Kudos to the Murrow Winners! [Archive] - MediaLine's Open Line Forum

Mom

Jul 1st 2008, 11:06 AM

Congratulations to all the recipients. This honor really seems to be just that ... a real honor ... A cut above the rest of the trophies and plaques being handed out. If you're one of the Murrow winners listed below, let the rest of us know and BRAVO.

Oops. Having problems. I can't print the whole list for some reason. Oh well. Here's the link to the winners ...

http://www.rtnda.org/

amp

Jul 1st 2008, 01:26 PM

Congrats to WSLS for their spot coverage of Tech!

Zero

Jul 1st 2008, 02:39 PM

Ah shucks. I'm too shy to admit it, so I'll wait until someone else posts that I'm on the list.

Gosh.

Mom

Jul 1st 2008, 03:05 PM

If that's true, Zero, it should certainly lead to a .... uh .... hmmmmm ... lively discussion.

Zero

Jul 1st 2008, 04:35 PM

Oh you know it's true mama. But I'm not gonna say what category, only that it's in the network division.

http://a330.g.akamai.net/7/330/2540/20080701190844/www.broadcastingcable.com/articles/images/BCST/library/MurrowAwardLogo.jpg

Twitch

Jul 1st 2008, 08:49 PM

:) Today was a good day.

markminn

Jul 3rd 2008, 07:01 PM

Zero? A Murrow winner? Did hell freeze over?

Zero

Jul 3rd 2008, 08:24 PM

Zero? A Murrow winner? Did hell freeze over?

Nah. That would imply a highly unusual circumstance. This isn't the first. And it's very warm where I am.

rootboyslim

Jul 5th 2008, 10:36 AM

Nah. That would imply a highly unusual circumstance. This isn't the first. And it's very warm where I am.

Congrats, Paper Trail.

ewink

Jul 5th 2008, 05:33 PM

Well I am flabbergasted. I don't see a 'bulk-erase' category under network.

Stack It

Jul 5th 2008, 06:59 PM

Well we know Egbert Roscoe Murrow DID NOT win one.

CKMD

Jul 6th 2008, 08:39 AM

I will say conrgrats...but winning awards doesn't make you a good journalist. it just means you sent some stories in and someone liked it and gave you an award.
Awards are somewhat of a joke...for all careers.

rootboyslim

Jul 6th 2008, 09:06 AM

Clod

Jul 6th 2008, 09:45 AM

I will say conrgrats...but winning awards doesn't make you a good journalist.
It certainly makes you a better story teller than the other people who submitted.
And that's a main objective. If you won a national award in the investigative category, it means you have serious chops. Sometimes it's the subject of the story which gets the attention, but even then a reporter has to handle the story well.

Of course it's subjective, but RTNDA members and only RTNDA members get to Judge the Murrows. And from my experience, only serious career minded journalists become RTNDA members.

I've judged Murrows, have you? I saw some great work, was happy to honor the best.

Sounds like you have a producer's attitude to me, rather than a reporter's. By the way, now that I think about it, the RTNDA doesn't give national Murrow awards soley to producers, do they?

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/Sour%20Grapes.jpg

CKMD

Jul 6th 2008, 09:51 AM

Does that include the Nobel Peace price for science?

It includes awards for anything...but, yes, Gore hater, it can include that for you too.:rolleyes:

CKMD

Jul 6th 2008, 09:54 AM

Sounds like you have a producer's attitude to me, rather than a reporter's. By the way, now that I think about it, the RTNDA doesn't give national Murrow awards soley to producers, do they?

Umm....I've won plenty of awards in my career...incuding investigative pieces... And the plaques sit in a box in a room with my wife's awards.

They do not reflect "good journalism"...and since, these days, there is no more good journalism, these awards are a joke...like awards for any career.

They also don't reflect good story telling. I know hundreds of great storytellers at stations across the country that have ND's who won't pay the fees to submit awards...therefore, they don't get recognized and win.

It's not sour grapes...it's the truth.
Congrats to those who have management who will pay the entry fee to feel good about themselves this one time rather than every single day they should be turning stories that matter. It's those stories that get overlooked...and those reporters, producers who deserve kudos...not a plaque that gathers dust or looks good on a wall.

rootboyslim

Jul 6th 2008, 09:55 AM

It includes awards for anything...but, yes, Gore hater, it can include that for you too.:rolleyes:

Wasn't thinking of Gore, but the cure for polio, for example. I agree with your premise, but cannot agree that it goes for all professions.

Clod

Jul 6th 2008, 10:11 AM

Umm....I've won plenty of awards in my career...
National Murrows are trophies, not plaques. How many of those are gathering dust in your closet? I'm betting on none. What about Emmys? I'm betting none too.

Couple of AP's? Yeah, that's more like it.

Stack It

Jul 6th 2008, 11:24 AM

CKMD

Jul 6th 2008, 12:58 PM

National Murrows are trophies, not plaques. How many of those are gathering dust in your closet? I'm betting on none. What about Emmys? I'm betting none too.

Couple of AP's? Yeah, that's more like it.

It doesn't matter which ones I have one...
But, apparently it does to you.
10 AP's
1 Emmy...didn't even go to the ceremony. Murrow...prestigious award for JOURNALISTS. The regular public don't give a crap.

Big deal...all in a box. And, all won because my boss spent the money to put the stories in and spend the money.

Again...I don't need awards to make me feel good about myself. Apparently, though...you do.

CKMD

Jul 6th 2008, 01:03 PM

Awards are nothing more than an ego booster. Just ask the KNTV reporter who won 2 Murrows last year and was let go last week.

A certain manager in our newsroom puts it best. "They win all the awards, but we kick their butts in ratings and make all the money."

Bingo, Stack It!
It's all about spending the money to enter things. Some stations win stations of the year solely because their management sends in entries for EVERY SINGLE AWARD. WOW!!! they must be great stations! ;)

Again...congrats to winners...but it shouldn't be a huge deal for real journalists.

Stack It

Jul 6th 2008, 02:55 PM

Amen CKMD.

I have a few awards, but do they mean anything, not really. The best ones are the ones you don't receive. It's respect in the newsroom from your peers and the respect of your viewers. But if you need to feed your ego and validate your inflated state of mind, then spend the money and submit your stuff for an Emmy, Murrow, or AP award.

Where's Barkie when we need him.

Juan Macanudo

Jul 6th 2008, 03:42 PM

Amen CKMD.

Spoken like a couple of jealous show stackers; people who only get their names on awards when anchors and reporters shine in front of the camera.

Keep your *****y attitude at the bar.

You don't buy the awards, you earn them. And if either of you had ever judged a contest, you'd know that. Have another drink and slap each other high five. I bet you're a pleasure to work with.

Desert Rat

Jul 6th 2008, 05:33 PM

I think the only question to ask to find out if trophys and awards are important is this one...

If you had to pay to enter your stories, instead of the station, would you?

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 6th 2008, 05:38 PM

10 AP's

I thought this was funny. You compare the state AP contest to the national Murrow awards. Let me know when you finally figure out there's a rather large difference in quality of submissions.

Oh, and I won an Emmy and didn't go to the ceremony either. Not that I was that unimpressed by the honor. It was an economic decision. The ceremony was 250 miles away and the Emmy was for best newscast, so that meant a lot of people were involved in the award. Most of us stayed home and had our own party. The station sent the news director to pick up the hardware. He was a first time news director still learning where the bathroom was when we won. He was later fired. You know what he did when he picked up the award? He thanked his wife. Someone who had even less to do with the award than he did. And that was hard to find.

Stack It

Jul 6th 2008, 05:43 PM

Spoken like a couple of jealous show stackers; people who only get their names on awards when anchors and reporters shine in front of the camera.

Keep your *****y attitude at the bar.

You don't buy the awards, you earn them. And if either of you had ever judged a contest, you'd know that. Have another drink and slap each other high five. I bet you're a pleasure to work with.
You can have all the awards you want, sport. I'll take the dominant number one rated newscast in the market and the respect of my peers. Make sure you shine those trophies, the light will blind you enough so that you can't see the big picture.

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 6th 2008, 05:46 PM

A certain manager in our newsroom puts it best. "They win all the awards, but we kick their butts in ratings and make all the money."

Sounds like something a whore would say.

Another side

Jul 6th 2008, 05:56 PM

I won a few local and regional awards in my day ... enjoyed every one of them.

I never understood people knocking awards. Hell, it's just someone trying to do something nice for someone else.

Stack It

Jul 6th 2008, 06:28 PM

Sounds like something a whore would say.

No, it's something anybody who realizes that this is a business would say. Personal accolades do not spare you from becoming a casualty when times are tight. Look no further than the recent layoffs in Los Angeles and in San Jose. I've won my share of awards, they're nice, put a smile on the face, but this is a business. Yes, we're supposed to excel at reporting, producing, anchoring, videography, all the things that make us journalists and it's great to be recognized. But in the end, it's about the bottom line. We're walking dollar signs to anyone outside the newsroom. If you cannot come to grips with that, then you're in for a real harsh dose of reality when you're told you're no longer needed.

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 6th 2008, 06:53 PM

Yes, we're supposed to excel at reporting, producing, anchoring, videography, all the things that make us journalists and it's great to be recognized. But in the end, it's about the bottom line.

And you choose to give up your pursuit of excellence in order to sensationalize, scare and titillate. Like a whore. And you brag about it.

That's really sad.

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 6th 2008, 07:06 PM

I won a few local and regional awards in my day ... enjoyed every one of them.
I never understood people knocking awards. Hell, it's just someone trying to do something nice for someone else.

There's a name for these people. Apparently they're just producers.

Stack It

Jul 6th 2008, 07:13 PM

And you choose to give up your pursuit of excellence in order to sensationalize, scare and titillate. Like a whore. And you brag about it.

That's really sad.
You better back up your bullsh*t, because I've drilled a new orifice into you and you're doing nothing more than taking cheap shots from the peanut gallery. And oh by the way, you couldn't be further from the truth.

ewink

Jul 6th 2008, 07:42 PM

No, it's something anybody who realizes that this is a business would say. Personal accolades do not spare you from becoming a casualty when times are tight. Look no further than the recent layoffs in Los Angeles and in San Jose.
Neither do good ratings! Newport chopped us two days after we found out we beat the #1 station in one of the demos that I assume is important in the May book. :P

I don't think any of it matters, really. :frustrated:

I have never won an award myself, but I have never lost in a category either, so :thumbsup:.

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 6th 2008, 08:25 PM

you couldn't be further from the truth.

All I have to go on is what you post. And so far you've said that excellent journalism isn't as important as ratings, and the more people you service, the more you get paid. And how much you enjoy that.

Walks like a whore. Talks like a whore. Sucks like a whore.

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 6th 2008, 08:28 PM

we found out we beat the #1 station in one of the demos that I assume is important in the May book.
Don't let ratings fool you. They're just bragging rights for people who don't practice good journalism. Look, there's only so much dollar revenue in any market. The number two station makes as much money as the number one because they sell more spots at a cheaper rate.

Desert Rat

Jul 6th 2008, 08:36 PM

The number two station makes as much money as the number one because they sell more spots at a cheaper rate.

I don't quite think that you can make that blanket statement because total profit margin would depend on a number of factors....one of which is how much spots in a newscast go for. Remember, total revenue isn't the key number, profit margin percentage is.

s'news

Jul 6th 2008, 09:01 PM

Closes eyes. Envisions someday winning a Quill & Tankard award from the North American Guild of Beer Writers. A guy's gotta have a dread, doesn't he?

ewink

Jul 6th 2008, 11:00 PM

Don't let ratings fool you. They're just bragging rights for people who don't practice good journalism. Look, there's only so much dollar revenue in any market. The number two station makes as much money as the number one because they sell more spots at a cheaper rate.
Hrm.

So you're saying the only point is to win awards then. K.

The Fedora

Jul 7th 2008, 04:46 AM

Closes eyes. Envisions someday winning a Quill & Tankard award from the North American Guild of Beer Writers. A guy's gotta have a dread, doesn't he?

or a dream...

:D

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 7th 2008, 05:20 AM

So you're saying the only point is to win awards.

When and where did I say that? Excellence is the objective. That's the difference between good reporters and producers. Producers are under pressure to constantly sensationalize their newscasts. The best reporters do their best work by rejecting that base impulse.

It's something called dedication to craft. It's something called professionalism.

I've judged the Murrow awards often enough to tell you that those showy types of rating grabber stories don't get a second thought for awards consideration. And that's why the "journalists" here who doggedly pursue sensationalism in their stories and newscasts dislike awards - they just don't win and they just can't figure out why. It can't be them that's wrong, ergo: the awards are crap.

Instead they justify their behavior by touting their ratings numbers as essential to making a living, and they loudly brag that it's a much better living then those who do not sensationalize. You've seen it here on this thread a number of times: If you strive for excellence rather than selling out your profession, they will fire you! And they should!

When in reality, advertisers are going to buy time on all available newscasts, they'll just pay more per ad at one station. But the other stations make as much money from the car dealers because they sell more ads at a lower rate.

Another side

Jul 7th 2008, 10:06 AM

You're sounding just a little full of yourself. Is that intentional?

Scotch On The Rocks

Jul 7th 2008, 11:19 AM

A little bit, for effect.

Jul 7th 2008, 11:34 AM

Mom

Jul 7th 2008, 12:36 PM

Interesting theory 22 ... and one that seems to stand up again this year. Among network television newscasts look who won the Murrow for Best Newscast this year - Katie Couric and the CBS Evening News.

Desert Rat

Jul 7th 2008, 12:40 PM

But the other stations make as much money from the car dealers because they sell more ads at a lower rate.

Scotch please prove your point. As I said before, the percentage of profit margin is based on a number of factors, rate for spots in a newscast is only one of those factors.

Your blanket statement above isn't completely true.

If you had to pay for your Emmy entry, would you have?

Another OMB

Jul 7th 2008, 01:33 PM

Why is it that more often than not, the worst rated newscast in the market will win the local Emmy for best newscast. It doesn't happen all the time... but it happens a lot. Too often to just be a coincedence.

This, by the way, is a serious question.

That's a very good question, 22. I don't know the answer, but I have a theory.

Most viewers base their decision on which newscast they'll watch based on several factors: habit; what show they were watching just before the newscast (even with a remote control, I know a lot of times I'll just leave it where it is); and which anchors they like the best. All of those factor into ratings, but none factors into awards.

Granted, in some markets there are number one stations that, because they're number one, have much higher-quality newscasts. They're number one so they have all the latest toys and best equipment and maybe more people. Therefore, their product looks better on air, which viewers notice, if only subconsciously in some cases. Their newscast may actually BE better because of all that, and they may also win awards for "best newscast". The last place station in a market like that probably has worse equipment, fewer people, and possibly (but not always) less-talented people because they pay less. Their newscasts aren't going to win.

But in markets where a last-place station still puts on a quality newscast, they can win the award for "best newscast" because the judges are looking at things like writing, story selection, transitions and video quality, things that viewers (who determine the ratings) don't usually pay attention to.