for Sunday night where primetime actually matters. The only way I see to accomodate them on weekdays would be at 5:00.

The launch wasn't too bad. It felt right as Mark has a long history with the show. The pair can --not too heavily-- capitalize off of the husband and wife talk show angle (even though it's been done before). It was also nice to have Seacrest's replacement ready the following Monday morning, sparing another drawn out host search. I can't think of an immediate choice if Mark hadn't taken the job, but LIVE picked very well with both Michael and Ryan, so their judgement is sound. I will say they need less harsh lighting. It cheapens the aesthetic of the show. Looking back at clips from the Michael era, the lighting was warmer and significantly less washed out.

John & Craig have been moved around way too much. They, much like Kaity, deserve a weekday slot.

Nextar wouldn't want to pay that many bodies. AM 4:30-7 Vanessa & (Marysol?) 7-10 Dan & Tamsen? (if not then Hazel) 10-11 Marysol & Alex PM 4 & 6p Kala & Craig Treadway 5 & 10p John & Shirley I wonder if Tamsen would be better in the AM with Dan?

Someone finally posted Today Show coverage of the day following Princess Diana's death (1997) Another "new" Today post from 1997, 3 yers before the tragic events. Back when September 11th was just a regular date!

Agreed! Shirley is pretty good. Put her in the evenings so we have more faces.

I *speculate* they'll let Chuck make 50 years or break the longest running anchor in America record. NBC then might buy him out, or he might opt to retire after achieving one of those. Ether way, no rush, he should stay as long as he can.

Michael's addition cut into the amount of leftover fluff segments for the meteorologist to pick up. With Amy (when she was there) and Lara around to to handle the lifestyle pieces, then Robin, George and Michael all in the role of primary anchors, there's little besides the weather left for Ginger.

Exactly what is the brandng? WCCO News, CBS News Minnesota, WCCO News on CBS Minnesota? Go the KYW route and simplify it. "4" in the black box, "CBS News Minnesota" in the blue box. Maybe WCCO is like KCAL or PIX where the call sign is famously known otherwise referencing them isn't necessary. Fair points. IMO channel numbers should referenced in some way so people can quickly find the station on their tv. Most people probably say Channel 3 anyway instead of CBS Philly or KWY.

I'm surprised cable still beats broadcast viewership. The main reason I can assume is that cable (and satellite barring severe weather) gurantees a clear signal. OTA digital channels glitch and sometimes are temporarily unavalible due to poorer signal and antenna brands.

This video explains the concept of "channel drift" really well, a topic we've heavily discussed. I recall Flavor of Love, I Love New York, Keeping up with the Kardashians and Rev Run's House really signaled the programing shift in the mid 2000s for me. At least Game Show Network, Food Network and HGTV have largely retained their niche.

I hope design packages embrace black, browns, yellows and purples more instead of the general blue and white, breaking red, and morning orange looks. Not CBS but Nightly News woth Tom Brokaw used brown and purple effectively in the early 00s.

Green is a rare color for stations but KYW pulls it off well. Loving the Philadelphia Eagles shade of green. The new CBS package in't all that great, but touches of uniqueness like these is what adds flare and authenciticty.

On an episode of Allen's Judge Mablean Show, many youtube users commented the plot was very similar to "The Imitation of Life" movie.

What a shame. There's a saying that goes "don't go too hard on the competition, you never know if you might end up working for them".