MediaZone4K

Oh CBS what a mess. I understand that the aim is for straightforward easily identifiable branding, but this is too wordy. " KCAL News at 11AM on CBS Los Angeles". When you have a name as a brand its more easily transferable. Example: Atlanta News First, it works on both WANF and WPCH. Then again this was tried already with "News Central". Maybe CBS should abandon standardized O&O branding and let individual stations do their own thing. The L3's look terrible, it screams streaming (which is probably the point). That's better. Local stations are really mix and match all over the place with anchor pairings, that it's confusing to tell what time you can see your preferred anchor.

I guess TJ and Amy figured that they might as well carry on as apologizing and damage control stops nothing in todays culture that will drag you until your destruction.

why not just Team A: 4:30-7 am Team B: 7-9 am Team B: 9-11:30 am Part of scheduling is a predictable team line up.

The simplest scheduling may have been to similcast KCAL Mornings on KCBS from 4:30-7 am, then go to CBS Mornings. Viewers are probably used to local then national arrangement on NBC and ABC so it may be confusing for them (the little that watch) to see a national morning newscast at 5 AM and then a repeat at 7. I'm sure they have their reasons for doing this though.

I question if the decline of live tv is limited to the United States.

Overall, it looks like KCBS has exhausted every trick in the book to remain relevant. Let's see if this works out.

BET does this alot. Weird timeslots like 4:27 pm to 5:06 pm to accomodate more commercials.

The set looks nice and the promo graphics were well done even though they reek of corperate blandness. This is really someting. An owned and operated station is doing that badly that it's independent sister station will become the chief brand. Personally, I haven't seen this before. For LA watchers, is KCAL that much more popular than KCBS? How do you feel about the double (live and repeat) broadcast of CBS Mornings?

(Didn't merge) Didn't even realize MTV 2 was doing that bad. Content wise it's superior to it's sibling Rediculousness and Teen Mom ladened MTV.

And one would think an abundance of choice would make tv better but it's had the exact opposite effect. Something left out of my earlier essay, lol. Cable channels rerunning the same thing ALL day long. I'm looking at you Rediculousness MTV, or SpongeBob Nickelodeon. Does Rediculousness even do that well in the ratings to be rerun that often? I wouldnt even mind an endless array of cable channels playing movies if said feature was inline with it's niche. Example: a movie like Notorius (about the music industry) on VH 1.

You hit every individual nail on the head. It's like sometime in the 2010s, exectives just forgot how to produce good tv. Jimmy Kimmel is the cheif suspect. I thought the nonstop Trump coverage would've died after the election, but Kimmel continues to go on and on. Find material outside of "orange man and red party bad" EVERY night. Saw that too!! Soap writers seem to be ignorant that repetitive poor writing and not just changes in viewing habits have lead to the genre's collapse. The only reason those shows retain an audience is viewer loyalty. It's sad what's become of kids tv. Back in the day even my adult family members could sit watch and enjoy because the writing was smarter and didn't dumb things down for children. All kids in my family look at now are Co Co Melon, and watch other children play with toys and video games on YouTube. Don't get me started on just how and low bar some of the kids YouTube content is ex: Dobby ASMR. Gone are the days of Cartoon Network Fridays, saturday morning Disney and Nick Jr reruns on ABC and CBS, good shows on Nickelodeon, or actual new Sesame Street episodes on PBS. Big events like Fairly Odd Parents tv movies or deep shows like Avatar the Last Airbender would be hard to find today. Children's television seemed to fall off somewhere around 2012-13. That was around the time Victorious ended on Nick and Good Luck Charlie ended on Disney. Since then, both networks have failed to produce a consistent class of hit shows. What sucks is that despite the lack of programming, they won't rerun the old stuff (and not in a decent time slot if they do).

Tody Show (1994), Matt--in for Braynt--and Katie in the wooden set. Cool seeing Katie and Matt together on the old set. **Ignore the thumbnail**, but I never knew Monica Lewinsky did an interview on Today in 1998

Rabbit ears analog was way better. I preferred the static over scratching and glitching from digital.

As the article suggests, cord cutting isn't the sole issue. Cable networks seem to be clueless that they've abandoned their niches in favor of saturated content: reality shows and sitcom reruns. MTV & VH 1 don't play music videos anymore, TLC lacks educational content in favor of Honey Boo-Boo, and umpteen channels show Friends. Not to mention the original content channels produce seems watered down compared to their old offerings: examples BET, Disney Channel, Nickelodeon, and Cartoon network. Audiences aren't that dumb. Add to that, the heavy handed political messaging in shows. Viewers can tell when something is poorly written or cookie cutter and will turn away. Broadcast tv is stale, it's current lineup of shows lack imagination compared to scripted streaming offerings. Finally, we all know the problem with cable news. Sensationalism, hyper partisanship and toxic journalism that seeks to get eyeballs and reactions from viewers, rather than educating and informing them. With these poor choices, it's no wonder audiences are turning away from television.

The original cast reacts to Barbara's passing. I would love for the OG cast to return with Whoopi as moderator. Have the show not just be about politics all the time, but older women's perspective on life.

Historic day today with the passing of the former Pope. His election (2005). His resignation (2013) Has Dannotch's News Videos been taken down?

WCBS 2 1977, I love that New York area TV stations are all releasing archival clips in decent quality.

Not sure where exactly to post this, but it definitely is relevant to GMA. Disney CEO Bob Iger was in conversation with John Stewart about the issues with modern news. Iger claims ABC News never sacrificed quality for ratings. To the contrary, GMA and ABC News are one of the worst offenders (if not the worst among the big three) of frequently using hyperbole and breaking news. An element I like that Stewart pointed out, is that modern news media all rushes to cover one event with extreme focus, then moves onto the next topic while other issues get pushed to the sidelines. Case and point, the Mueller Report. A key thing Stewart kept pressing Iger about is how would news organizations execute the change for better quality news they claim to want---to which the latter said would be impractical to do in today's climate. Interesting watch, and to Iger's credit he was the only major news executive willing to talk to Stewart.

Graphics aside, CBS This Morning was fine especially when it was more hard news oriented. Nora, Gayle, and Charlie were a solid team. All they needed was a solid replacement for Charlie and the anchor line up would've been fine.

I keep hearing it said that flatness is more mobile friendly. In what way? It's a fair statement to not nitpick too much given that the average viewer just cares about channel content more so than presentation elements. A tweaked logo isn't the end of the world. On the contrary, a large portion of what we critique here like lighting, studio setup, and graphics, only industry junkies would care about. My point remains though, a lot of these graphical "updates" networks are doing to their logos seem to take a step backwards. The NBC news logo IMO is the perfect all around peacock design to settle on. White borders with depth, gloss, and gradient to the colors.

This was unnecesary and not an improvement by any measure. First ABC ruined their logo, then CBS gets a miniscule screen bug, now this. Its like the networks are dertermined to spend money for a worse product.

NBC News Projections (1960). A panel of reporters discuss diplomatic, problems, and solutions facing counties they studied. Very indepth and intelectual doscussions. Feels like a model UN class. The 60s and 70s truly were the stongest periods for tv news from a journalistic standpoint. Frank McGee is lead anchor.

Crazy, was thinking about this today. I was having a discussion with a family member — who retired early — and is very big on people of a certain age calling it quits to enjoy retirement. The way I see it, when you love and are passionate about a career, you aren't rushing to leave. All things considered, when one retires, what is there to do at home? Chuck aside, in the average citizen's case, retirement often means sitting at home, watching daytime television, and waiting for the eventual. Especially if their family doesn't live close and their friends aren't in good health or have passed, going to work is what gives many of the elderly the drive to keep going. In Chuck's case, I'm sure he has decent wealth to travel and live well. We aren't privy to his personal life, so I'll guess that he really just loves his job. It pays well, isn't physically taxing, and simply requires him to sit and read a pre written script for about 22 minutes excluding commercials. Plus, Chuck's usually on about 3 out of 5 nights a week. As long as he remains in good health and isn't demanding any dramatic salary increases, lets see how long he can go for.

Any numbers on how WANF is doing in the ratings? Not that where a few months in do you guys feel things are flowing well or is this not working, is more time needed?

Yes! The old newsroom set was much more grand and felt like you were in the middle of a non stop news operation.