nycnewsjunkie

Looks like a half-launch. Weird.

Not sure what you’re replying to there…I never said people didn’t get the two confused.

Not surprisingly, they’re basically the CBS News/Evening News graphics. For the most part, they look slick as hell, and it’s good to see the local stations getting the same look. The cut of music they use in the demo is refreshing, but as others have mentioned, it feels a bit too light for some markets (including New York). I was hoping they’d go with a variant of the CBS News streaming theme. Then again, the demo cut gives off a WCCO/WJZ vibe, and will work well on those stations. Unless they’re referring to the radio station, but of course, it no longer has anything to do with the TV station.

Good to see Andrea back in the weekend anchor chair. She and Cindy made a great team. Also, I’d like some of that bread. As for the graphics/name change, I wouldn’t be surprised if the new graphics launch September 12. Given that they’re still promoting it as “CBS2 News,” I guess they’ll be easing in the name change over the next few weeks. I’m surprised they aren’t launching it sooner, given that it’s CBS’ key station and that the branding change won’t be very drastic at all in this market.

They could theoretically dump the post-game show if it’s that big of an issue for the network. Besides, I have a feeling most people (myself included) switch over to another Saturday night game by that point anyway.

Maybe it’s me, but this version of the logo looks a bit awkward. IMO they should’ve kept the logo horizontal and made it much smaller, kind of like how CBS Sports does with their logo placements. That’s a nitpick though; most people won’t (and shouldn’t) care and I’m sure they’ll make adjustments as time goes on.

I assume you’re referring to Elizabeth Hashagen?

On the contrary, I think this new branding is exactly what Hilton Howell meant by “firing CBS.” It fits with the overall strategy of giving the station its own identity, which it’s never really been able to find all these years. It’s not like they’re planning on dumping the affiliation or anything.

Because WGCL’s ratings have been in the toilet since time immemorial. The only constant at CBS 46 has been an absurd level of instability. Also, I’m not sure how branding by “channel 46” makes you relevant in today’s world. Gray doesn’t want its largest station to be a perennial basement dweller. They needed to end the instability plaguing the station, enhance the newsroom with new hires, and blow up the branding. They’ve done a decent job with the first two so far, and now they’re about to do the third.

Sara Shookman is on maternity leave. The station even covered the birth of her second child. I don’t think anyone’s getting pushed out here. Also, I don’t like WKYC’s format either, but it’s not like Dave Lougee and Tegna issued an edict that WKYC must change their newscasts. While Tegna management certainly encouraged this stuff, these moves were made entirely by local management.

While there are potential problems, it may be worth the risk given that the more successful O&Os are exceptions, not the rule. Also, CBS has changed significantly since the Killian fiasco. CBS and Dan Rather have had nothing to do with each other for nearly 20 years. If CBS News gets into hot water again on the national level, there will always be people who harass their local CBS affiliate over something the national network did, regardless of station branding. Also as you alluded to, KCNC’s identity has been that of a standard CBS O&O since 2003, and they no longer have any real local identity to speak of anyway. This really isn’t much of a change on their end. IIRC, that had more to do with KRON’s habit of preempting shows than a branding issue. I mentioned this in the “WBZ Rebranding Newscasts” thread, but that’s a big component of this. Even if some of CBS’ more successful stations in medium-size markets (ex: Baltimore, Pittsburgh) lose their local identities, they will make the national network more relevant in those markets. You mentioned the difference in viewer trust between CBS News and the local affiliates, and CBS is well aware of this. Unifying national and local brands can be a small step in remedying that issue. The CBS O&Os can add value to the national news operation, and if the CBS News brand is more ubiquitous, more viewers might begin to trust the national network in the same way they trust their local station. It should be noted that WCCO appears to be launching the new look with their own local branding, although that’s more than likely a transitional thing.

Thing is, given the damage David Friend, Peter Dunn, and the old management team at the CBS stations did, and the fact that there is a clear push toward unifying linear and streaming brands, it has to happen. There are also reasons why it can work at CBS, but not at the other networks. I’ll link to a post from @Samantha, who explained it best: As for your point about local brands being more trustworthy than the network’s brand, I totally get it. If you asked me a few months ago, I would’ve agreed with your point and would’ve questioned why dumping local identities was even up for discussion (in fact, I did). Thing is, that trust deficit is a huge problem for the network, especially given its eternal ratings woes. In fact, it’s all the more reason for CBS to do what it’s doing. Having trustworthy local news brands is great, but it means little if it doesn’t translate to success on the national level. By integrating the local stations with CBS News, the national news operation can benefit from the trust people already have in their local stations. It might sound like CBS News is trying to force its way into CBS-owned stations; in reality, it is the stations and their local news operations that are adding value to CBS News. The local station might feel less “local,” but over time, the national operation will feel much less alien to viewers.

Kudos to everyone who called this even before the new websites rolled out. Hopefully CBS’s rededication to investing in its O&Os goes beyond this name change and translates to better local journalism.

Just curious, in what ways could a network pressure its affiliates to that extent without completely alienating the station groups? Granted, the station groups need the networks more than the networks need them, but given that many CBS affiliates are part of duopolies (ex: KGMB, WTOL, KPHO), I’m not even sure CBS would want to go that far. That said, unified branding somewhat remedies the 1994 switch that still affects CBS and its stations today. As you said, it’s the norm in nearly every other country, and it makes sense in a world that prioritizes streaming. Nobody looks for “channel 2” on YouTube TV or online; they look for CBS.

No need to apologize, that’s my bad. I agree with your point though. Making things less complicated is likely the whole motivation behind why they’re doing all of this in the first place.

I wish I snapped a picture, but I’m in Philly right now and I saw a KYW talent promo w/ Ukee Washington after tonight’s Evening News. It ends with the “CBS3” and “CBS News Philadelphia” logos, with no mention of Eyewitness News. They’re going full send on brand standardization. I didn’t think they’d actually do this at first either, and I’m very much in favor of local identities being kept. That said, on many levels, this makes sense. As many others here have pointed out better than I ever could, most CBS-owned stations in large markets do not stand out. WCBS and KPIX already look bland, KYW and WBBM have been mismanaged into instability, and KCBS… need I say more? I don’t think a unified branding will make those stations ratings powerhouses or anything, but it would at least tie them to the network’s news division. Also, to answer your question, there is no longer any need to differentiate between the network and streaming. That’s the whole point. If CBS wants to really prioritize streaming, a great way to do that is to unify both linear and streaming brands.

No need to be snarky, but yes, CBS or CBS New York will suffice. (If you weren’t being snarky, my apologies for interpreting it that way.)

No offense, but I don’t get why either of you is so passionate either way about KDKA’s color scheme. I don’t think KDKA will tank in the ratings depending on whether they go with a standard set of graphics or change some colors around. Besides, it’s not like they’re filling the screen with fuchsia (although I suppose I shouldn’t give people ideas). To get back on topic, despite the twinkle effect in the intro and the large horizontal bug, this is the best the Evening News has looked in a long time. For once, they beat out the other networks’ graphics. ABC could certainly use a similar upgrade.

There are a few parts of the newscast where CBS is copying (or if you prefer, taking inspiration from) ABC. They didn’t air a single commercial until 14 minutes in, and that commercial (for a pharmaceutical, of course) was accompanied by a headline banner. In addition, Robert Costa’s opening story relied heavily on quick soundbites, fast cuts, zoom effects, and the obligatory “Breaking News” banner, all hallmarks of modern-day ABC News. I’m not sure if any of these adjustments were in place before today, and the rest of the stories felt like they were from a CBS newscast, but I couldn’t help noticing some close similarities to David Muir’s newscast.

The music works well for what it is. A modern take on the 1987 theme is miles better than the awkward EDM remix they’d been using. Sounds like they incorporated the 5-note musical signature as well. The twinkle effect they have on the intro looks cheesy and cheap as hell, but I guess the overall intro/graphics are an improvement over what they had. I’m surprised they didn’t make further updates to the set, given that the virtual background draws heavily from Studio 57 in NY. None of this will really do anything ratings-wise, of course, but I guess it’s good for brand cohesion.

False. WRAZ simulcasts with WRAL at 4pm. Once again, simulcasting exists in the year 2022. The concept of 2 stations running the same newscast has been in place for at least 20 years. There is no written or unwritten rule that forbids something from happening just because some people don’t like it. There will be no mass affiliation changes if both NBC and Fox stations run 10pm news. There will be no volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, or tsunamis as a result of NBC and Fox stations running 10pm news. The state of Hawaii has not sunk into the Pacific Ocean just because KGMB/KHNL already simulcast their late news. Stations are not going to blow up their affiliation agreements just because some of us don’t like the idea of a 10pm simulcast.

They “sacrificed the network” when the TV industry became creatively bankrupt in the 2000s. You may not like it, but most TV shows are not all that relevant. NBC is not the only network that is “so desperate” to prioritize streaming, and no company in their right mind would ignore today’s trends and pretend that we live in the 1990s.

The New York Post originally ran with the story, along with the story about staffers being asked to promote Cuomo’s show. I know, it’s a daily rag and it’s not always reliable, but I suppose it’s better than RadarOnline.

One would be naive to think that station owners aren’t already greedy. Why do you think stations have news at 3pm now? Also, you’re focused on ratings when the driving factor (for the local affiliates, at least) is ad revenue. As many have pointed out many times now, local ad revenue is just as important to stations as ratings. I’m not saying that news expansion is a good thing from a creative/journalistic point of view (I hate it as much as the next person), but it makes sense from a business standpoint. And why the heck would NBC care what Fox thinks? Is there a rule that prevents NBC from upsetting Fox? If NBC can take away viewers from Fox stations at 10pm, all the more reason to do it.

Thing is, why would NBC and their stations care? If anything, they would want to take away from Fox’s prime time news audience. Besides, there’s no guarantee of it being a blow to every Fox station either (see: KTVU, WTVT, KDFW), and more local news competition can’t be too much of a bad thing, even if it is just a sign of less creativity in the TV business. This lack of creativity isn’t anything new either. I remember when NBC programmed Deal or No Deal 5 nights a week. They practically squeezed the life out of that show with how often it was on. Same could be said for Millionaire in the early-2000s. I wish TV hadn’t gone through such a creative slump over the past 2 decades, but a lot of that creativity has moved over to Amazon, Netflix, and Disney+. Peacock is way behind the game when it comes to streaming (if you want proof, look at some of the movies they have on there). NBC needs to do what it can to make it more lucrative. Besides, the local stations would prefer local news over yet another Dick Wolf series or Dateline rerun. What “decision” do they have to make? Just simulcast the damn thing. The stations would be more than grateful for the extra ad revenue.