The Future of Local TV News

I must confess I got the link to this article from the kids at lostremote.com. (Steve, thanks for the comment a few days ago.) Now as always, some will discount this because even though the article wasn't written by the Lost Remote staff, some view anything on their site as anti-conventional TV news. I disagree with that notion and think the following article brings up an interesting topic. Actually the article comes from across the ocean and the Guardian. Although the subject looked at TV as a whole, and not just TV news, it mentioned how 85% of content is currently on tape so it makes it easier for it to be eventually downloaded to MP3 live formats for video IPod devices. And it says the TV industry could be going down a path similar to the music industry. However, a VP of Google says you will still need live TV for sporting events and news. I am curious how you think local TV news will change or not change years from now? The latest Poll question is on this topic. -Hal

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/aug/27/news.google

Hutch Bomb Threats: Day 2

Hutch finds themselves in the middle of the attention as "copycats" Today called in hoaxes, after the threats from Tuesday. The three stations got a tour of the Hutch Dillons' stores as the day unfolded from hoax to hoax. The question news directors must deal with as this continues, is how much coverage do you give to these, and the more you give especially to the hoaxes, do you just encourage more idiots to call? That's one question I'd like to open up for discussion.
As for coverage, pretty average and starting to grow old and warn together. I must say I liked Jim Grawe's story on the guy who was a customer at Dillon's Tuesday and Wednesday and while there both days he was evacuated. For me to get excited for a topic like that, I think means I am even growing tired of it all, but once again when do you let up? At 10PM, KWCH and KAKE all lead with the arrests and had video from the scene of the arrests of people described as simply wanted for questioning in connection with the hoaxes. KSN had a slight mention of this, but pretty much stuck to a wrap up of the events earlier in the day. -Hal

Hutch Bomb Threats Coverage Notes

The news stations found themselves breaking into regular programming throughout the afternoon as the situation broke out in Hutchinson. Early on KWCH definitely showed an aggressiveness in being on the air. Anchor Kim Setty did a decent job, with little information, staying on at for times beyond the commercial breaks they were preempting. KAKE broke in with similar information all anchored from the station. KSN lived up to their channel number, as they so often do, by starting off in 3rd. They basically continued with using only a crawl for coverage, while the others were breaking in with anchors in the studio. The early use of pictures from cell phones was good by KWCH (not sure if KAKE or KSN had them). Although they didn’t provide much in the grand scheme of things, at least it was something to look at early on. I wasn’t able to watch everything from start to finish, but I think KAKE was the first to report all the people inside were released. That was probably one of their only wins for the day. As for the newscasts, I think we need to divide my comments into two sides of thinking: stations covering overall situation and the station with the information of longstanding significance. If you are wanting to know who covered the basics of the situation best, I would say KWCH and to a smaller degree KAKE did so. I think KAKE could argue that as the day played out and we found out that there wasn't necessarily a captor inside (and basing it on that info only) then one could argue that it was OK to back off a little bit more at 6.
Meanwhile, KSN would have been a distant third if it wasn't for the information reported by Chanda Brown on the link of the Hutch event to others around the country. This was definitely the story of longstanding significance. I wonder if they knew they were the only ones with this info. If so I wondered why they would break this information on the 5PM show. I thought this was somewhat gutsy. Turns out at 6PM the others really couldn't get enough further info to corroborate it. One comment said that KSN wasn't the first to break it. I'd be curious if this is true who did? If someone else did break it, KSN had more of a presentation with maps and made it more of a part of their coverage as a key part of their story. This information probably made up for what seemed to be a slow start and pretty average information as a whole for KSN. By 10PM this fact lead all the stations, except it ironically I thought was somewhat played down on KSN, compared to 6PM.
I do want to take up the matter of information coming out from the scene. I'd be curious to hear from anyone there. I couldn't believe for something that started before Noon, it took so long for officials to release whether there were hostages. I realize that it was a little more complicated and took some time to understand it all, but a little information regarding this would have helped. A couple of times on KAKE, an anchor asked when an official press conference would be held, as they were over 2 hours into the situation and it was unknown if hostages were being held. I think a little more info would have prevented speculation (overall the stations did well in refraining from that) and having to solely rely on people from around the scene for the information. They provided much more usable information, than a mouthpiece would, but a little more information would have helped. I also must say since the FBI was involved that could have slowed down the information release.
As mentioned earlier, predictably the exclusives KSN had at 6PM, were all covered by the other 2 at 10PM. KAKE pretty much had what was said at 6PM on KSN by 10PM. KWCH actually found out more information of additional cities involved than what KSN had at 5, 6 and 10. I thought KSN definitely competed well at 6, but by 10, KWCH overtook them on information. By 10, KSN's story on the connection to other states had all the same facts at 5 and 6 plus it was buried. It appeared as if they did little to advance that angle of the story for 10. Since that is what made them competitive at 6, they should have tried to stay out on the lead of that angle for 10. They didn't. -Hal

Also:
-It was good to see KWCH reporter Alana Rocha speaking about her recovery and thanking everyone for the support. She is set to start reporting again Wednesday.
-If you have a an idea for a poll question, let me know.
-I forgot all about the weather. Posters have started to comment about KSN starting off with weather, no matter the news for the day. I agree, even if it is only "15 seconds." It can still be too long on a breaking news day. I must say I think KSN has moved up the start and begins at the same time now if not sooner, at least thats what happened Tusday night.-Hal

Potpourri

Blog Poll - I know the poll on the blog is far from being scientific, but I think it does deserve a little conversation. Since there are changes going on at KSN, the poll asked what 1 on-air cosmetic change at KSN would you make? The choices were dumping Dave, Anita, Paul or nothing. This was posted after Paul was moved from anchor at 10PM to a reporter role. The results favored dumping Dave (46%), Anita (34%), Paul (13%) and then nothing (4%). You faithful readers will know I have never been a fan of Paul's. Once again, I don't think this poll is necessarily the Gospel truth, but it is what it is. I think it collaborates what some may be thinking, KSN had other issues on the anchor desk it needed to deal with before Paul. As for the blip in the Carrie Renger's column in the Eagle about the staffing change.

http://www.kansas.com/business/rengers/story/155485.html

I think the quote from the news director could be put into a yet unwritten book called, "Putting the Spin on Anchor Changes in TV News." He said as quoted in the article, "In any business, you should always play to your strength," he says. "Paul's a terrific reporter."

I have liked Paul's on-air presence doing live stories, but once again that is nice spin instead of saying, "We don't want him to anchor our 10PM show." He is still doing the 5PM. Although it was sent as a comment, a faithful reader e-mailed me to ask the question, "How many chances with co-anchors will Anita get? When do they realize she could be a problem?" As the Eagle article pointed out, Paul was the 3rd male anchor to join Anita on the desk in a little less than a decade and that doesn't include the various stints she went solo.

Mapping Software - Also I have enjoyed looking at the Map Clusters software I added to the site. Like the poll, you can't get real excited over it, but I enjoy it. Although they probably will never come back to the site, I would like to say, "Guten Tag," to the one hit I got from somewhere in Europe, possibly Germany?

What Not to Blog About - I guess I learned at least one thing this weekend. Viewers to this blog don't share my enjoyment of academic studies about the business. I thought the study from 1998 would illicit some interesting dialog about the industry. This was the smallest reaction I had gotten from a post, since I started.

New Nielsen Market Rankings Unveiled - Nielsen tweaks its market sizes from time to time. Although Wichita added over 600 TV homes, the market dropped 2 sizes and now clocks in at #69. Tucson and Roanoke-Lynchburg overtook Wichita in the latest chart. Here's a link to the updated version. (Sorry to the reader who doesn't like the Lost Remote blog.) -Hal
http://www.lostremote.com/2007/08/23/new-nielsen-dma-rankings-released/

An old news Case Study

As some of you may have figured out, Hal enjoys reading scholarly journals. I stumbled onto a study from 1998 that was particularly interesting, especially here in Wichita. The study by Tom Rosenstiel, Carl Gottlieb and Lee Ann Brady of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, ranked the quality of over 60 stations in 20 cities. It says it found audiences will not punish stations in ratings for producing quality local news as defined by a group of professionals. However it also says the lowest scoring stations as defined by its professionals are just as likely to succeed as the best stations. One of its 4 stations that it describes as being, "model" is KAKE. For KAKE it was all about doing in-depth pieces and less crime in 1998 as described by the authors. Hmmmm. And today they lead off with a murder trial. Now those reading this who were in this town back then and remember their newscasts in the late 90's, will not find this all that surprising. However, those who didn't, will find this as a reminder that just as a station may rave about their formula, they can change it and not even be near where they once were. So lets open up the time vault to 1998. Here's a link to the study in full. I encourage you to read it.
http://journalism.org/node/377

I will now post an excerpt from the study that offers an interesting glimpse into KAKE in 1998.

"A few stations prove there is an alternative to this processed news product - and it can still attract viewers. Over the past three years, each of the four stations profiled here has been trending up in ratings while most of the industry is down. What's going on at WEHT in Evansville, WLKY in Louisville, KARE in Minneapolis and KAKE in Wichita is thoughtful, old fashioned, and emphatically local. The formula is a straight-forward approach to writing and reporting. None of these stations is dumbing-down its news, or hyping it up. Crime is not blown out of proportion, and technology is merely a tool, not an end in itself. Most important, viewers are treated like citizens rather than consumers. It's back-to-basics newscasting, and it's working."

Here is the excerpt about KAKE as a model station.

"Not surprisingly, weather is often big news at KAKE, the ABC affiliate in Wichita, in the heart of the tornado belt. In the springtime, when storms can turn deadly, a meteorologist leads the show each night, followed by stories on various aspects of approaching fronts. The comprehensive coverage lasts all night with updates every half-hour until morning. "Weather is the number one thing that we do," says KAKE News Director Jim Turpin. "If it's really severe weather, we just take over the station." KAKE's coverage of fast-changing local weather and its impact on the community is one of the reasons a station in the 63rd market is ranked number two in quality in the study. Its busy consumer unit is another. Consumer reporter Deb Farris isn't doing formula pieces from consultants. Viewers call her with problems and she does her best to solve them. One day it's plumbers falsely claiming to be available 24-hours a day. The next it's helping a family get a refund for a vacation gone awry. She even vacation gone awry. She even tackles local examples of national problems, informing people that those with car insurance can end up paying more for broken windshields than those without it. "If we feel like it's a valid concern or if it affects a lot of people, we'll do it," says Farris. And like other stations profiled here, KAKE tries to find stories that are unique as well as local. To help them, the entire staff is invited to participate in the daily editorial meetings. KAKE reports the local angle on national stories frequently and leads the market in using multiple sources. It also focuses less on everyday crime. "Over the years we've just stopped covering crime," says reporter Farris. We are much more interested in stories that "help more people in their day-to-day lives."

Farris's quote in the study from 1998 is very interesting, "Over the years we've stopped covering crime," and that they are interested in stories that help people. Once again they led with a murder trial today. However, I must say their murder trial story on Thursday was interesting. A lot happened in the court room that was interesting to watch, but to me that's an exception rather than the norm. So in 9 years (eternity in the TV world) KAKE has clearly adapted a new philosophy. Someone in the know, please help me out, I think their ratings or rank has improved since then. So I ask you (TV professionals and those who aren't), although KAKE has changed, have what people want in local news changed in those 9 years? Is KAKE a "model station" today? Is there a "model station" in the market? -Hal

KSN Changes

Thanks again to the comment about noticing Paul Petite live out at a shooting last night and not behind the desk. I kind of noticed it, but in someways I didn't. I guess it proves that I was growing tired of the act on KSN. I still wonder if the change is permanent. I went to the KSN website and if you click on his name he is listed now as a "Reporter/Anchor" where Anita is listed solely as an "Anchor." Maybe for Paul this always was the case, because if you read in his bio, it still lists him as a 10PM anchor. On the other hand, maybe they haven't updated the bio, yet. I must admit I have made my comments known in the past that I don't care for Paul behind the desk. After the fact last night, and the more I thought about how it, I like Paul reporting in the field with breaking news such as the shooting. I must say I thought he did a real fine job. Then Tonight at 10PM, he was reporting and I was reminded why I don't like his on air presence. It wasn't a breaking news story and his reporting live tonight was more of the song and dance you see at 5PM and not as authentic. Maybe he needs to head to KAKE and do nothing but breaking news. He'd do good live on the scene stories and probably be one of their best (and that isn't a slam to KAKE's current reporters). Next question would be is KSN now looking for a new co-anchor to join Anita or would they go back to Anita being solo? I seemed to remember they have done this before only to go back to adding an anchor after a period of time. If they are or ever do add a co-anchor with Anita, whoever takes the job might want to be leery because those who have joined her the past few trials haven't lasted long term next to her.

But the move of Paul off of the 10PM anchor desk, must have been only the beginning of the changes for KSN. I noticed things a little different at the beginning of the newscast with the introduction and all last night, but thought it might just be do to the weather watches and warnings. Another comment Today suggested I go to the KSN website and look at a blog by Jason Kravarik. (It has since been taken down.) I'll take the phrasing as a commenter quoted it from earlier in the day, "you'll get a new segment called, 'Weather First,' right off the top even before the news starts." The blog continued "it's because people constantly tell us that weather is the most important reason you turn into our newscast." With this in mind watching the newscast at 10PM you can definitely see a philosophy of Dave, Dave, and more Dave. I am curious if people (what people) told them they like weather as a whole or if they specifically said KSN weather. Then in the middle of the newscast Tonight after a story about damage from last night storms, Dave and Anita suddenly started what seemed like a version of "Coffee Talk," (lets call it "Latte Talk" because of it being 10PM at night) talking about the severity of last night's weather. Just when you thought he was going to show tonight's weather again (he had just lead the show with a quick forecast of tomorrow) the bit ended and they went on with the show. He was merely brought in to talk about the weather with Anita, without maps. Will that continue every night? Maybe they needed to move Paul off to make room for more Dave on the desk? I don't think it is just irony that Paul's move to a 10PM reporting position and a new increased weather emphasis happens at the same time. It must be KSN's latest, in a long line of efforts to improve ratings. I'd be curious what sort of odds this would get of working at a Vegas casino.

That now leads me to the poll question. If you were in charge at KSN what on-air cosmetic change would you make. I know they already have made a change with Paul, but lets say that hadn't happened yet. I'm leaving Jim out of the equation because since I started this blog I have only had a few times where his name has been brought up. Please vote, only once. -Hal

Ants in your Food, Ants on Your TV?

At least it wasn't the lead. Yes, the reporter tried to have fun with the topic. Still, I thought it was still a little bit of a stretch to do a full story on the allegation of ants at a local fast food restaurant. KAKE's Cayle Thompson got to (literally) the bottom of the bag to get to the story. Apparently a posting on Myspace said there allegedly were ants at a Burger King on the east side of town. So Cayle went to investigate even pulled a part his burger as part of his "picnic" and couldn't find any ants. So he had to resort to talking to clueless people outside of the Burger King to ask them what they would think if they found ants. It was a dumb story, but I give Cayle credit, it couldn't have been far worse. He did what he could out of a lame topic. At least he didn't use a cheesy line about extra protein or anything like that.
http://www.kake.com/home/headlines/9250061.html

OK KWCHers, mark this down Hal is praising you. Well, sort of. I think you need to use the Fact Finder12 more often as you did on Sunday with info of the last Pizza robberies. You'll say you use the FactFinder often, but I say usually it doesn't come across as useful as it did on Sunday. It fit well with the main story and had information that one might want to know after watching the lead. -Hal

Moving On: The Sad Future of Local TV news

Once again, I apologize to everyone offended by the comment that made it through, following a previous post. There have been a few comments critical of me and suggestions of other TV personalities who I have criticized in the past that I now have to apologize to. This is the last time I will address this topic. A reader very adequately wrote, "actually the Rebecca comments were just his opinion... the Megan stuff was just plain mean." Once again I didn't write the Megan comments and they were not my opinion, but nonetheless I let them through and I have apologized for that. Comments about others are my opinions of the business about people who, after all are in the public eye. Are they like elected officials and voted in by the people? No not in that official sense. One could argue, though, voting occurs with the ratings' books. But the reporters profit (not with much money) by being in the public eye, so as long as they are not ruthless personal assaults, I think they are game to be praised and criticized in a careful manner. Enough on that. As I was reading the comments, one stuck out. The comment was why I should stop the blog and that my comments are petty. Here is an excerpt:

Some of your criticism's are petty and contrary to what you may believe, the reporters you criticize are still fairly fresh, still learning, and no, they do not make a ton of money. Last thing they need is someone like you criticizing their every mistake.

Those comments tell the tale of the future of local TV news. It tells of a not so bright future for local TV news as we know it, not just here but all over the country. The reader writes, "..the reporters you criticize are still fairly fresh, still learning.." I agree and that is the problem with TV news, not just here in Wichita, but all over. Even just a decade ago if you were graduating from college and wanted to get into the business, it was understood you would have to start in a small market like Corpus Christi, TX; Amarillo, TX; Joplin, MO; Topeka, or even a bureau in Kansas. You would do your time, learn the business and then move here and some would stay here for some time, while others would move on up more quickly. Over a decade ago the stations in Wichita, like much of the country, had a number of reporters, not including anchors who were at their stations for 5+ or more years. They were career journalists in Wichita at their stations. Now do to the economics of TV stations and a psychology in the reporters, being at a single station for a number of years can be looked down upon. Many young reporters out of school today see the glamor of the business in bigger markets and think they can make it to the national level, in part because pay and the quality of life can be tough in smaller markets. Often times when they are looking to move up, being at one station for an extended time can be looked upon as negative, unfortunately. Looking at the stations here in Wichita, I can think of only a couple of reporters who have been here a number of years, know, live and have rooted families in the communities and because of this they do solid work consistently. Kudos to them. I am not criticizing those who use this as a step to a better job, because the nature and economics of the business today have caused this. It has always happened here to some point, but now if you don't leave town, move up or get out of the business after some years, you are the rare exception. To me, many of these young and inexperienced reporters (some I have mentioned before and some I haven't....yet) will only add to a spiraling snow ball that will leave to an unwatchable product and one that I think will eventually kill most of the local TV news in the next decade. Outside of the friendly talk with the anchors and weather guy, why would I want to sit through a clueless inexperienced reporter tell me something, that they clearly know nothing about, when I can just read it now at my own pace on the internet? Its a harsh prediction of the industry's future. And in some cases it is well underway. Thanks to the reader who pointed me to this story off of the Lost Remote blog:

http://www.lostremote.com/2007/08/13/internet-news-audience-critical-of-traditional-news-media/

The premise of the story is those who are increasingly turning to the internet for news are doing so because they do not like TV news. As corporate bottom lines become tougher and tougher to meet, cheap inexperienced and unwatchable talent will be the norm and the audience will tune out to the point it will make more sense for the stations to run an infomercial or a Judge Judy rerun. -Hal

Sorry for letting the bad comments slip through

I must admit I didn't look all that closely at the comments and that is the one reason why I moderate the comments and up until this last week, I could only count about 2-3 where I had to moderate the post. There certainly must be something in the air, water, heat or something that is turning the comments into more of a negative vibe lately. I am the punk, coward or whatever you want to call me for letting that comment slip by. I do apologize and will have my eyes open wider in the future. -Hal

Election Coverage winners

On the Eve of the election on the Casino issue, who are the winners covering the issues? Unlike maybe the election, I don't think this is really even a close race. KWCHers mark this in your books, Hal is nice to you. I know you all will find a way to say I am being unfair during this post. You might want to let the person know, who said a few weeks ago they would never read the blog again, that I'm praising you guys so the person's fair weatherness may pass enough to read this post.



KWCH - I think leading up to the election they certainly have distinguished themselves on providing the most coverage. I found their polls most useful. A poll a few weeks ago showed how the Pro Casino folks' once large lead, was now suddenly very close. On Tuesday of last week they had polls breaking the vote down between male/female and other demographics. Say what you want with polls, but it gave KWCH another angle to cover. Plus they had another story to go along with it. As I have said previously I liked the icon on the website that brought you to a page with links to stories the station had previously done. The debate was OK. Something should be said they were the only ones to do it, but just because it wasn't on live TV and streamed on the Internet, doesn't mean you should of given up on the production value.



KAKE - They did keep up with the issue, but lacked the execution that KWCH had and overall plan. I don't think they covered as many diverse issues with the casino issue as KWCH did, but they kept on the story on a daily basis with stories from reporters. For example KWCH did a few stories about communities in other states and if crime rates were effected. It was a closer (wont say in-depth) look at a topic out there that many opponents bring up, something you might see less on KAKE. Like KWCH I liked the icon that takes you to all of their stories about the casino vote.






KSN - I thought they largely stayed away from the issues and covered it largely from afar. There were a few stories, such as one by Jason Kravarik a week ago that dealt with it in-depth. I will say if you don't have a story idea beyond going over the same arguments over and over, then it might be a good idea to withdraw. Maybe that's what they did. No folks, this isn't an excuse for them. I still think they placed 3rd in coverage of the election. They weren't out in front of anything on the issue. The only exception was the decision by the GM to do a commentary on the issue. I still question the legitimacy of him being able to do this like he did. I thought this was a bad move and something the station shouldn't have gotten involved in, even if the opinion was only his. I wonder if many any viewers at home, who saw this were upset. -Hal

KSN's GM Takes a Position on Casino Issue

Once again readers, thanks again for waking me up. At Noon Today, I was half watching and flipping newscasts, when I suddenly hear this anti-casino speech. I knew it wasn't a normal commerical that had been running, because the voice wasn't familiar. I watched more closely and realized it was a commentary from the GM on KSN. I thought it was odd, but disregarded it. Then someone comments on it at the end of the previous post. I then think about it some more and decided to write the following and open it up for discussion.

I honestly do not know the answer to this question so I will pose it here. Are their equal time rules regarding TV stations during elections? You hear about this at times during the Presidential elections. The question comes up after seeing the General Manager of KSN doing a commentary explaining why he is against expanded gambling in the upcoming election. I am sure he and the station would argue these are solely the opinions of him and not the station. I'll accept that, but besides the fact he is GM of the station, couldn't one argue someone from the "Yes" camp should be given an opportunity to have the time to do the same thing.

Another argument could be newspapers do this all the time with editorials. However the newspaper is printed on a median (paper) from a private entity. Although TV stations are owned by private entities, they are broadcasting on the Public's airwaves, regulated by the FCC. So in this example the public airwaves are being used to give time for one opinion, whether or not its just the GM's opinion and not the station's. So my question once again is, does KSN owe the opposing side the same amount of air time for their rebuttal? Honestly I may be totally wrong here, but I'd like your opinions of what you make of this spot and secondly do they violate an FCC or equal time rule, if anything like that even exists?

A commenter mentioned that the station could have credibility issues covering the story now. That is an interesting point, even if their staff hasn't made up their minds, do viewers who see this, think "anti-casino" now when they see Anita, Paul or noon anchor Stephanie Bergman? Also if the GM takes this stance now and if the casinos pass, will he refuse the casinos' money when they want to advertise on his station. I think I know the answer to that one. -Hal