Jump to content

The Definitive ABC 7 Thread


24994J

Recommended Posts

They'll keep the page. Just because he was the social media maven of the group doesn't give him any intellectual rights to the page. Besides, he isn't the only member of the team posting on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This comment plus the earlier comments about only needing one evening meteorologist brings up the point that I was thinking about last weekend: It doesn't make sense that every time Tom Skilling takes a two week vacation that Jim Ramsey should have to work 16 straight days with no time off (well this time around, Jim did 15 consecutive days and then took off the final Sunday before Tom got back, and they called in Tim McGill to fill in).

 

It just doesn't make any damn sense that at least once a year (usually twice, IIRC), Jim, at his age, should be working 16 consecutive days because the station only has two evening meteorologists.

WNBC, WCBS, and WABC all make do with 4 meteorologists. That's DMA #1 we're talking about. And never have I seen anyone work 16 straight days. That's foolish scheduling on WGN's part and not making good use of their full staff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Eric Horng?

 

I am talking about moving from Chicago to either NYC/LA or a major network. There are plenty (Zoriada Sambolin, Horng, Jeff Goldblatt, etc...) who have returned to local news after a network level gig. No one, that I can recall, has been tapped, for whatever reason, from WLS for bigger horizons. The majority have come from WMAQ. So it wasn't the best of moves, imo, to leave in the first place if Scott's intentions are to move upward and onward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

WNBC, WCBS, and WABC all make do with 4 meteorologists. That's DMA #1 we're talking about. And never have I seen anyone work 16 straight days. That's foolish scheduling on WGN's part and not making good use of their full staff.

 

There's really not much difference between DMA 1 and DMA 3. WGN has always had Skilling and Ramsey for evenings and a couple folks for mornings. For the amount of news that the station does their weather and sports staffs are really small at 2 each that do evenings at all. Last Sunday at 9pm they had a CLTV Meteorologist fill in for Ramsey so they will utilize someone from the cable channel before they hire somebody else.

 

Bottom line is that they need to hire more folks but probably won't. So it's not so much bad scheduling as having nobody to schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am talking about moving from Chicago to either NYC/LA or a major network. There are plenty (Zoriada Sambolin, Horng, Jeff Goldblatt, etc...) who have returned to local news after a network level gig. No one, that I can recall, has been tapped, for whatever reason, from WLS for bigger horizons. The majority have come from WMAQ. So it wasn't the best of moves, imo, to leave in the first place if Scott's intentions are to move upward and onward.

 

To be fair, we don't know that WLS people haven't been approached for bigger things. Perhaps those that have fielded offers feel satisfied being at the #1 station in the 3rd largest market. Plus, more than WMAQ (to my knowledge), ABC 7 seems to have several Chicago natives, making leaving their hometown an unattractive proposition. What's happened at NBC 5 over the last few years is the same thing that happened at CBS 2 twenty years ago. They had Elizabeth Vargas, Jim Avila, Larry Mendte and Rob Stafford, all of whom went national.

 

Long story short, a lot of this stuff is cyclical, and I doubt there's any major correlations between big market interest and talent, just good agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

To be fair, we don't know that WLS people haven't been approached for bigger things. Perhaps those that have fielded offers feel satisfied being at the #1 station in the 3rd largest market. Plus, more than WMAQ (to my knowledge), ABC 7 seems to have several Chicago natives, making leaving their hometown an unattractive proposition. What's happened at NBC 5 over the last few years is the same thing that happened at CBS 2 twenty years ago. They had Elizabeth Vargas, Jim Avila, Larry Mendte and Rob Stafford, all of whom went national.

 

Long story short, a lot of this stuff is cyclical, and I doubt there's any major correlations between big market interest and talent, just good agents.

 

I'm sure offers have been made to WLS people...hence the 'for whatever reason' part of my post, but WMAQ has a longer history of people actually landing bigger jobs that dates back to at least the 60s. That said, the odds would seem to be better at WMAQ than WLS, but I agree these things are cyclical. My concern is that she may be in over her head. It's one thing to be confident in one's self and your abilities and it's another to over value yourself and those abilities. Rob Johnson and Anna Davlantes come to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still maintain that with having to follow Ginger Zee, there is a pressure on her to find similar success. Eventually, if you hear something enough times, you start to believe it, though I do think she is exceptionally smart enough to realize it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still maintain that with having to follow Ginger Zee, there is a pressure on her to find similar success. Eventually, if you hear something enough times, you start to believe it, though I do think she is exceptionally smart enough to realize it.

I just don't see her moving to a network and I'm not sold that moving on is her eventual goal right this second or this pressure even exists. Those opinions are of course subject to change if she improves enough to warrant it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, Dionne's sick this weekend, and Mark and JR are out of town, so Ryan Chiaverini's going to be anchoring sports this weekend.

 

Wahoo... too bad ABC is so obtuse about showing it's sportscasts, I'd like to see that. I have a hard time believeing a cheap company like Scripps has the rights to air the sports highlights over the internet and the O&O's don't but who knows.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was talking to my mother tonight. She wants to know why Tracy and "that new girl" wear nothing but skin tight dresses, often with cleavage hanging out. She asked if that's "All channel 7 is about these days?" She said she can't trust a weather forecast when the main goal seems to be about getting you to stare at their body rather than giving you an accurate forecast.

 

I told her that she might want to stick with WGN on the weekends, in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Was talking to my mother tonight. She wants to know why Tracy and "that new girl" wear nothing but skin tight dresses, often with cleavage hanging out. She asked if that's "All channel 7 is about these days?" She said she can't trust a weather forecast when the main goal seems to be about getting you to stare at their body rather than giving you an accurate forecast.

 

I told her that she might want to stick with WGN on the weekends, in that case.

 

Ok then....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be honest, I kind of always thought Emily Barr was the kind of boss that played things very conservative. Remember all the discussions we had when they overhauled the graphics, theme, and general presentation, and how many of us agreed that Ms. Barr was really hanging onto the past for the sake of familiarity? I think part of that "safe" mentality also carried over to the female anchors' fashion. Now, I'm not saying Idler and company are a bunch of pigs that want the ladies looking like sluts, but that they have a little more freedom in what they wear on-air. They've been given longer leashes and are free to wear what they want.

 

Many might equate that to whoring themselves out for ratings, but I would disagree. I'll use a few examples...

  • Kathy Brock: she used to be nothing but jackets and suits, it seemed. Now, you see more dresses, and when I was down there last, even skinny jeans. Nothing has come across to me as inappropriate, but perhaps a little fresher.
  • Cheryl Scott: much of her attire and style crossed stations with her, but even though they lean towards tight, her dresses seem a little less "showy" than when she was on NBC. Granted, it is winter, when skin and such tends to be covered up. Dare I say, she's also 29 and can pull it off.
  • Karen Jordan: while many of her colleagues have spruced up their wardrobes, Karen has maintained her rather modest presentation, and she too, pulls it off well, without coming across as stuffy.

A lot of this also relates to current trends. Those tight dresses your mom speaks of are in-style. And that's as far as I'd go, because, outside of WGN, the ABC7 anchors still seem to me to be less daring than the 3 other stations in town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be honest, I kind of always thought Emily Barr was the kind of boss that played things very conservative. Remember all the discussions we had when they overhauled the graphics, theme, and general presentation, and how many of us agreed that Ms. Barr was really hanging onto the past for the sake of familiarity? I think part of that "safe" mentality also carried over to the female anchors' fashion. Now, I'm not saying Idler and company are a bunch of pigs that want the ladies looking like sluts, but that they have a little more freedom in what they wear on-air. They've been given longer leashes and are free to wear what they want.

 

Many might equate that to whoring themselves out for ratings, but I would disagree. I'll use a few examples...

  • Kathy Brock: she used to be nothing but jackets and suits, it seemed. Now, you see more dresses, and when I was down there last, even skinny jeans. Nothing has come across to me as inappropriate, but perhaps a little fresher.
  • Cheryl Scott: much of her attire and style crossed stations with her, but even though they lean towards tight, her dresses seem a little less "showy" than when she was on NBC. Granted, it is winter, when skin and such tends to be covered up. Dare I say, she's also 29 and can pull it off.
  • Karen Jordan: while many of her colleagues have spruced up their wardrobes, Karen has maintained her rather modest presentation, and she too, pulls it off well, without coming across as stuffy.

A lot of this also relates to current trends. Those tight dresses your mom speaks of are in-style. And that's as far as I'd go, because, outside of WGN, the ABC7 anchors still seem to me to be less daring than the 3 other stations in town.

If you are gonna go younger and target younger than it's reasonable to assume that the clothing would follow a younger pattern. I don't really know how into the wardrobes Emily Barr really was.. That seems like something for the News Director with maybe a little input from Barr, micromanaging newscasts seems a bit below a GM. The news director is gonna have a lot more direct input into the newscasts than the GM I would think since the ND's job is day to day newsroom management and newscast development. Maybe they even did some research or the anchors started asking or they simply decided to freshen their image.

 

Speaking of stuffy clothes... Cheryl Burton and those funny ascot/scarf/neck thingies... Nothing stuffier than that look.

 

Btw when do February Sweeps start? Waiting for signs of stepped up and over the top stories like the cat cam but haven't seen any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same ND for over a decade.

That ND isn't a statue either... Things evolve and freshening up the look is part of that. The ND was likely given a strategy to implement and made specific decisions from there which apparently included less strict wardrobes.

 

That the ND is the same for a decade or not doesn't mean much when they start redoing things or they start implementing a new strategy. They probably figured they needed to liven up the place while they still had demos and having the anchors look a little more with the times might help in getting those younger demos to stick around.

 

Frankly I hadn't hardly noticed any change in there wardrobes and they are still rather conservatively dressed and yet they are contemporary.

 

Put another way: just be glad you don't have to look at a 65 year old women's cleavage on a semi regular basis. One of the anchors around here is allowed to do that and it's... Yuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to dress it all depends on the person.. Example here in NYC WPIX clearly has a very loose dress code.. Jill Nicolini used to be literally half naked sometimes and looked like she was going clubbing.. Whereas Lisa Mateo and Sukanya Krishnan dressed a more professional but still modern... I've never seen Rosanna Scotto wear a sleeveless dress on air at WNYW but other anchors like Dari Alexander or Traffic reporter Ines Rosales wear them all the time. When it comes to females the way they dress is very important to viewers. They are very critical and sometimes very harsh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using Local News Talk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.