Charles Kuralt Is Old School

[Chief]

And at least one of his stories is up on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJ3spW5r1sI)

It was shot in Cuero, Texas during the 1972 Turkey Trot and shown on the CBS evening news. For you young folks, Walter Cronkite is the news anchor.

Enjoy

[ February 02, 2007, 11:18 PM: Message edited by: Chief ]

[Roy Hobbs]

We called them packages and folks who were good at them used to get hired in TV.

[s'news]

Yes he is.

[Lazlo Toth]

I imagine if he had to, Kuralt could have done it in a minute-thirty. But it sure would have cheated the audience out of a lot.

[Diplomat]

Mr. Kuralt was at his best doing On the Road pieces.

[Chief]

Got a three video tape retrospective of his "On The Road" stories. It's available on Amazon and sometimes on eBay.

Don't worry about the stories being dated. They are timeless. And there's a new lesson in each one, with each viewing.

And you know what? They're all small market stories.

Think about it.

[Roy Hobbs]

Yep. And the sad thing is small markets are increasingly less likely to do them as producer-driven (into the ground) newsrooms abandon storytelling for vo/sot-o-rama swill.

[Chief]

You ought to look for a job as a small market ND Roy. You could make a change. You could make a difference.

Think about it.

[Roy Hobbs]

That would be fun.

[Pro]

Kuralt's pieces were SO popular that in the 1970's and 80's every local station, it seemed, had an "on the road" reporter. I remember several at the stations I worked at, even until the mid 1990's.

But these were the first things cut when "budget adjustments" were made. It takes time to do these kind of stories, a good "on the road" reporter could only do maybe two of these kind of stories per week. That wasn't good enough, management wanted reporters who could do daily packages and live shots. And do it for less money.

The "on the road" pieces were determined to be a waste of resources. Today, you'd be hard pressed to find many stations still doing them.

[ February 03, 2007, 02:13 AM: Message edited by: Pro ]

[Rosenblum]

In the late '80s I worked as a producer on Sunday Morning. When I cut my first package for them, I was told just to leave holes where the narration would go in, but note the time for the openings. I went to the studio to watch the output from the control room. When my package came up, it ran with Kuralt's voice as the narration. I assumed they had cut it at some point. But I looked out in the studio and while the package was running, Kuralt was sitting on his stool, smoking a cigarette, and reading the narration from the teleprompter while watching the video roll out live. He hit every cue. His narrations were perfect every time.
And because he was telling a story to the audience while he also watched it, instead of reading in a sound booth, it really carried. He was the consumate professional. Truly.

[ February 03, 2007, 04:33 AM: Message edited by: Rosenblum ]

[Scotch On The Rocks]

How about that intro?

Well, it's that time of year again, when Charles Kuralt reports from a turkey town in Texas called Cuero. Which once a year, and with sytle, gives America the bird.

[Scotch On The Rocks]

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
When I cut my first package for them, I was told just to leave holes where the narration would go in, but note the time for the openings. I went to the studio to watch the output from the control room. When my package came up, it ran with Kuralt's voice as the narration. You wrote for Kuralt?
Holy cow.

[Clapper]

Someone's gotta say it. Might as well be me.

As God as my witness. I thought turkeys could fly.

[Paper Trail]

link (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/kur0int-5)

We did a story about a black family in the poorest part of Mississippi one time, the Chandlers. There were eight or nine children, and the oldest of them decided he wanted to go to college, which had never happened in that family, I assure you. All his parents could do for him was hitch up the mule to the wagon -- they didn't own either the mule or the wagon - - and go into town and borrow two dollars for bus fare to send him off to college. From that beginning he became Dr. Cleveland Chandler, the head of the Department of Economics at Howard University. And each of his younger brothers in sisters in turn went on to college, most of them to graduate degrees.

There was a Baptist minister from Colorado, and the head nutritionist of a veteran's hospital in Kansas City, and people of accomplishment in every case. And one of them wrote me a letter and said, "You really ought to come see us, because we are something." Their parents' 50th anniversary was coming up, it happened also to be Thanksgiving Day.

From all over America, all the children came back to the new house they had built to replace the shack they had grown up in. And looking back on those days of picking cotton all summer to afford to go back to school, helping the younger brothers and sisters accomplish what they had accomplished, and looking back on the humblest beginnings that any family could ever have, all we did all afternoon was cry.

Mr. Chandler couldn't get through the blessing at the Thanksgiving dinner. I looked over at Izzy Bleckman, the camera man I worked with all these years, and he was not able to look through the viewfinder of the camera. I was weeping too, everybody was. And what were we weeping about? The American Dream, this notion that, if you really want to in a country like this, you can start from nothing and make a success of yourself. Maybe not a rich man, or a rich woman, but a success, the kind of success that you look into your own heart and find is there.

That is not possible in most countries of the world, to this day, but it still is possible here. That's something very precious. I've kept up with the Chandlers. One of the grandchildren played violin in Carnegie Hall last year. It goes in circles. The dream doesn't stop. It makes me cry to think about it.

[ February 03, 2007, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Paper Trail ]

[Roy Hobbs]

Originally posted by Pro:
Kuralt's pieces were SO popular that in the 1970's and 80's every local station, it seemed, had an "on the road" reporter. I remember several at the stations I worked at, even until the mid 1990's.

But these were the first things cut when "budget adjustments" were made. It takes time to do these kind of stories, a good "on the road" reporter could only do maybe two of these kind of stories per week. That wasn't good enough, management wanted reporters who could do daily packages and live shots. And do it for less money.

The "on the road" pieces were determined to be a waste of resources. Today, you'd be hard pressed to find many stations still doing them.Heck you can pull them off 5 days a week if you had to.

I don't think many people realize how much the use of gratuitous live shots has destroyed this business. Every b.s. live shot takes away from shooting, edit and writing time.

In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.

[Chief]

Originally posted by Paper Trail:
link (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/kur0int-5)

We did a story about a black family in the poorest part of Mississippi one time, the Chandlers. There were eight or nine children, and the oldest of them decided he wanted to go to college, which had never happened in that family, I assure you. All his parents could do for him was hitch up the mule to the wagon -- they didn't own either the mule or the wagon - - and go into town and borrow two dollars for bus fare to send him off to college. From that beginning he became Dr. Cleveland Chandler, the head of the Department of Economics at Howard University. And each of his younger brothers in sisters in turn went on to college, most of them to graduate degrees.

There was a Baptist minister from Colorado, and the head nutritionist of a veteran's hospital in Kansas City, and people of accomplishment in every case. And one of them wrote me a letter and said, "You really ought to come see us, because we are something." Their parents' 50th anniversary was coming up, it happened also to be Thanksgiving Day.

From all over America, all the children came back to the new house they had built to replace the shack they had grown up in. And looking back on those days of picking cotton all summer to afford to go back to school, helping the younger brothers and sisters accomplish what they had accomplished, and looking back on the humblest beginnings that any family could ever have, all we did all afternoon was cry.

Mr. Chandler couldn't get through the blessing at the Thanksgiving dinner. I looked over at Izzy Bleckman, the camera man I worked with all these years, and he was not able to look through the viewfinder of the camera. I was weeping too, everybody was. And what were we weeping about? The American Dream, this notion that, if you really want to in a country like this, you can start from nothing and make a success of yourself. Maybe not a rich man, or a rich woman, but a success, the kind of success that you look into your own heart and find is there.

That is not possible in most countries of the world, to this day, but it still is possible here. That's something very precious. I've kept up with the Chandlers. One of the grandchildren played violin in Carnegie Hall last year. It goes in circles. The dream doesn't stop. It makes me cry to think about it.Here's the story (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adsc6kW1Spk). I put it up on youtube.

Enjoy

[ February 03, 2007, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: Chief ]

[Spike]

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
In the late '80s I worked as a producer on Sunday Morning. When I cut my first package for them, I was told just to leave holes where the narration would go in, but note the time for the openings. I went to the studio to watch the output from the control room. When my package came up, it ran with Kuralt's voice as the narration. I assumed they had cut it at some point. But I looked out in the studio and while the package was running, Kuralt was sitting on his stool, smoking a cigarette, and reading the narration from the teleprompter while watching the video roll out live. He hit every cue. His narrations were perfect every time.
And because he was telling a story to the audience while he also watched it, instead of reading in a sound booth, it really carried. He was the consumate professional. Truly.But they were doing it all wrong. Shouldn't they have been using VJs instead?

[Pondering Aloud]

Aw, leave the guy alone. He's got his philosophy, you've got yours. And he's written for Kuralt, so you're not going to persuade anyone over him on this thread.

As a matter of fact, staying on Kuralt, I saw an interview with him once where he said he used to make sure to stand behind the photographer as he shot, so that he had a better idea what the photographer's shot would look like in the viewfinder. So he could write a draft as the shot was happening. Now, I ask you, how far removed is that from shooting it himself? Sounds to me as if he would just as soon shot it himself. Of course with the portability of today's video equipment, he probably would really want to. That way he wouldn't be just writing to his shots. He could shoot to his writing.

But let's have that discussion on another thread. For now, let's just enjoy the Kuralt stories. Been a long time.

I love the Chandler story up above. The information is front loaded and the emotion is back loaded. Man that piece flows. He said he cried when they shot it. I bet more than a few viewers cried as well.

It's one terrific small market story. I hope he got an Emmy for that one.

[ February 03, 2007, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Pondering Aloud ]

[omb]

As someone who works in a small/medium market, sometimes the only differences are the toys and the writing.

Most of the people (reporters and producers) writing in our market haven't turned 30 yet and whoever taught(?) them to write should be prosecuted in international court for crimes against humanity.

Approaching the big 4-0, I'm already feeling the "stupid old guy" treatment from some of these children.

I can't understand half of what they write because they just want to track four words, throw in a nat break, then read the rest of the sentence. And most of their sound bites aren't long enough to even CG the person - let alone get a thought or idea from what they said.

Kuralt was and is a god. Nowadays, some punk producer would be ripping his script to shreads and telling him to "get to the point" if they even had the time of day for him.

[omb]

As someone who works in a small/medium market, sometimes the only differences are the toys and the writing.

Most of the people (reporters and producers) writing in our market haven't turned 30 yet and whoever taught(?) them to write should be prosecuted in international court for crimes against humanity.

Approaching the big 4-0, I'm already feeling the "stupid old guy" treatment from some of these children.

I can't understand half of what they write because they just want to track four words, throw in a nat break, then read the rest of the sentence. And most of their sound bites aren't long enough to even CG the person - let alone get a thought or idea from what they said.

Kuralt was and is a god. Nowadays, some punk producer would be ripping his script to shreads and telling him to "get to the point" if they even had the time of day for him.

[Another side]

Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
Heck you can pull them off 5 days a week if you had to.

I don't think many people realize how much the use of gratuitous live shots has destroyed this business. Every b.s. live shot takes away from shooting, edit and writing time.

In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.I couldn't agree more.

[repoob]

Amen to Roy Hobbs. The consultants have strangled local news operations throughout the land, creating clone after clone, with one common thread. We're stupid as hell.

[Chief]

Originally posted by omb:
As someone who works in a small/medium market, sometimes the only differences are the toys and the writing.

Most of the people (reporters and producers) writing in our market haven't turned 30 yet and whoever taught(?) them to write should be prosecuted in international court for crimes against humanity.

Approaching the big 4-0, I'm already feeling the "stupid old guy" treatment from some of these children.

I can't understand half of what they write because they just want to track four words, throw in a nat break, then read the rest of the sentence. And most of their sound bites aren't long enough to even CG the person - let alone get a thought or idea from what they said.

Kuralt was and is a god. Nowadays, some punk producer would be ripping his script to shreads and telling him to "get to the point" if they even had the time of day for him.Maybe it's time for the pendulum to swing the other way. The Chandler piece above clocks in at 5:21... but it's special enough to have people talk about it for years. One of these type of pieces a month is enough to set one station apart from the other cookie cutters out there. Just gotta wait for someone to get smart and realize it.

These best of On The Road tapes are something else. I'll upload a few more to youtube in the upcoming days.

[Roy Hobbs]

Fortunately there's still a few Kuralts left in the unlikeliest of places, celebrating the human spirit in more than three minutes and ending a package with an enduring sentiment instead of a sound bite:

Notable New Yorkers (http://wcbstv.com/local/local_story_205105349.html)

[ February 03, 2007, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Roy Hobbs ]

[Chief]

Here's another small market Kuralt story (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EircVhudo&mode=user&search=) that I uploaded.

[Scotch On The Rocks]

Yes, it's a small market story, but you can't tell that story in that market. It's nicely told, but it's nothing new.
It works for the people on the east and west coast and really anywhere OTHER than that market.

To tell that story in that market, you'd have to feature the winning kid of Tom Sawyer Days, what he was like, what winning meant to him. and that could be nicely done. But you'd naturally leave out all the poetic waxing about Hannibal. Did you notice that unlike the Chandler story posted earlier, there wasn't a single interview in the Hannibal story?

And I beg to differ about boyhood not being much different today than it was in Sam Clemen's time. The Clemens family owned a slave, for instance. That's a rather large difference, if you ask me.

[ February 04, 2007, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Scotch On The Rocks ]

[kim jung il]

Paper Trail
Senior Member
Member # 3269

posted February 03, 2007 10:52 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We did a story about a black family

I assure you. All his parents could do for him was hitch up the mule to the wagon -- they didn't own either the mule or the wagon - - and go into town and borrow two dollars for bus fare to send him off to college.You Imagine Hell take place? ...
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/korea/story/leader/kim.dae.jung/link.kim.jong.il.jpg http://www.geocities.com/california_state_unfair2002/politics_2007.jpg
Joseph Biden say about, Barack Obama.

[ February 04, 2007, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: kim jung il ]

[Buffalo Soldier]

Originally posted by Chief:
Here's another small market Kuralt story (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EircVhudo&mode=user&search=) that I uploaded.What about his reading pace? Who can get away with that today?
Today you gotta be quick and if it's a feature story, you gotta be funny in a quirky kind of way. For me, I loved the "neatness counts,( pause a beat) but not much" line.

[Tripe Face]

Originally posted by Paper Trail:
link (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/kur0int-5)

We did a story about a black family in the poorest part of Mississippi one time, the Chandlers. There were eight or nine children, and the oldest of them decided he wanted to go to college, which had never happened in that family, I assure you. All his parents could do for him was hitch up the mule to the wagon -- they didn't own either the mule or the wagon - - and go into town and borrow two dollars for bus fare to send him off to college. From that beginning he became Dr. Cleveland Chandler, the head of the Department of Economics at Howard University. And each of his younger brothers in sisters in turn went on to college, most of them to graduate degrees.

There was a Baptist minister from Colorado, and the head nutritionist of a veteran's hospital in Kansas City, and people of accomplishment in every case. And one of them wrote me a letter and said, "You really ought to come see us, because we are something." Their parents' 50th anniversary was coming up, it happened also to be Thanksgiving Day.

From all over America, all the children came back to the new house they had built to replace the shack they had grown up in. And looking back on those days of picking cotton all summer to afford to go back to school, helping the younger brothers and sisters accomplish what they had accomplished, and looking back on the humblest beginnings that any family could ever have, all we did all afternoon was cry.

Mr. Chandler couldn't get through the blessing at the Thanksgiving dinner. I looked over at Izzy Bleckman, the camera man I worked with all these years, and he was not able to look through the viewfinder of the camera. I was weeping too, everybody was. And what were we weeping about? The American Dream, this notion that, if you really want to in a country like this, you can start from nothing and make a success of yourself. Maybe not a rich man, or a rich woman, but a success, the kind of success that you look into your own heart and find is there.

That is not possible in most countries of the world, to this day, but it still is possible here. That's something very precious. I've kept up with the Chandlers. One of the grandchildren played violin in Carnegie Hall last year. It goes in circles. The dream doesn't stop. It makes me cry to think about it.I think I saw that piece once. Did the older brothers and sisters help pay for the younger ones to go to college? One of the youngest is a professor at Duke now right?

If that's the story, I remember it... VERY POWERFUL STORY. congrats.

[Basically A Nice Guy]

Originally posted by Chief:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Paper Trail:
link (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/kur0int-5)

We did a story about a black family in the poorest part of Mississippi one time, the Chandlers. There were eight or nine children, and the oldest of them decided he wanted to go to college, which had never happened in that family, I assure you. All his parents could do for him was hitch up the mule to the wagon -- they didn't own either the mule or the wagon - - and go into town and borrow two dollars for bus fare to send him off to college. From that beginning he became Dr. Cleveland Chandler, the head of the Department of Economics at Howard University. And each of his younger brothers in sisters in turn went on to college, most of them to graduate degrees.

There was a Baptist minister from Colorado, and the head nutritionist of a veteran's hospital in Kansas City, and people of accomplishment in every case. And one of them wrote me a letter and said, "You really ought to come see us, because we are something." Their parents' 50th anniversary was coming up, it happened also to be Thanksgiving Day.

From all over America, all the children came back to the new house they had built to replace the shack they had grown up in. And looking back on those days of picking cotton all summer to afford to go back to school, helping the younger brothers and sisters accomplish what they had accomplished, and looking back on the humblest beginnings that any family could ever have, all we did all afternoon was cry.

Mr. Chandler couldn't get through the blessing at the Thanksgiving dinner. I looked over at Izzy Bleckman, the camera man I worked with all these years, and he was not able to look through the viewfinder of the camera. I was weeping too, everybody was. And what were we weeping about? The American Dream, this notion that, if you really want to in a country like this, you can start from nothing and make a success of yourself. Maybe not a rich man, or a rich woman, but a success, the kind of success that you look into your own heart and find is there.

That is not possible in most countries of the world, to this day, but it still is possible here. That's something very precious. I've kept up with the Chandlers. One of the grandchildren played violin in Carnegie Hall last year. It goes in circles. The dream doesn't stop. It makes me cry to think about it.Here's the story (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adsc6kW1Spk). I put it up on youtube.

Enjoy</font>[/QUOTE]It's linked right here.

[aphia]

I love Kuralt, and the poetics of looking for America, but who wants watch that on the local news? Where do you fit that in durring the 90? Who has time to pull a photog off breaking news to shoot that? There is too much going on.. Times are too different to support that nostalgic type of story telling in local news where most viewers just want the headlines or the visual details of a newspaper story that was printed at 4AM. There are plenty of cable outlets for you story tellers.... now go get me that vosot....

[Lazlo Toth]

Originally posted by aphia:
Who has time to pull a photog off breaking news to shoot that? There is too much going on..I would hate for us to miss a car accident or a fire just to tell a story that might have some deeper meaning and reveal some aspect of the human condition.

What a waste of time that would be.

[Bandit '07]

Originally posted by aphia:
I love Kuralt, and the poetics of looking for America, but who wants watch that on the local news? Where do you fit that in durring the 90? Who has time to pull a photog off breaking news to shoot that? There is too much going on.. Times are too different to support that nostalgic type of story telling in local news where most viewers just want the headlines or the visual details of a newspaper story that was printed at 4AM. There are plenty of cable outlets for you story tellers.... now go get me that vosot....I could not disagree more. In a media and news culture saturated with kidnappings, "breaking news fires" that are 1,000 miles away, and brainless twits with their t!tties hanging out all over the place .. people crave stories about real people who live in their communities.

In every market I ever worked in, the most popular reporters were the ones who had a feature-oriented storytelling franchise.

Just my .02

[ February 06, 2007, 07:42 AM: Message edited by: Bandit '07 ]

[aphia]

sarcasm is lost on you people

[Glovis Hogbarch]

I met Kuralt.
I was a journalism student at the University of Kentucky. In 1989, he spoke during an annual journalism lecture. He also handed out the scholarships to a dozen or so students who were receiving them. I was one of them.
He took the time to talk to me, and the other students, individually. He asked me what I was doing, if I had a job lined up for the summer. I told him I was going to be a morning reporter/anchor for a local radio station. We talked about that, and he mentioned he had to get up at 4 a.m. when he'd anchored the 'CBS Morning News.' We had a pleasant conversation that lasted maybe two minutes.
I was stunned that he would take the time to do that. It didn't last long, and I'm sure it wasn't memorable to him, since he met dozens of people that day. But I'll remember it until the day I die. An Emmy-winning CBS newsman -- one of the all-time greats of our profession -- took the time to talk to a 20-year-old journalism student, when he didn't have to. He could have easily given me the brush. But he didn't. He struck up a conversation with me, and others like me, of his own accord. He was genuinely interested in us.
Occasionally, in life, you meet a famous person, and they disappoint you. They're rude or egomaniacal or something. Not Charles Kuralt. He was the real deal. He was as friendly, open, likeable, and as interested in people as I hoped he would be.
Kuralt was one of the best.

[5w40]

Last guy like that in NY was one who worked in the same milk barn as Kuralt ... Morry Alter.
It's true that these stories couldn't really be turned on a dime ... needed constant set-up, probably a day to shoot and another day to write and edit ... when it's done right ... so that's why Kuralt's and Morry's type of stories aren't done anymore ... we just get some sort of butt bongo nonsense ... and Paris Hilton.

[Rosenblum]

Originally posted by 5w40:
Last guy like that in NY was one who worked in the same milk barn as Kuralt ... Morry Alter.
It's true that these stories couldn't really be turned on a dime ... needed constant set-up, probably a day to shoot and another day to write and edit ... when it's done right ... so that's why Kuralt's and Morry's type of stories aren't done anymore ... we just get some sort of butt bongo nonsense ... and Paris Hilton.Sometimes we worked on the stories for weeks. Those were the days when CBS News had massive budgets and did not care what they spent. One of the first assignments I got on Sunday Morning was to do a piece about the Bolshoi. They were coming to the US for a visit. (This was still the days of the Soviet Union, so this was a big deal). They were going to visit Boston, NY, Washington, Miami, Dallas and LA. I asked Shad Northshield, (the EP) which city he wanted me to shoot the story in. He paused and looked at me like I was the biggest idiot in the world. After a long silent stare he said, "all of them" and walked away.

Like I said, big budgets.

[CKMD]

Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
[QUOTE]Heck you can pull them off 5 days a week if you had to.

I don't think many people realize how much the use of gratuitous live shots has destroyed this business. Every b.s. live shot takes away from shooting, edit and writing time.

In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.If this were true, why, oh wise sage and producer hater, are the number ones in most markets the live, latebreaking stations?
Tell me why the public is turning to those stations who have fast newscasts, lots of lives for live sake and high story count.

I agree...better told stories would be awesome...and length...hell, that doesn;t matter to me. I run 6 minute pieces if the story deserves it.
But, the Number 1 stations in the country are not that way.

So...who are we serving, ourselves with our lofty sights as to what "journalism" is, or the viewers who watch ads and help us with our paychecks?

[Roy Hobbs]

"If this were true"...so you claim what I said about quality undermined by needless live shots is false?

No..."I agree," you say, to better stories and allocating time for them.

If I follow your misguided logic you're saying that viewers like watered-down crap so let's give it to them.

Your presumption that "Live Local Latebreaking" is a number one in most markets is highly debatable, the fact that viewers are leaving in droves is widely known.

I suggest you take your estimable producing talents, storytelling savvy and keen news judgment to "Access Hollywood" and other fine viewer-validated outlets.

Best of luck to you in finding a Paris Hilton item on the news feed tonight to keep up your track record of top-rated and "Kick-ass" fast-paced shows, as the kids like to say.

You must be proud.

[CKMD]

I'm proud that I am a manager in a good size market and able to support my family.
What's your point?

My point, easy: Even IF viewers are leaving the number 1's in most markets are live and late breaking and don't tell stories. Viewers go to them for some reason.

I ask you...why is that?

Can you get through a post on the subject without being bitter, or will I get another "tongue-lashing"? :rolleyes:

I don't work at a station like that, by the way. We tell stories here. We have long investigative pieces and have broken quite a few "big J" stories this year...not during sweeps.
But we're not number 1.
The number 1 here is flash and trash...tell me why?

[ February 06, 2007, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Can't Keep Me Down ]

[Roy Hobbs]

You seemed confused and defensive.

Are you now instead complaining that the Number 1 in YOUR market is "flash and trash", compared to your virtue-infused newscast?

Or continuing with extolling the virtues of fast-paced live shot infested and high story count vo/sot sweatshops, as you first did?

As you bob back and forth I think you need some syrup with your waffles.

[CKMD]

If you really wanted to have a conversation, you wouldn't be this much of an *******.

You think you know what viewers want. You don't.
They want worthless live shots and fast paced newscasts based on the ratings of the number 1's in major markets. I have the data. It sucks, but it's true.

I don't work at a station that does that.

One doesn't equal the other and I'm not waffling. Where did I extoll virtues in my original post?

I'll go where I get a paycheck.
Whether it's worthless live shots or your dream station that tells stories like Charles Kuralt.

Fact is, those stories don't work anymore.

Why you need to be such a prick about this is beyond me...then again, you're just another anonymous ******* on an anonymous website who I have noticed either doesn't have a job or hates his job alot.

[ February 06, 2007, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Can't Keep Me Down ]

[Roy Hobbs]

I can't argue with that obvious eloquence.

Moderators might find your language interesting.

[Rosenblum]

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
Heck you can pull them off 5 days a week if you had to.

I don't think many people realize how much the use of gratuitous live shots has destroyed this business. Every b.s. live shot takes away from shooting, edit and writing time.

In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.If this were true, why, oh wise sage and producer hater, are the number ones in most markets the live, latebreaking stations?
Tell me why the public is turning to those stations who have fast newscasts, lots of lives for live sake and high story count.

I agree...better told stories would be awesome...and length...hell, that doesn;t matter to me. I run 6 minute pieces if the story deserves it.
But, the Number 1 stations in the country are not that way.

So...who are we serving, ourselves with our lofty sights as to what "journalism" is, or the viewers who watch ads and help us with our paychecks?</font>Actually, the number one in most markets is 'not watching'. if you add up the total viewership for local news in most markets you will find that the vast majority of people are not watching at all. maybe there is a bigger market in what they want to watch and why they left.

[CKMD]

Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
I can't argue with that obvious eloquence.

Moderators might find your language interesting.Oh...OK... you won! graemlins/icon_pray.gif

[Roy Hobbs]

The pen is mightier than the bore.

[Chief]

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
Heck you can pull them off 5 days a week if you had to.

I don't think many people realize how much the use of gratuitous live shots has destroyed this business. Every b.s. live shot takes away from shooting, edit and writing time.

In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.If this were true, why, oh wise sage and producer hater, are the number ones in most markets the live, latebreaking stations?
Tell me why the public is turning to those stations who have fast newscasts, lots of lives for live sake and high story count.

I agree...better told stories would be awesome...and length...hell, that doesn;t matter to me. I run 6 minute pieces if the story deserves it.
But, the Number 1 stations in the country are not that way.

So...who are we serving, ourselves with our lofty sights as to what "journalism" is, or the viewers who watch ads and help us with our paychecks?</font>Actually, the number one in most markets is 'not watching'. if you add up the total viewership for local news in most markets you will find that the vast majority of people are not watching at all. maybe there is a bigger market in what they want to watch and why they left.</font>[/QUOTE]When will someone listen to this argument? Viewers are going away. They are not watching the news.
Sooner or later, probably later, someone's gonna figure out that good counter programming will work. You know, where experienced storytellers who are now anchors are given time to develop richly textured stories every so often and given the 3 minutes of air time to tell them. The kind of stories that viewers remember. The kind of stories that viewers talk about. The kind of stories that invite viewers to come back.

[The Oklahoma Kid]

Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.This, my friends, is a case of classic ignorance.

It would appear Mr. Hobbs has never been a producer, news director or even an EP. For if he had, he would understand that management, perhaps at the insistence of consultants, demands producers to lay off the packages and stack their shows with live shots, VO's and VO/SOT's.

See how silly one can look when he states his opinion as if it's factual?

[TV Dad]

Originally posted by Chief:
When will someone listen to this argument? Viewers are going away. They are not watching the news.I disagree that viewers aren't watching news these days. I believe there are the same number of eyeballs watching (if not more than ever before), but they're dispersed over a much larger number of channels and time periods.

Sooner or later, probably later, someone's gonna figure out that good counter programming will work. You know, where experienced storytellers who are now anchors are given time to develop richly textured stories every so often and given the 3 minutes of air time to tell them. The kind of stories that viewers remember. The kind of stories that viewers talk about. The kind of stories that invite viewers to come back.You're absolutely right. Viewers WILL watch the kind of stories you're talking about and they do it every week on "60 Minutes", "Primetime", "Dateline", etc... Now, whether or not those types of stories are enough to make viewers revert back to their old ways of getting their news is open to debate.

[Clever Login Name]

Originally posted by The Oklahoma Kid:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.This, my friends, is a case of classic ignorance.

It would appear Mr. Hobbs has never been a producer, news director or even an EP. For if he had, he would understand that management, perhaps at the insistence of consultants, demands producers to lay off the packages and stack their shows with live shots, VO's and VO/SOT's.

See how silly one can look when he states his opinion as if it's factual?</font>[/QUOTE]Much like you just did? Good grief ...

[Michigan J. Frog]

Originally posted by TV Dad:
I disagree that viewers aren't watching news these days. I believe there are the same number of eyeballs watching (if not more than ever before), but they're dispersed over a much larger number of channels and time periods.
Research doesn't support this conclusion.

[The Oklahoma Kid]

Originally posted by Clever Login Name:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by The Oklahoma Kid:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
In fact the "Everything must be fronted live" mindset of the vo/sot-enamored toddlerproducernazis has pushed news back to the days of film....everything has to be to the processor by 3 or 3:30 so you can run out to the live shot and point at a crime scene tape in a trash bin from day before yesterday.This, my friends, is a case of classic ignorance.

It would appear Mr. Hobbs has never been a producer, news director or even an EP. For if he had, he would understand that management, perhaps at the insistence of consultants, demands producers to lay off the packages and stack their shows with live shots, VO's and VO/SOT's.

See how silly one can look when he states his opinion as if it's factual?</font>[/QUOTE]Much like you just did? Good grief ...</font>[/QUOTE]I think "Clever Login Name" just proved an ignorance epidemic is spreading. She's obviously never been a producer, EP or ND either.

[ February 08, 2007, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: The Oklahoma Kid ]

[TV Dad]

Originally posted by Michigan J. Frog:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by TV Dad:
I disagree that viewers aren't watching news these days. I believe there are the same number of eyeballs watching (if not more than ever before), but they're dispersed over a much larger number of channels and time periods.
Research doesn't support this conclusion.</font>[/QUOTE]I haven't seen it, so I don't know, but what does the research say? Does it count the total minutes of news watched or is it broken down by the number of people? Does it look at viewership at particular time periods or does it combine the entire 24 hours of a given day? Have they added in newspapers and the internet? Is the viewership of all the ESPN channels and the Weather Channel counted?

[The Invisible Swordsman]

research (http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2006/narrative_networktv_charts_and_tables.asp?cat=8&media=5)

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Michigan J. Frog:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by TV Dad:
I disagree that viewers aren't watching news these days. I believe there are the same number of eyeballs watching (if not more than ever before), but they're dispersed over a much larger number of channels and time periods.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Research doesn't support this conclusion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I haven't seen it, so I don't know, but what does the research say? Does it count the total minutes of news watched or is it broken down by the number of people? Does it look at viewership at particular time periods or does it combine the entire 24 hours of a given day? Have they added in newspapers and the internet? Is the viewership of all the ESPN channels and the Weather Channel counted? 52 million people watched the network evening news in 1980. Less than 30 million watched the network evening news in 2006.

How many more people are in the United States today than in 1980? So much for being the top rated newscast.

Edited to add... Just a 100 million more people in the US since 1980.

[ February 08, 2007, 10:32 AM: Message edited by: The Invisible Swordsman ]

[Spike]

Originally posted by The Oklahoma Kid:
For if he had, he would understand that management, perhaps at the insistence of consultants, demands producers to lay off the packages and stack their shows with live shots, VO's and VO/SOT's.A consultant is hired to give advice. A consultant cannot insist or demand anything. Who's in charge of your newsroom, your ND or your consultant?

This is one reason field people are often critical of producers, EPs and NDs. Sometimes they just don't think for themselves. If you can't justify a decision for any other reason than "the consultant told me to do it," then I would wonder whether you're really qualified to hold the job.

I do understand that producers have to do what their NDs tell them, even if they disagree with it. But to try to defend it because it ultimately comes from a consultant shows that you have no judgement of your own.

[CKMD]

Spike,
When you're a producer and you're told to do something, you can disagree with it, but you better damn well do it or I'll find someone else.
Period.

[Lazlo Toth]

A consultant is a person who takes your watch and tells you what time it is.

[Spike]

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
Spike,
When you're a producer and you're told to do something, you can disagree with it, but you better damn well do it or I'll find someone else.
Period.You didn't read my post all the way through before you posted, did you? Now don't you look silly.

[CKMD]

Originally posted by Spike:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
Spike,
When you're a producer and you're told to do something, you can disagree with it, but you better damn well do it or I'll find someone else.
Period.You didn't read my post all the way through before you posted, did you? Now don't you look silly.</font>[/QUOTE]Not at all..I read it and reiterated that I would fire you if you didn't do what I told you.
Period.

Now, you look silly.

[Spike]

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Spike:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
Spike,
When you're a producer and you're told to do something, you can disagree with it, but you better damn well do it or I'll find someone else.
Period.You didn't read my post all the way through before you posted, did you? Now don't you look silly.</font>[/QUOTE]Not at all..I read it and reiterated that I would fire you if you didn't do what I told you.
Period.

Now, you look silly.</font>[/QUOTE]I wrote:

"I do understand that producers have to do what their NDs tell them, even if they disagree with it."

What part of that don't you understand?

[CKMD]

I read it...but you didn't go farther and I did.
See the sentence continues with the word but and qualifies your statement.
look and comprehend:
"but you better damn well do it or I'll find someone else.
What part of that don't you understand?

[ February 08, 2007, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: Can't Keep Me Down ]

[Glovis Hogbarch]

Is this thread still about Charles Kuralt?

[Roy Hobbs]

As they say in the musical, I guess Oklahoma Kid sings "I'm just a girl who can't say 'no!'"

[Fiya Storm]

Originally posted by Glovis Hogbarch:
Is this thread still about Charles Kuralt?Yes it is. And here's a nice little Kuralt story. Not one he aired on tv. But one about tv stories. And it's worth remembering.

THE TRICYCLE PRINCIPLE--KEEPING OUT OF THE STORY

Well, one time the cameraman with whom I've worked all these years, Izzy Bleckman, and I were in his room at the Holiday Inn somewhere, I can't remember where, watching the local evening news as we frequently did before going out to supper. And there was a story on there about a children's tricycle race. It was a very appealing story about youngsters peddling away, trying to go fast. And as we watched, Izzy said, "You know, before this story's over, that guy is going to ride a tricycle. That reporter." And I said, "No, he wouldn't! It would just ruin it! It would turn an attractive story into a kind of joke." And we watched. And sure enough, at the end, the camera was close up, and this guy says, "Joe Dokes, Eyewitness News," and the camera widened, and he was on a child's trike, and he turned and peddled awkwardly away. And Izzy and I just looked at each other. And there was born the tricycle principle, which is very simple for a reporter. And it is simply, where possible, don't ride the tricycle. Keep yourself out of the story. The people who are watching it are not interested in you, they're interested in this tricycle race and these cute children. That is a principle that is violated more than ever, it seems to me. I understand why it is. Our young reporters want to get themselves on the air, they want to be part of the story, if possible. I think that's just the wrong way to do it. I think one should leave oneself out of the story. In my "On the Road" stories, I frequently didn't even appear. I tried not to appear, and if I did appear it was for some good reason. Mainly that the story wouldn't work as well without a little on-camera piece.

Ideally, the reporter in television, I think, should be like the old-fashioned newspaper reporter. The guy standing in the corner making notes. I remember a famous story from the 1964 Goldwater campaign. Many of Barry Goldwater's supporters were neurotic when the press came in. They thought there was a great media conspiracy against their candidate. I think it's Tom Wicker of the New York Times who told this story, could have been somebody else. But he said at some rally, a woman sidled up to an aide to Senator Goldwater, and said, "I think you should know this, there's a man over there writing down everything he's saying." (laughs) That was Tom Wicker, or that was the reporter. That's the proper role of the reporter. The guy who's leaving himself out of the story, and standing in the corner writing down everything that's going on.

[Roy Hobbs]

Amen to all of that.

I asked the Head Ape at TalentApes (or is it Talent Tapes...hey buddy buy an extra T, okay?!) to select his favorites from my stories.

He started with one where I profiled commandos jumping into a frozen lake in their thin fatigues...the main reason he liked it? "I've seen that story done dozens of times and you're the ONLY reporter who didn't jump in as part of the story--that's unique and you kept the right focus."

I may be one of the few reporters who's never jumped on-camera with the Golden Knights,flown with the Blue Angels, ridden the circus elephant or been tazered, but my viewers have because I allowed them to experience it for themselves through the strengths of the medium rather than the forcefeeding of schmaltz.

[Chief]

Anew old Kuralt story is up on YouTube. This one is about Register Cliff along the Oregon Trail.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EY5RN6scec

[Roy Hobbs]

Mmmmmmmm...new Old Kuralt.....(gurgling drool sound)

http://www.justinbrothers.com/Images/drooling_homer.gif

[Zero]

How about that rule of threes right off the bat?

[Roy Hobbs]

Yup the rule of threes taught to me by a sage old assistant ND at WCCO-TV when I talked my way in there once in the 80's.

Needless to say it didn't grease the skids for tapes and e-mails submitted in the 2000's.

Oh well. Tain't the same place I suspect.

[Buffalo Soldier]

Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
Yup the rule of threes .And in time came Jedediah Hines from Ohio County, Kentucky.
And in time a man named Preston from Michigan.
And in time came thousands, each yeilding to the urge to carve his name on register cliff.

[TV Dad]

I'm curious about something...when you think of CBS Sunday Morning, what's the first thing that pops into your head? Do you remember it by some specific story you saw there or do you remember that they always end with some pretty nat snd piece?

[miss hap]

The good story tellers are on NPR. But sadly the consultants are moving in and now you can hear "stand ups" inside their features. It's dreadful.

[Roy Hobbs]

Originally posted by Buffalo Soldier:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Roy Hobbs:
Yup the rule of threes .And in time came Jedediah Hines from Ohio County, Kentucky.
And in time a man named Preston from Michigan.
And in time came thousands, each yeilding to the urge to carve his name on register cliff.</font>[/QUOTE]Actually that might arguably be the rule of 2002's.

Can I get back to you?

[upandown]

It pains me to say this, but old school features are pretty much dead---at least in the present climate. It's too bad, because little stories can leave the biggest impressions.

IF done well. viewers still appreciate and remember them. But how many of today's reporters would know how to do such a story? It looks easy, but it's a ton more work. Stories like that take time, take mulling, take experimentation, take more than an hour to shoot, and take more than forty-fve minutes to edit.

Stories like that do not include experts and file tape.

Stories like that take more than a superficial angle.
They speak to simple and universal human truths.

I know a lot of news directors who talk good games, but they do not have the resources to support such efforts. They want what they assigned and what fits in a rundown, not what a reporter finds. They don't want surprises. It's normal that after multiple discouragements, reporters stop looking, and stop risking.

If you don't use it, you lose it. And many reporters have lost it.

Remember, ON THE ROAD was originally a risk, too.

Here's what you borrow and apply from Kuralt:

HIs wonderful words.
His wise observations.
His natural manner. Charles Kuralt was exactly the same off-camera as on---just Charlie Kuralt.

[ March 04, 2007, 09:35 PM: Message edited by: upandown ]

[Lazlo Toth]

Originally posted by TV Dad:
I'm curious about something...when you think of CBS Sunday Morning, what's the first thing that pops into your head? Do you remember it by some specific story you saw there or do you remember that they always end with some pretty nat snd piece?I remember Kuralt sitting there. But I also remember an extraordinarily simple thing. Sound transitions within the packages. Beautifully done. So rare then. Virtually non existent today.

[Buffalo Soldier]

Originally posted by miss hap:
The good story tellers are on NPR. But sadly the consultants are moving in and now you can hear "stand ups" inside their features. It's dreadful.Check out a guy named Mike Redding at WCNC. He is wonderful.

[Tripe Face]

Originally posted by Fiya Storm:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Glovis Hogbarch:
Is this thread still about Charles Kuralt?Yes it is. And here's a nice little Kuralt story. Not one he aired on tv. But one about tv stories. And it's worth remembering.

THE TRICYCLE PRINCIPLE--KEEPING OUT OF THE STORY

Well, one time the cameraman with whom I've worked all these years, Izzy Bleckman, and I were in his room at the Holiday Inn somewhere, I can't remember where, watching the local evening news as we frequently did before going out to supper. And there was a story on there about a children's tricycle race. It was a very appealing story about youngsters peddling away, trying to go fast. And as we watched, Izzy said, "You know, before this story's over, that guy is going to ride a tricycle. That reporter." And I said, "No, he wouldn't! It would just ruin it! It would turn an attractive story into a kind of joke." And we watched. And sure enough, at the end, the camera was close up, and this guy says, "Joe Dokes, Eyewitness News," and the camera widened, and he was on a child's trike, and he turned and peddled awkwardly away. And Izzy and I just looked at each other. And there was born the tricycle principle, which is very simple for a reporter. And it is simply, where possible, don't ride the tricycle. Keep yourself out of the story. The people who are watching it are not interested in you, they're interested in this tricycle race and these cute children. That is a principle that is violated more than ever, it seems to me. I understand why it is. Our young reporters want to get themselves on the air, they want to be part of the story, if possible. I think that's just the wrong way to do it. I think one should leave oneself out of the story. In my "On the Road" stories, I frequently didn't even appear. I tried not to appear, and if I did appear it was for some good reason. Mainly that the story wouldn't work as well without a little on-camera piece.

Ideally, the reporter in television, I think, should be like the old-fashioned newspaper reporter. The guy standing in the corner making notes. I remember a famous story from the 1964 Goldwater campaign. Many of Barry Goldwater's supporters were neurotic when the press came in. They thought there was a great media conspiracy against their candidate. I think it's Tom Wicker of the New York Times who told this story, could have been somebody else. But he said at some rally, a woman sidled up to an aide to Senator Goldwater, and said, "I think you should know this, there's a man over there writing down everything he's saying." (laughs) That was Tom Wicker, or that was the reporter. That's the proper role of the reporter. The guy who's leaving himself out of the story, and standing in the corner writing down everything that's going on.</font>[/QUOTE]You know, if you watch the Kuralt pieces on youTube he didn't follow his own advice much. He's got multiple standups in most of them.

Good standups, but not a case of "the story wouldn't work as well without a little on-camera piece."

Still he's my favorite.

U&D you are correct, current realities make this kind of story telling very rare.

[upandown]

Mike Redding can do very fine work.

[ March 05, 2007, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: upandown ]

[Buffalo Soldier]

Barry Simmons at WTVF in Nashville can glue you to your seat too.

[Buffalo Soldier]

Originally posted by Tripe Face:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fiya Storm:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Glovis Hogbarch:
Is this thread still about Charles Kuralt?Yes it is. And here's a nice little Kuralt story. Not one he aired on tv. But one about tv stories. And it's worth remembering.

THE TRICYCLE PRINCIPLE--KEEPING OUT OF THE STORY

Well, one time the cameraman with whom I've worked all these years, Izzy Bleckman, and I were in his room at the Holiday Inn somewhere, I can't remember where, watching the local evening news as we frequently did before going out to supper. And there was a story on there about a children's tricycle race. It was a very appealing story about youngsters peddling away, trying to go fast. And as we watched, Izzy said, "You know, before this story's over, that guy is going to ride a tricycle. That reporter." And I said, "No, he wouldn't! It would just ruin it! It would turn an attractive story into a kind of joke." And we watched. And sure enough, at the end, the camera was close up, and this guy says, "Joe Dokes, Eyewitness News," and the camera widened, and he was on a child's trike, and he turned and peddled awkwardly away. And Izzy and I just looked at each other. And there was born the tricycle principle, which is very simple for a reporter. And it is simply, where possible, don't ride the tricycle. Keep yourself out of the story. The people who are watching it are not interested in you, they're interested in this tricycle race and these cute children. That is a principle that is violated more than ever, it seems to me. I understand why it is. Our young reporters want to get themselves on the air, they want to be part of the story, if possible. I think that's just the wrong way to do it. I think one should leave oneself out of the story. In my "On the Road" stories, I frequently didn't even appear. I tried not to appear, and if I did appear it was for some good reason. Mainly that the story wouldn't work as well without a little on-camera piece.

Ideally, the reporter in television, I think, should be like the old-fashioned newspaper reporter. The guy standing in the corner making notes. I remember a famous story from the 1964 Goldwater campaign. Many of Barry Goldwater's supporters were neurotic when the press came in. They thought there was a great media conspiracy against their candidate. I think it's Tom Wicker of the New York Times who told this story, could have been somebody else. But he said at some rally, a woman sidled up to an aide to Senator Goldwater, and said, "I think you should know this, there's a man over there writing down everything he's saying." (laughs) That was Tom Wicker, or that was the reporter. That's the proper role of the reporter. The guy who's leaving himself out of the story, and standing in the corner writing down everything that's going on.</font>[/QUOTE]You know, if you watch the Kuralt pieces on youTube he didn't follow his own advice much. He's got multiple standups in most of them.

Good standups, but not a case of "the story wouldn't work as well without a little on-camera piece." .</font>[/QUOTE]The tri-cycle principle is not that you should never do a standup. It's that you do not ever want to change the focus of the story away from the subject and onto the reporter.

And we don't know if network didn't MAKE him do standups. I've heard of stuff like that.