ABC World News Tonight

[C Block 1566]

On 7/24/2024 at 6:05 PM, NYCsporty said:

Noticed at the end of the special, David Muir brought up the fact that ABC was the one that hosted the pool feed of tonight's Biden presser, something we usually see/hear about at the State of the Union.

 

What's the point of calling that out publicly on air? Bragging rights? All the networks take turns doing pool for all of those kinds of big events.

[GodfreyGR 652]

5 hours ago, C Block said:

 

What's the point of calling that out publicly on air? Bragging rights? All the networks take turns doing pool for all of those kinds of big events.

It was brought up as he was wrapping up with their correspondent at the White House and the pool comment was in the context that since ABC was the pool the reporter David was talking to got to be one of the few people in the Oval Office to witness the "historical night" in person. I didn't get any bragging attempt from it.

[mountainave 606]

WNT senior EP Almin Karamehmedovic appointed President of ABC News, filling the position left open by Kim Godwin's departure.

 

https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/almin-karamehmedovic-president-abc-news-1236110648/

[MediaZone4K 2172]

With David and Linsey presumably resting after the debate,  Martha Raddatz alongside Jonathan Karl, Rachael Scott and  Mary Bruce lead ABC coverage.

Edited September 11, 2024 by MediaZone4K

[24994J 5575]

25 minutes ago, MediaZone4K said:

With David and Linsey presumably resting after the debate,  Martha Raddatz alongside Jonathan Karl, Rachael Scott and  Mary Bruce and lead ABC coverage.

 

They did the preshow, too. They make sense, as they typically fill out the rest of the panel, though Scott is more often in the field.

[TVNewsLover 779]

12 hours ago, MediaZone4K said:

With David and Linsey presumably resting after the debate,  Martha Raddatz alongside Jonathan Karl, Rachael Scott and  Mary Bruce lead ABC coverage.

 

12 hours ago, 24994J said:

 

They did the preshow, too. They make sense, as they typically fill out the rest of the panel, though Scott is more often in the field.

While I enjoy them as contributors during other coverage or as hosts on This Week, I do believe ABC would’ve benefited from having a stronger anchor leading coverage, such as George, Whit, or even Robin.

[MorningNews 1448]

I’ve never been big on David Muir but he did an impressive job last night despite the flak ABC is catching this morning.

 

No offense to Robin but she would have been completely out of her depth leading political coverage. I think George and David both have some sort of clause that limits the other’s command of coverage for their respective day parts. Whit is good but he hasn’t done much political anchoring at ABC. Given all those, I think who they had was solid.

[24994J 5575]

George is the main subject of Trump's lawsuit against the network. He probably literally can't lead political coverage with Trump involved. Headlines and stuff on GMA is different. As for Whit, he did anchor post-post-show coverage from the press room on ABC News Live. Didn't see much, as I switched to local news, but he was there. Also of note, Byron Pitts anchored Nightline from the site, later on.

[NYAZSporty 128]

38 minutes ago, MorningNews said:

I’ve never been big on David Muir but he did an impressive job last night despite the flak ABC is catching this morning.

 

No offense to Robin but she would have been completely out of her depth leading political coverage. I think George and David both have some sort of clause that limits the other’s command of coverage for their respective day parts. Whit is good but he hasn’t done much political anchoring at ABC. Given all those, I think who they had was solid.

Considering how much flack Trump gives to George, clause or not, there was NO SHOT he was going to be involved with the debate.

[Jase 1047]

1 hour ago, TVNewsLover said:

 

While I enjoy them as contributors during other coverage or as hosts on This Week, I do believe ABC would’ve benefited from having a stronger anchor leading coverage, such as George, Whit, or even Robin.

 

I assume Raddatz was the lead will the others adding their analysis. She has more than enough experience to handle debate coverage. Karl on the other hand can be very bias. Other than that, it made sense to have this group given politics, white house, congress, etc.. is what they cover normally.

 

While it would have been great to have Muir (and/or Davis lead),  I would argue that ABC has a solid group of anchors/reporters that are fully capable to handle whatever.

 

 

1 hour ago, MorningNews said:

Whit is good but he hasn’t done much political anchoring at ABC.

 

Honestly, he would have been fine as well. It was a debate not election night.

[24994J 5575]

1 hour ago, Jase said:

I assume Raddatz was the lead will the others adding their analysis.

 

All 4 got opening billing, in Martha, Jon, Mary, Rachel order. Martha got the first lines & later interviewed Vance, while Jon interviewed Walz. They were seating in the middle of the 4. Kind of a 1A/1B arrangement.

[TVNewsLover 779]

2 hours ago, MorningNews said:

I’ve never been big on David Muir but he did an impressive job last night despite the flak ABC is catching this morning.

 

No offense to Robin but she would have been completely out of her depth leading political coverage. I think George and David both have some sort of clause that limits the other’s command of coverage for their respective day parts. Whit is good but he hasn’t done much political anchoring at ABC. Given all those, I think who they had was solid.

 

1 hour ago, Jase said:

 

I assume Raddatz was the lead will the others adding their analysis. She has more than enough experience to handle debate coverage. Karl on the other hand can be very bias. Other than that, it made sense to have this group given politics, white house, congress, etc.. is what they cover normally.

 

While it would have been great to have Muir (and/or Davis lead),  I would argue that ABC has a solid group of anchors/reporters that are fully capable to handle whatever.

 

 

 

Honestly, he would have been fine as well. It was a debate not election night.

Radditz and Karl were both the leads. Speaking from someone who watched the coverage, it seemed like they lacked someone to lead the coverage and ask the questions of the commentators, which is the role they usually hold on nights like this. Whit seemed like the obvious choice to do so. 

[MorningNews 1448]

Oh brother, I forgot that lawsuit was even a thing.

[MediaZone4K 2172]

8 hours ago, Jase said:

  I would argue that ABC has a solid group of anchors/reporters that are fully capable to handle whatever.

Agreed. Of the big 3 I think ABC is strongest in terms of on air talent. They are the weakest journalistically however, given their flare for entertainment and tabloid stories. Examples being WNT, 20/20 and GMA. 

 

While CBS is the weakest personality wise, they are the best in journalistic quality as evidenced by Sunday Morning, 60 Minutes, and CBS Mornings. 

 

NBC is a good medium between the two.

Edited September 12, 2024 by MediaZone4K

[MediaZone4K 2172]

On 11/29/2024 at 10:27 AM, ns8401 said:

Some of that may be true. On the other hand they may have alienated a bunch of people and attracted a bunch of different people or fewer people by changing the format as radically as they have.

 

The times “straight news” has been tried incidentally the marketing for it wasn’t very good and the execution was poor. Think CNN. You have to do the FOX style pro wrestling thing… by calling out FOX on a daily basis in a less than statesman like way. But you have to use facts as your weapon. Not only that but FOX has slick marketing and is extremely polished and flashy… that’s execution and not content. You see that in which local station is number one in a given market. Often times it’s flashier and more polished and just feels official. It’s kinda like a sports team.. the good teams LOOK good and do things well. 
 

But mostly my biggest gripe is why Muir talks the way he does. If someone walked up to you and started talking like that you’d try to either run or have them have some sort of evaluation as their mental well being would be a primary concern. Second gripe… why in the world is “those powerful storms, millions under the gun” news? Keep the weather off the national news as a daily thing. The local stations already cover it so unless a school bus with 50 kids gets washed away in a flood or something just gripping and tragic it’s a waste of a reporter and 2 minutes and that’s not time they exactly have to waste in a 30 minute show. 
 

To keep this relevant to the thread… local news hasn’t changed so much that I want to scream. That includes WABC. It’s more or less what it’s always been with different people, graphics and segments. 

 

On 11/28/2024 at 10:15 PM, HanSolo said:

“One of the most cited.” Which would suggest someone would thoroughly clean up by simply rolling back the clock. And yet, they don’t. Maybe because whatever is supposedly “cited” is rubbish.

 

The entire world shifts around us. Technology, tastes, demographics…and “news” does not exist in an isolated bubble in which the same approaches from decades ago magically work. 
 

How many times did we hear “viewers told us they want a straight news approach”—no

fluff or whatever one wishes to call it. Yet when tried,  it fails. Because what people supposedly say in dubious polling isn’t what they do. 

Carrying this over to the WNT thread.

 

I agree with @ns8401. The natural opposing answer is evening newscasts had to switch up the format because it's not the 1980s anymore. 

 

Except... Their formatting has largely remained unchanged. What's different is, less international news, reporters like Muir always speak in active present tense, and more stories are being overdramatized to qualify as "breaking news" .

 

Yes things have to evolve, But don't change for a worse product. 

 

CBS Sunday Morning remains largely unchanged from 30 years ago and it's now the number one Sunday morning show. 60 minutes retains the same formatting as it has for decades, and it is still one of the best performing news programs.

 

Quality stands to test of time. Cord cutting will always eat away at audiences, but giving them a reason to still turn on the TV matters.

Edited November 30, 2024 by MediaZone4K

[mre29 1519]

20 hours ago, MediaZone4K said:

CBS Sunday Morning remains largely unchanged from 30 years ago and it's now the number one Sunday morning show 60 minutes retains the same formatting as it has for decades, and it is still one of the best performing news programs.

 

Quality stands to test of time. Cord cutting will always jump away at audiences, but giving them a reason to still turn on the TV matters.

 

Both CBS Sunday Morning and 60 Minutes can still be watched by cord-cutters subscribed to Paramount+. Maybe not live, but then, neither show focuses on breaking news anyway.

 

[HanSolo 159]

On 11/29/2024 at 6:39 PM, MediaZone4K said:

 

Quality stands to test of time. Cord cutting will always eat away at audiences, but giving them a reason to still turn on the TV matters.

Quality is subjective. Audiences are not looking for the same thing. If there was a big hole out there for something else each night, someone would have exploited it.

 

The hangup over active tense that seems to permeate so often is kind of amusing. And that comes from someone old as darned dirt. Does it work for them? If not, they’d change. And the numbers bear it out. It isn’t what I was taught. It isn’t what I grew up with. That doesn’t make it wrong, and my professors weren’t god almighty. 
 

It sometime seems collectively that we’re “ok with change,” so long as it’s the change we deem to be ok. That’s not how life works, though. 
 

 

 

[MediaZone4K 2172]

11 hours ago, HanSolo said:

Quality is subjective. Audiences are not looking for the same thing. If there was a big hole out there for something else each night, someone would have exploited it.

 

The hangup over active tense that seems to permeate so often is kind of amusing. And that comes from someone old as darned dirt. Does it work for them? If not, they’d change. And the numbers bear it out. It isn’t what I was taught. It isn’t what I grew up with. That doesn’t make it wrong, and my professors weren’t god almighty. 
 

It sometime seems collectively that we’re “ok with change,” so long as it’s the change we deem to be ok. That’s not how life works, though. 
 

 

 

Its grammatically incorrect. If something happened seven hours ago it isn't "happening" it happened. Active present tense is overused to create a false sense of urgency or timeliness.

[ns8401 941]

On 12/1/2024 at 10:07 AM, MediaZone4K said:

Its grammatically incorrect. If something happened seven hours ago it isn't "happening" it happened. Active present tense is overused to create a false sense of urgency or timeliness.

It’s also not the way people talk normally. One of the things I remember being endlessly bombarded with in college was the need to make it conversational… well… nobody holds a conversation in active tense about something that happened last week. 
 

But I have a couple of simple production issues with WNT too… the tease needs to be 30 seconds with the top 3 or 4 stories and a sentence or two about them. Instead we get an explanation long enough to be its own story about everything they are gonna talk about. It’s dangerously close to being able to watch the tease and shut it off knowing what happened.

 

The other thing that bugs me is they adopted the old music and then the rest of the newscast everything goes to break in silence and they end the newscast in silence. It looks a bit unkempt and thrown together that way. I don’t get it and I don’t think it’s some broader trend in news. 

Edited December 4, 2024 by ns8401

[HanSolo 159]

Honestly, it doesn’t matter if that’s the way people hold a conversation in day to day life. Things change no matter what we all were bombarded with however many years ago. Production methods change. Approaches change. Viewers change. Viewing habits change. 
 

I’d be willing to bet they have oodles of data that inform all of the decisions and they go deeper than “it wasn’t what we were taught.” Not every decision is going to appeal to any one of us, but guaranteed they’re making those decisions based on measurable info. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MediaZone4K 2172]

6 hours ago, ns8401 said:

It’s also not the way people talk normally. One of the things I remember being endlessly bombarded with in college was the need to make it conversational… well… nobody holds a conversation in active tense about something that happened last week. 
 

But I have a couple of simple production issues with WNT too… the tease needs to be 30 seconds with the top 3 or 4 stories and a sentence or two about them. Instead we get an explanation long enough to be its own story about everything they are gonna talk about. It’s dangerously close to being able to watch the tease and shut it off knowing what happened.

 

The other thing that bugs me is they adopted the old music and then the rest of the newscast everything goes to break in silence and they end the newscast in silence. It looks a bit unkempt and thrown together that way. I don’t get it and I don’t think it’s some broader trend in news. 

I don't mind the no music cuts to break its actually a cool touch. 

 

Yeah that 2 minute tease excessive. 

 

Agreed! The conversational requirement from professors and news directors can be annoying. Yes, we shouldn't use overly complicated words so that all viewers can understand. We shouldn't, however, be dumbing down vocabulary too much. Viewers can expand their minds. If I dont quite understand a word I'll make inference based on context clues or look it up. News can be a formal occasion, almost like a lecture. Accordingly, all writing wont be conversational.

Edited December 4, 2024 by MediaZone4K

[ns8401 941]

10 hours ago, HanSolo said:

Honestly, it doesn’t matter if that’s the way people hold a conversation in day to day life. Things change no matter what we all were bombarded with however many years ago. Production methods change. Approaches change. Viewers change. Viewing habits change. 
 

I’d be willing to bet they have oodles of data that inform all of the decisions and they go deeper than “it wasn’t what we were taught.” Not every decision is going to appeal to any one of us, but guaranteed they’re making those decisions based on measurable info. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps… but the folks who gave us “New Coke” went on measurable info too. 

[HanSolo 159]

13 hours ago, ns8401 said:

Perhaps… but the folks who gave us “New Coke” went on measurable info too. 

I could have guessed that was coming. A flameout in a different industry in a different era that is quite obviously the exception to the norm, but we cling to it as if there aren’t a multitude of examples to the contrary. 

 

[ns8401 941]

5 minutes ago, HanSolo said:

I could have guessed that was coming. A flameout in a different industry in a different era that is quite obviously the exception to the norm, but we cling to it as if there aren’t a multitude of examples to the contrary. 

 

Actually everybody who is in second or third did market research that said what they were doing would work great so there are limitless numbers of examples across all industries of market research not doing a heck of a lot for companies or biting them badly… I would recommend not trying to use this angle.
 

Market research asks the folks you see walking around that make you wonder what rock they came out from under answer questions about what they want to see. The idea that those folks can speak for everybody accurately is preposterous. In the end if you had 4 stations in a town and absolutely had to watch one you’d pick what you believed was the best. That doesn’t mean you are head over heels in love with the product… you might want to make 25 changes to it. But it’s the least bad option. Some people might have it as appointment viewing because they just can’t get enough of gods gift to News but the biggest winner is… shutting the thing off and doing something else. Consistently.

Edited December 5, 2024 by ns8401

[TheNewsTV 253]

I don't know if this would be the right topic, but it looks like ABC's Special Report has new graphics.