MediaZone4K

It's not the fault of news emplyees, it's the network heads who keep demanding more news. They keep blaming splintered audiences for low ratings. That's only part of the puzzle. Low effort or *low quality* programming is also to blame. Spitting out cheap Byron Allen court shows, repeditive newscasts and recycling tired police procedurals is bound to negatively affect ratings. I know countless people who say TV sucks now so they watch Netflix It is lazy in a sense. Rather than being creative with programming, networks can simply have their news crew that's around (doing a lot as it is) churn out yet another newscast for no added cost. Profit comes first but, there has to be a way to achieve that without showing news 17 hours a day.

Amen. TV news started out as networks filling their government mandated public service quota. Once they realized news divisions could be profitable, the problems we have today began. It's the American way. The people running the business make all the money while the people at the ground level make small potatoes.

What you're saying is not wrong but I'm gonna have to hold greedy executive's feet to the fire more on this one. We proclaim that journalists are these "beacons" who hold truth to power. Yet, we don't pay journalists a livable wage, so they leave and work in PR for people like politicians who spin reality. That can't good for a democratic society. Not to sound extremist, but journalists need to be the next group to strike. This especially as stations rely more on news departments for direct ad revenue with syndication options drying up.

Adding to this, smaller market stations pay less money. If a reporter is in market 115 for example, they might keep climbing up markets until they can make it to a top 30 market station where the pay is better. Larger markets require experience. If your hometown is a larger market like NYC, you're at a disadvantage trying to enter the industry. You'll most likely have to move to a small market (away from eveything you know) and rack up years of experience in order to make it back home. I respect the fact that someone has to toil in the D leagues before reaching the NBA. But to set up the industry in a way that talent has to move their life for a job that pays near minimum wage --despite being required to have a bachelor's degree -- and be locked into a near two-year contract at often toxic newsrooms is pretty nasty. This is a huge reason why so many people leave the industry.

Thank you for this question. A lot of us are enthralled by tv news, but learn the harsh reality upon working in the industry. The short answer is money. A reporter contract is 1-3 years and reporters typically ask for more money every time they extend their contract. It's cheaper for stations to have a revolving door of one contract term reporters than to keep paying them more every renegotiation. Sales department, management, and the corporate bosses make significantly more than the news. Trust me, the pay at alot of stations is a few dollars above minimum wage for reporters, even less for producers and photographers.

WCBS 2006. Big visual improvements to graphics and set over 2003-2005. The skyline lookes better than the plain blue backgrop they had for a while. I dont recall this graphics era but it looks good. By 2007 the station would be back on track after going off the rails since about 1996. EDIT: Dare I say this graphical look is better than their current.

That's refreshing when you hear so much negatives about companies like Nexstar etc..

Who here is saying any of those things? In your personal opinion, does doing that add anything to the broadcast? In the same way, if WABC did a live shot from Columbus Ave to talk about a shooting in Newark would that make sense to you?

??? The entire purpose of a reporter doing an outdoor stand up is to have them at the scene or a related location. On local news you don't see a reporter standing on a random street in the Bronx in front of nothing to talk about a shooting on Long Island. Exactly. The NY thing is my cynicism getting the better of me but they could have thrown "Upstate" into the lower third.

Fair point. Similarly, Somara is live in NJ for a story about storm threats in the south. Phil Lipoff is live from some -- again -- undisclosed street in NY for a story about anti semitism in Pennsylvania. I get "presence" but it feels nonsensical to do these elaborate field live shots from locations unrelated to the story/topic. I haven't seen this on the local level.

Personally, live shots are only necessary when there are visual elements to seen, details to a story that are still developing, or when an event happens so close to a broadcast that there is little time to assemble a package. Big market stations especially love to have a reporter standing at an already wrapped up story at night where the scene is barely visible. In an era where we watch news on our own time rather than live tv, the impact of going live for live sake becomes dulled.

Something I've noticed on WNT as well as NNN. After the synagogue shooting in Albany, NY, none of the networks had time to send their reporters there as it happened so close to their broadcasts. Instead of presenting the stories from the newsroom or studio, ABC had a reporter standing on some unspecified street with a heavily blurred background and a locator graphic marked "New York". At least the background on NBC was more visible and the reporter is infront of what looks like a synagogue --- which they didn't bother to specify. It's perfectly acceptable to stand in front of a synagogue in Manhattan to talk about anti-semetic incidents across the country. But to have the background be indecipherable and ambiguously labeled "New York", without specificity for state vs city gives an almost deceptive sense of presence. I like the "portrait mode" effect, but it defeats the purpose of a live shot if the audience cannot see what you are standing in front of. Nothing to die over, small critique.

Obviously experiences differ by station...but good lord, are any of these news corporations good? Do I dare ask about Gray television

Thoughts on Tegna? I've seen the station group criticized for how it manages newscasts and news departments. Aesthetically speaking, Tegna stations are way more pleasing on the eye than Sinclair, Scripps, and in a lot of Nexstar. 11 Alive Atlanta looks far better than it did 10+ years ago sets and graphics wise.

Lauren is always a good and common fill in. Sidebar...Lauren like so much of the talent has been there at least 20 years! What is it about Channel 7 compared to the other NYC stations that they've retained reporters in particular for so long? My first assumption is the pay.

My personal philosophy... be as scarce as possible with the viewers about your personal life, on air and online. Have separate social media accounts for work and your personal. Make the personal social account accessible to friends only. People crave personal narrative to create drama. Don't make it easy for them.

Per Vulture, Holmes was sleeping with a female staffer --on work premesis-- which was ABC's grounds for firing. I don't recall what justified Amy's axing. Aside from all this, scandals like these make you weary of going into the news industry as an on air talent. Especially at the national level, you become a public figire which heavily shrinks your private life. Arguably this is self inflicted but TJ's wife supposedly hired a PI who leaked the pics and made this a spectacle. Rickey Smiley was onto something when he said being "medium famous" is the sweet spot. Known enough to get into places, but not famous enough to be hounded by paparazzi and have your entire life in the tabloids.

C'mon WABC.

TJ & Amy have to stew in their mess for little bit, but does their offense rise to the occasion of never working in the industry again? No. Let some time pass. When their distracting presence fades, then they may be able to get a job again.

CBS 2 was ahead of its time with a 4 PM newscast, which really became common place post Oprah. If WCBS wanted to try another attempt at four --hopefully not-- it might work nowadays.

it's amazing to see all these attempts to boost The CW this late into its existence.

Totally agree. Let her acknowledge that she won't cover the controversy because that's her dad, move on, and let her do her job. I miss the days when weekend mornings was Alex Witt for like 4 hours straight. Glad to see she's getting some good airtime in the afternoon.

On Ch 2 or 55? If you mean Ch 2, hopefully not. Judge Judy would probably do better in the ratings. I'm surprised they put Hot Bench in that slot and pushed Judy back to 3 rather than leaving Judy at 4 and Hot Bench at 3.

Totaly agress, but I suppose they want that live factor for weather and traffic. Since The Couch didn't work, and I don't recall seeing any promos for morning news on WLNY, I wonder how long this will last. Agreed. Cindy is great and only doing one newscast, they might as well utilize her for both. They can also have John handle some segments in the 7-9, Sam Champion style, to lighten the load off of Chris and Mary.

Good Day DC's Jeanette Reyes is leaving WTTG. She says it's focus on her kids. Reyes and her husband/morning compeditor Robert Burton from WJLA went viral for their humorous "news couple" social media videos. Bittersweet because she's in the prime of her career. This feeds into the "can we have it all" discussion: successful careers, and time with family.