MediaZone4K

On 1/14/2024 at 8:07 AM, MediaZone4K said:

Now, time for that abysmal set to get updated when they move HQ. With WNBC's news upgrades, the Eyewitness News set is officially the worst in market.

On 1/16/2024 at 1:49 PM, Vlad said:

I have to constructively disagree with you MediaZone about WABC's current set being abysmal.

 

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. 

20 hours ago, bgiesing said:

TBF, just cause it's "renewed though 2028" doesn't mean it will be "on CBS through 2028", they could very easily have a clause just like with Days to move to streaming at a later date.

Or of course, they could can the other one to free up the hour instead. Alongside the announcement, TVLine was told this

So like maybe B&B is only renewed for one more year while the more popular Y&R stays on for 4. 

------

Personally, I'm of the mind that yeah I do think there's too much news hours even if yes, most people don't watch all the hours and aren't getting "fatigued" from it. I personally would want them to be more like say BBC internationally where daytime hours include stuff rarely shown on broadcast television over here and are instead locked to cable/streaming like cooking or home improvement shows BUT I can't deny Daily has been a success (and personally I find it to be my favorite, just the right mix of more upbeat morning news and serious primetime news without going too far in each direction) and like, most people nowadays have options. Even before streaming, most people could switch to any of the 100s of cable channels if they didn't want to watch what the big networks were showing and especially now with streaming, there's literally thousands of other options if you don't want news at noon.

It's 2024, basically everyone has decent internet and already streams content, you aren't forced to watch NBC (and the others) if you don't want news. Hell, go watch YouTube even, you don't even need a 30-60 minute scripted drama during that time frame. 

------

Side-Note: Why have they not put Daily on demand yet like almost all of their other news shows. Kinda hard to watch the one you prefer when it's literally not available. NBC News Now of course streams it but not everyone can watch live that exact second and the only stream that allows going back into the VoD is the YouTube version but they delist that meaning if you don't save the link, it's impossible to watch.
 

Every other NBC News show from the mainstay TODAY to Nightly and including other News Now ones like Top Story, Stay Tuned, etc. you can stream on-demand on either YouTube, NBC.com, Peacock, or via Podcast. I get Daily is a bit unique in that there's 4 separate hours but nobody is saying you have to save all 4 of them, like already Nightly is only the West Coast edition on demand so like just pick one of the 4 hours and make that the on demand version.

7 hours ago, Nelson R. said:

Maybe CBS does similar to NBC News Daily and schedules it at 12:30, 1:30, 2:30, and 3:30 ET for each continental time zone. That would allow for CT to keep their noon news without the new CBS Daytime News being delayed and Y&R could stay at 11am CT.

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?

WCBS is making big changes with Dick Brennan and Dana Tyler being booted from the 6pm news as 5/11pm anchors Maurice & Kristine take over. Dick will go back to reporting as Dana is reduced to a fill in anchor or special contributor. Bad move.

https://www.nexttv.com/news/wcbs-new-york-changes-6-pm-team

I can only speculate if ratings are the issue. IMO Dick and Dana are good together so the national CBS O&O format is what I'd say the real issue is.

Let the record state that Andrea Grymes was also bumped from weekends.

Is WCBS doing that badly? Much like WNYW isn't the strongest Fox station despite being the flagship what CBS o&o's would you say are in better shape than WCBS.

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.

14 hours ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

What a horrible turn of events for Newshub and for New Zealanders. WBD has already been making cuts to its NZ division, but to close the entire newsroom is diabolical. A lot of good people are going to be out of work, and most importantly, it’s a disaster for New Zealand. TVNZ (the state-owned “public” broadcaster that operates more like a commercial channel in practice) is going to have a monopoly on TV news. What a joke.
 

I don’t know of too many healthy democracies with a lack of media diversity. You can’t adequately scrutinize people in power when there’s only one, state-owned outlet available to do it. I’m hoping there’s a way to save Newshub before June, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

The crumble of terrestrial TV appears to be global sadly.

Didn't know where else to post this. Does anyone follow the news in New Zealand? The soon-to-be-defunct Newhub and its competition 1 NEWS New Zealand are aesthetically gorgeous.  Would love for CNN to implement these looks for either Newsroom or News Central. New Zealand and Australia are the two countries I've seen whose news production is greater than or equal to that of the US.  Does anyone know the set designer?

Newshub (bottom pic taken from a 1 News story on them). This is very CNN with the color scheme. Love the slanted desks and the sloped single monitors. Reminds me of the National Telemundo set. This would also work really well on an NBC O&O with a blue and white color scheme. Thanks to ATL NEWS Expert for putting me on to this outlet.

1 News NZ. Love the Amazon Alexa looking desk. 

54 minutes ago, ATLNewsExpert said:

Huge bombshell out of New Zealand this morning (evening over there) as Warner Brothers Discovery announced proposals to completely SHUTDOWN "Three NewsHub", newsroom, all newscasts (6pm and late), everything, putting up to 300 employees at risk of loosing their jobs. 

 

The Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand has called this move a "disaster" for New Zealand's democracy, as it leaves 1News as the only national TV news operation in New Zealand, however the reaction from the rest of the government has been minimal.

 

Also effected is the broadcast on "Sky Open", "News First at 5:30" which is produced by Newshub.

 

 

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. 

5 hours ago, mre29 said:

So, is everyone only interested in talking about the CBS-owned stations? The original poster never specified that...

 

True...but the o&o have a single owner and the same format so it's easy to pinpoint what their issues are.

For the affiliates which have multiple owners, and multiple factors at play, it's more difficult to pinpoint why they aren't successful. Some posters have said it harkens back to the '94 realignments. Others have pointed out CBS affiliates do well in small and rural markets.

2 hours ago, carolinanews4 said:

For the CBS owned stations, I think comes down to a lack of budget and the resulting lack of identity. CBS O&Os historically have spent less than their ABC and NBC counterparts leaving them with fewer resources. To play catchup stations like WCBS and WBBM have gone through numerous rebrandings.

 

From a corporate standpoint, CBS has undervalued the "presentation" portion of TV news which has been reflected in the way they fund their local stations. They live in the Walter Cronkite era of storytelling. Admirable? Sure. But television is a visual medium and newscasts are built on a relationship with the viewer. I don't feel like CBS has ever truly embraced either of those things. The lack of investment was easier to hide in the 70s and 80s because everyone's presentation was crude. But as technology has evolved, CBS always seems to be playing catch-up. 

 

When Jeff Zucker cut NBC budgets in the early 2000s, WNBC went into their "WCBS era" where they lacked identity and money. The NBC O&O group launched Daily Connection which was a "newscast" that featured repurposed content from across NBCU properties. The pieces of the show were assembled in NYC and then fed to stations to be produced with local talent. (Sound similar to the equally generic CBS News Now broadcast from Texas?) Cost efficient? You bet. Compelling tv? Not at all.

 

WNBC eliminated Live at Five in favor of News4You and Extra. When that didn't work, WNBC played musical chairs with timeslots, anchors, and formats for years. WNBC their newsroom into a "Content Center" which was nothing more than a gimmick, like the gimmick WCBS tried in launching the short-lived CBS 2 Information Network. It was during this time when WCBS was able to move up to #2, not because Channel 2 was doing anything particularly compelling but because they offered stability where WNBC didn't.

 

Valari Staab, formerly with the ABC O&O group, has spent over a decade rebuilding the newsgathering resources of the NBC group. New radar technology, studios, increased digital resources, heck even new buildings have been added. CBS meanwhile appears to continue the "more with less" mantra that has been in place for over 40 years. While NBC was rebuilding, the ABC stations, with their well-defined local identities, have steamrolled everyone with a consistent and well-funded product. Meanwhile the FOX O&O group, with seemingly endless hours of local news, generates strong local revenue. 

 

What has CBS done? Slapped the last-place 'CBS News' brand onto their local stations. Most of the CBS stations lack the type of true community investment it takes to be a strong player. With audiences for linear TV newscasts continuing to shrink, one could argue it Is way too late for them to catch up. 

Thank you for clarifying that the WNBC situation was budget cuts. I wondered why they would wreck their solid news product in the mid-2000s, for all the crap you listed coupled with a sub par studio and worse graphics. News 4 really improved in 2012! 

I do however appreciate that CBS O&Os don't have a billion hours of news compared to their counterparts.

Focusing on WCBS, alot of their troubles stem from a mass talent firing and re-branding in 1996. They abandoned the good "Channel 2 News" format which boasted a tabloid feel and commanding news theme ---though the NY Times says it performed behind CH 4 & 7.

It was replaced by several rebrands, studio, talent and graphics changes, until they finally stabalized in 2007. 10 years of instability! In the last 5 or so years WCBS has lost some 'flavor' and I'm not sure where they stand in the ratings today.

"Channel 2 News" final era (1993-1996)

2 News (1996-1997). The set and graphics were fine. The music, format changes etc though...

"CBS News New York" generic pharmacy jingle 2023

(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.

5 hours ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

Kimmel has his audience, but if I'm not mistaken, he is routinely beaten by Colbert and Fallon. As far as his current place in late night TV is concerned, I feel like The Daily Show and Last Week Tonight are more culturally relevant than Jimmy Kimmel.

 

I suppose there's a chance that ABC finds a fresh comedian to helm a new talk show, and if they're making money between 11:35 and 12:35, they probably won't fix what isn't broken. However, if they end up giving an extra 25 minutes to the affiliates, that really wouldn't surprise me.

In the event that Kimmel goes I'd like to see ABC keep doing a late night talk show. As much as I like Nightline, it's nowhere near the intelectual program it was under Ted Koppel.

Jimmy can be great. His issue is over reliance on Trump for material, especially his virtue signal ladened monolouges. His segments outside of that like Liewitness News, Baby Bachelor and Unnecesary Censorship are hilarious. Otherwise, I find myself turning into Fallon, someone who covers Trump briefly and moves on to other material, keeping his politics at minimum.

2 minutes ago, NYNewsCoverage said:

Yes, from what I've noticed the schedule is:

4,5pm: Kendis, Arrianee and Chris Cimino

6/6:30/10: Kori, Shirley, Mr. G

Previously, Chris did the 4/6 and G the 5/10.

Happy that PIX has finally diversified their evening teams, from what I saw of Kendis he seems like a great fit and adaptable to the lighter fare of the 4pm, and the harder approach to the 5pm.

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

4 hours ago, Breaking News said:

There were times where WAGA did beat WSB in the 70s, 80s and 90s before the switch. There were times WXIA beat both WSB & WAGA at 11pm due to NBC primetime lead in the late 80s and early 90s.

 

When the 80s came around in the bigger markets  NBC & ABC just changed with the times.  CBS hasn't fared well in the bigger markets, but NBC & ABC does really well.  CBS does well in mid size, smaller and rural markets.  Prior to the switch in the 90s.  Atlanta, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Dallas, Phoenix & Tampa Bay those CBS affiliates did really well.

Yes! CBS shows appeal to an older audience.

I can also see why CBS stations do well in rural smaller areas. Historically the network has run rural comedies like Green Acres and in the 90s *shows* like Murder She Wrote, Diagnosis Murder, Walker Texas Ranger etc. Today they've got an endless portfolio of procedurals. It's definitely a watch with your grandparents kind of channel which must trickle down to the newscasts.

My theory for the affiliates is that their struggles stem from the '94 realignments.  They lost some stronger affiliates, left to pick up weaker ones. Look at ATL, CBS lost WAGA 5 to Fox, so they had to settle for WGNX 46, a weaker station with a dial number up in the boondocks.  

For the owned and operated stations I'll say again...CBS O&O newscasts have a very generic, corporate, "Spectrum News" like feel, that isn't always authentic to the markets they're in. Big example, CBS' defunct "Nowcasts". WUPA's version, produced in NYC, felt so out of place in a country/soulful/hip hop city like Atlanta.

WCBS' Mary Calvi and Chris Wragge could do one of those nowcasts because they don't add any extra personality to make it feel like you're watching a New York morning show. This in contrast to the loud-brash-Brooklyn Rosanna Scotto on GDNY or the Jamaican Dancehall or Street Soldiers segments covered on WNYW.

Even though all o&o station groups duplicate their formats across markets, ABC, NBC, and especially FOX & CW stations are better at adding local touches.

4 hours ago, carolinanews4 said:

If this is a benefit of a group product, and that is a big IF, then it is an inadvertent benefit. To say a New Yorker who goes to LA will be drawn to KABC because they share a lower third with WABC is probably overstating the impact of graphics. The real driver for a group package is cost savings. Plain and simple. In ABC's case, it is one package for eight stations. Fox and NBC have been doing it for years. Not only do you save on development but there are downstream savings because topical graphics can be shared. KABC, KGO, and KFSN are probably all sharing flooding graphics for intros, display monitors, etc. 

 

 

Exactly! The network news division (save Sunday Morning and 60 Minutes) is in last place. Many of their local stations (save KDKA and WCCO) were laggards in their markets. So why not reimagine the branding to try to help both? But again, this is an excellent cost savings for the CBS group. And as NYCNewsJunkie rightfully points out, it gave them a comprehensive streaming approach for the first time.  

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. 

On 2/19/2024 at 7:29 PM, MorningNews said:

I’m all about a mandate if it prevents stations from the on-air presentation WABC had in place for a long time. 

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.

14 hours ago, Abraham J. Simpson said:

The thing is: who actually notices? For all the complaints about common elements, how many viewers are actually going to be in two markets with common designs, and happen to watch the stations in question, and happen to pay that kind of attention, and actually care? Effectively no one. 
 

Nobody cares if WABC and KABC, for instance, have common design elements. A few people like us on message boards aren’t representative of the public at large. 

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. 

5 hours ago, Vlad said:

 

I just hope under this change, the O&O stations continue to keep their individuality and local news branding instead of making them all look alike. There is a charm to that indivualistic aspect of a news station versus them all looking alike and sounding the same. 

Say it louder for CBS to hear.

9 hours ago, abc7 Man said:

Rosanna is a contributor on FNC show Outnumbered right now.

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.

Very underwhelming, especially for Graham which has some good looking stations. They should have taken a page from sister station WJXT whose set looks way better. IMO, stations need to tone down the video walls, quit the furniture minimalism and get some physical set pieces. 

4 hours ago, GodfreyGR said:

Apologies in advance if there is something obvious that I am missing here- But do the affiliates have more leeway on Sunday mornings with where they air network programs vs. local news? 

 

With a little channel surfing, Fox News Sunday had Shannon Bream interviewing Israel PM Netanyahu, now an hour later I'm on ABC This Week and Jon Karl introed his interview with the PM as the "first... in over three months". Could be true for a variety of reasons- if This Week airs at the same time as Fox News Sunday in some markets and is pre-empted an hour in mine? Or if ABC taped their interview before Fox? Is ABC assuming that if their viewers are channel surfing, they're not landing on Fox?

 

Or... Am I way overthinking all of this?

Interesting catch. Just this morning my local CBS affiliate skipped Face the Nation (for the first time that I've seen) and aired  E/I programming instead. The did however air Sinclair's Sunday morning political show "Full Measure".

5 hours ago, Jase said:

No amount of time could have saved the first incarnation of CNN This Morning. Don, Poppy and Kaitlan were (are) polar opposites of each other and never truly seemed interested in making the show work nor supporting (uplifting) each other in any way from the beginning.

Of course building chemistry takes time, but everyone has to be willing to do the work and I never got that from them. It was a pain to watch.

Yep!

12 hours ago, mountainave said:

Bit of a shame.  I may be in the minority, but I think the first incarnation of CNN This Morning with Poppy Harlow, Don Lemon, and Kaitlan Collins was a quality product that just needed time.  The three of them each brought something -- Poppy as a longtime anchor with a business acumen, Kaitlan as an incisive political questioner, and Don as an older guy attuned to social issues with an ability to humanize. Yes, Lemon stuck his foot in his mouth one too many times, but in the three of them you really had an ensemble of three smart anchors with different yet complementary skills.  When there wasn't off-camera acrimony or awkward on-camera blunders, the three actually did have good TV chemistry.  To be clear, I'm not saying they should've kept Don.  Just lamenting the show's potential, had things worked properly.

 

Firing Don and plucking Kaitlan off was a one-two punch to the show.  Then it never got the new set it was promised.  Then they decided to return to a stale two-anchor format, and plopped in Phil Mattingly who has a goofy sense of humor and a great political acumen but is still somewhat awkward at the anchor desk and plays too much "inside baseball" when asking questions during his political interviews, which works for a midday show but not for morning.  The morning warmth disappeared from the show and it started to feel like any other two-anchor show of CNN's prior days. 

 

Something else that's telling.  After deciding to move News Central up, they could have moved Poppy and Phil from the morning slot into the 10a-noon slot, either together or each with their own show.  Instead, they completely took them off the schedule, brought Acosta over from the weekend, and gave Pamela her own show.  Apparently someone decided Poppy and Phil have had enough.

 

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.

On 2/2/2024 at 12:07 PM, Geoffrey said:

Wednesday

 

Wonder why they changed Interestingly, it was done on the first day of sweeps (not sure how much those matter anymore).

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. 

On 2/5/2024 at 7:06 AM, Geoffrey said:

New graphics premiered.

 

The open basically looks the same, but has been made shorter.

 

The lower-thirds look cartoonish and they went with a bold condensed font for the main text. Is the text an afterthought?

 

The logo, now stacked in two lines, stays on the left side of the screen like the other CBS newscasts and local news. (Previously it would move above the lower-third.)

 

Edit:

I should add that this is an upgrade over the previous look, which didn't let the text breathe and had too many sections that were just black. This is mostly white and feels lighter.

 

WCBS seems to be having problems with the ticker. It's been blank most of the time, occasionally running a single headline from the website before being blank again. It also remained on screen during most of the first commercial break. 

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.