How do you save local tv news? [Archive] - MediaLine's Open Line Forum

John Fricke

Apr 15th 2006, 09:36 PM

we all know that this biz is no longer really "broad" casting.. it is, by it's own sales model "narrow" casting.

local tv news editorial aims at only one demo (women 25+) - hence the near death of sports and the continued push towards having a full time 'oprah re-cap and reaction' anchor.

now even narrow cable nets (like sports) continue to split into even more sub groups (espn splinters into espnu and next espnhs - the 24/7 high school sports net)

so what's the saviour of local tv news?

will we see soon...

single anchor with his/her title? no co-anchor, no weather or sports anchors, few reporters?
a local 1/2 hour o'rielly or matthews.

not out of the question. if i took over a bad 4th place local newscast i might roll the dice on something truly unique to the market.

adam & doctor drew

Apr 15th 2006, 10:54 PM

well, I look at the most successful TV news program ever, 60 Minutes.

why not copy that?

obviously the quality would never be as good... but why couldn't a 3rd or 4th-place station copy the format of 2-3 in-depth stories each show, even if they repeat at 6 and 10?

forget sports, forget fires, shootings and stabbings and promote yourself as something truly different.
you probably don't even need a weather person.
just put up tonite, tomorrow and the 5-day at the end of the show, with music.

but we all know it'll never happen.
it's too cheap and easy to do what every station in every market now does.

foxravens

Apr 16th 2006, 05:06 PM

Why forget sports?

Roy Hobbs

Apr 16th 2006, 05:27 PM

Gee. Tell real stories about real people with real interesting angles using great natural sound, writing and video.

That WOULD be a revolution in local TV News.

"Well gosh that sounds interesting but I don't think it's a fit with the Oprah viewers."

- real morning meeting comment, real sad

foxravens

Apr 16th 2006, 05:38 PM

It's easier to just kill sports.

SpxGrunt

Apr 16th 2006, 06:15 PM

Yeah, there are no good stories in sports. :rolleyes:

Consider This

Apr 16th 2006, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by Resurrection Roy Hobbs:
Gee. Tell real stories about real people with real interesting angles using great natural sound, writing and video.
That idea might work if there were enough people who could actually do these kinds of stories. Oh, sure, there are plenty of wannabe-Murrows who think they can.

Signature on File

Apr 16th 2006, 06:42 PM

We can save TV News by eleminating all the competition that challenges it.

TVMattNYC

Apr 16th 2006, 06:43 PM

Hire PDs and NDs with balls?

brs1905

Apr 16th 2006, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by Consider This:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Resurrection Roy Hobbs:
Gee. Tell real stories about real people with real interesting angles using great natural sound, writing and video.
That idea might work if there were enough people who could actually do these kinds of stories. Oh, sure, there are plenty of wannabe-Murrows who think they can.</font>[/QUOTE]This is coming from a former farm boy who went from a Ag undergrad degree to studying advertising for his masters. Reporters need to put less stock in the Gatekeeper idea. They should reporter on items that are news FOR their local audience. Every time I see someone in our newsroom sneer at the idea of covering a new business opening, I can't help but think they are sending the message that the lives and livelyhoods affected by that new business have no worth. That is news. That deserves to be covered. I do not understand why TV news does not understand asset allocation. Local news does not need 4 minutes of a half hour show to go through national stories when the network news is going on next. Devote your newscast time to LOCAL content.

2:30

Apr 16th 2006, 06:55 PM

Hire PDs and NDs with balls? No, Matt. Instead, hire GMs and NDs without them.

adam & doctor drew

Apr 16th 2006, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by foxravens:
Why forget sports?sorry, foxravens, I meant forget the traditional 3-minute sportscast as we know it (which is becoming extinct anyway).

there are many good stories in sports, and they should absolutely be part of the local version of 60 Minutes, when warranted.

Kelvin Hemholtz

Apr 16th 2006, 08:37 PM

Or how about this... cut the ADS in the local news. It sounds NUTS - but if you could gain back that 10 minutes out of the 30 min newscast, you could allow stories to breathe and become more viewable. Weather and sports could "air it out" as they say, being able to actually hit all the marks the consultants want and tell those "stories behind the scores." You wouldn't really have to change the "way" news stories are done. You'd have more room for everything and more time to actually E-X-P-L-A-I-N stories. No boring talking heads... just the same news with the ability to tack on :30 to your pkg IF you need it and can make it more interesting or helpful to viewers. Not espousing PBS style news... just your news MINUS the stopping points of the break load.

The sales department and the GM would burn someone like me at the stake for saying this. But then again, if more people watched, the spots going in and out of the news would be MORE valuable. You could even look at a ONE sponsor option like the OLD OLD days of TV where ONE sponsor paid for the entire newscast.

I just wish someone had the gonads (or lack of 2:30) to try this model somewhere and see if more folks didn't flock to the "anti-commercial" newscast.

Then again, we could start by taking out all promos for all shows in the newscast. Seriously... if I'm watching you now...I know where to find you. If Oprah airs at 4 - I'll find her here. Stop wasting my time telling me where she is during the news. Just do the news.

upandown

Apr 16th 2006, 09:44 PM

Simple.Your competition is with newspapers (for depth) and the internet (for immediacy). What can we offer? A visual and visceral experience.

We can no longer afford to alienate viewers with claims of 'breaking news' and 'live team coverage'. They see through that.
It's crap.

We can tell them the story of the day in a narrative manner.
We can offer perspective and local angles on meaningful or interesting subject.
We can bring sounds and pictures and moments to those stories.
We can add perspective. We should not be ashamed to do 'television news' in addition to 'the news on television'.

Emphasize the work you can do well. Apply your best resources there. Cover real stories. If this means means doing a shorter broadcast with an updated top and a repeated second half, then go for it. Nobody watches an hour anymore, anyway.

[ April 17, 2006, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: upandown ]

adam & doctor drew

Apr 16th 2006, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by upandown:

We can tell them the story of the day in a narrative manner.
We can offer perspective and local angles on meaningful or interesting subject.
We can bring sounds and pictures and moments to those stories.
We can add perspective. We should not be ashamed to do 'television news' in addition to 'the news on television'.
boy, how often does anyone's local newscast deliver THOSE four?

Sultanosurf

Apr 16th 2006, 10:28 PM

We try damned hard for the admirable U&D goal, but it's a daily struggle.

Do we even consider newspapers competition anymore?

SkyOne

Apr 17th 2006, 12:59 AM

This is coming from a former farm boy who went from a Ag undergrad degree to studying advertising for his masters. Reporters need to put less stock in the Gatekeeper idea. They should reporter on items that are news FOR their local audience. Every time I see someone in our newsroom sneer at the idea of covering a new business opening, I can't help but think they are sending the message that the lives and livelyhoods affected by that new business have no worth. That is news. That deserves to be covered. I do not understand why TV news does not understand asset allocation. Local news does not need 4 minutes of a half hour show to go through national stories when the network news is going on next. Devote your newscast time to LOCAL content.Has anyone not seen that the beginning of the demise of TV news (local and national) was when we stopped covering the news that happened that day? Now it's all a spin factory. I have never believed that we should be "gatekeepers" or "watch dogs". Our news numbers aren't going to be any better...and the public's perception of us is not going to improve until we get back to good ol' Journalism 101. It was us...not the public who said we needed to stop covering the fires, the auto accidents, the store openings, etc. It's not our place to set public policy on issues such as race, immigration, religion, politics, etc. Just present the facts of the day...no more "Special Assignments" of the week. Every story ought to be a special assignment.

[ April 17, 2006, 05:57 AM: Message edited by: SkyOne ]

SamG

Apr 17th 2006, 02:36 AM

All these suggestions are based on one thing... "give the viewer what we think he NEEDS." However, it doesn't matter how many in depth emothional stories you pack into your show, you need to give the viewer what he WANTS.

Over the last ten years, my station has gone from a solid number two to defending the number one slot. Our current format... 7-10 minute first blocks with all local news, including (usually) 2-3 live shots. Keep people updated on weather, accidents, fires, and breaking news. In our 90 minute evening newscast, we do ~5 minutes of sports. Weather on the other hand gets somewhere between 10-15 minutes. Bad storm coming in the next 24-48 hours? Lead with it.

Our state legislature just completed their work for the year... I don't think we even sent a camera, much less a live shot during the session (despite working on a budget, mandatory seat belt law, and other controversial issues).

It might not be my ideal newscast, but I can't argue with the results.

Pro

Apr 17th 2006, 05:22 AM

And I'll remind everybody again of the WBBM/Carol Marin 10 PM experiment in the late 1990's.

Anne Bonney

Apr 17th 2006, 06:00 AM

Key word is LOCAL. Most local casts I see have maybe 5-10% local content - rest is feeds.

So, make it LOCAL ... and start podcasting. Content delivery methods will change sooner rather than later.

overthehill

Apr 17th 2006, 06:15 AM

Anne

Podcasting is NOT the be-all and end-all that news managers and gurus think it is.

Take a survey, of your regular friends, outside of the newsroom. I'll betcha, very few, VERY few are podcasting. Why watch TV on a teeny-tiny screen?

upandown is closest to being right. Tell good local stories about interesting people on topics that matter to your community. Our newsrooms have gotten away from that and fill time with junk that LOOKS LIKE news, but isn't to the viewer--red lights, sirens, consumer scare stories, entertainment fluff.

I'm also concerned that there are too many non-news managers trying to stir the pot in the newsroom. They "think" they know how to "fix" local news and all they're doing is spoiling the recipe.

Anne Bonney

Apr 17th 2006, 06:56 AM

Overthehill, podcasting isn't just for mobile media ... though, I'd LOVE to get traffic info on my mobile phone during rush hour.

Maybe I'm not using the right term. However, a lot of people get their news streaming on the internet.

Also, the major networks are starting to use other delivery methods for entertainment programming. I think that eventually local stations will be networkless. For a lot of stations, that could mean going dark.

Fake Post

Apr 17th 2006, 03:55 PM

Has any station thought of taking the local news crawl space at the bottom of the screen and using it as a tool to sell advertising?

Let a package tell a good visual and interesting story. Use the bottom 20% of the screen to sell local ads, drive people to local advertisers web sites and provide the viewer an informative and interesting experience.

Face it people. If you want to get younger eyeballs back to the tube, take a lesson from the web. People can multi task in their viewing habits as long as you don't shove too many pinwheels into their face at the same time.

http://www.leaveittobeaver.org/images/pinwheel.jpg

Let's face it.

Here's the future of "tv" news.

www.rocketboom.com (http://www.rocketboom.com)

[ April 17, 2006, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: Fake Post ]

neodeity

Apr 17th 2006, 04:04 PM

How do you save local tv news? Take a really big baggie, or Tupperware, then freeze until you want it. Thaw by microwaving; never leave local tv news under running tap water.

Buck T. Trend

Apr 18th 2006, 05:25 AM

Get rid of the consultants, the "research", and the focus groups. Then go out on the street and get some real feedback from some real people on what they want in their local newscast.

Quit treating the viewers like 8-year-old children by dumbing down the product.

Find quality, intelligent, curious people to work in your newsroom, then invest in them. Keep them around, and you'll keep your viewers around.

Try working on those for right now, and I'll be back with more suggestions after you've mastered these.

Ryder13

Apr 18th 2006, 05:45 AM

Ah, but Buck, you know as well as I do -- that as long as the 'suits' consider newscasts as a license to print money AND the viewers keep tuning into some of the substandard shows we put on under the guise of news AND you can get young and attractive talent for half (or less) what it cost to get and keep experience et cetera --that won't happen.

Except at perhaps at the distant number two and below stations. But they would have to realize that they would have to commit to doing this kind of news for AT LEAST five years. It takes a long time to change viewing habits. Also, find talented talent AND KEEP THEM. Viewers don't mind set changes, new graphics/names whatever -- but if they have grown accustomed to that face -- well, remember what happened at the 'Today' show when Deborah Norville came in.

And, I personally hate the ad at the bottom of the screen idea. After all, how many of us like pop-ups? Besides, the news is not now and never has been (and probably never will be) attractive to younger viewers. And that 'problem' is inherient in age group. Content is irrevelant -- you don't care that much about news in your community until and unless you have a stake in same. Younger people just don't HAVE that. Nothing against them, just stating fact. But, somehow, the consultants have convinced themselves and their clients that this is an obtainable audience. It is -- BUT NOT WITH NEWS.

Lazlo Toth

Apr 18th 2006, 06:23 AM

How do you save local tv news?

Our station sitll archives mostly onto Beta tapes,but we're moving toward DVDs. At home< you could probably use your vcr, dvd recorder or Tivo.

adam & doctor drew

Apr 18th 2006, 07:02 AM

Has any station thought of taking the local news crawl space at the bottom of the screen and using it as a tool to sell advertising?

the crawl is already sponsored on many newscasts, usually in the sports segment.

Kelvin Hemholtz

Apr 18th 2006, 07:53 AM

Our state legislature just completed their work for the year... I don't think we even sent a camera, much less a live shot during the session (despite working on a budget, mandatory seat belt law, and other controversial issues).
AMEN AMEN AMEN!!!!
I can't even count the number of times I've seen our research say that people DON'T dig politics or participate or care outside of bumpersticker slogans.

WE do. That's why Medialine Open Forum is such a great place to vent it. The audience has the web and talk radio if they want politics 24/7.

HOWEVER - how many of you work where some "piece of legislation" was the lead with a live shot the night there was some committee meeting on it?

People do not care. You cannot MAKE them care. The moment you say "legislation" they click the remote.

They DO care what their local baseball or football team did today....in SPITE of what the research results say.

[ April 18, 2006, 08:57 AM: Message edited by: Kelvin Hemholtz ]

Big City

Apr 18th 2006, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by Buck T. Trend:
Get rid of the consultants, the "research", and the focus groups. Then go out on the street and get some real feedback from some real people on what they want in their local newscast.

Quit treating the viewers like 8-year-old children by dumbing down the product.

Find quality, intelligent, curious people to work in your newsroom, then invest in them. Keep them around, and you'll keep your viewers around.

Try working on those for right now, and I'll be back with more suggestions after you've mastered these.DINGDINGDINGDING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

Lazlo Toth

Apr 18th 2006, 09:26 AM