-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
TEGNA shuts down Northwest Cable News
- Thread starter Roddybob
- Start date
Interesting comment. How has Tegna lost Seattle? Do you have access to ratings or revenue data that would indicate such? What constitutes to you putting resources in the market?
A couple points: About three years ago, HLN re-sized their writing and separate reporting staff to cut costs. Given the number of individual market airports that carry either Morning Express or CNN Airport, all selling separate spots, I have it on good authority that HLN is doing fairly well for what it is.
One problem with regional cable news networks that are in the same building as a local call letter station, is the call letter station will never give the cable the ability to break a story. The call letter station is the revenue generator. One of many reasons why you won't find a local like NWCN breaking a story. They just get the leftovers.
Nancy Grace is no longer on HLN. Her time slot has been replaced with Prime Time Justice with Ashleigh Banfield.
Come on Kelly, you and I both know KING is a shadow of itself. The writing is on the wall. Mass defunctions of major talent via buy-outs. A weak set in an undersized studio near Safeco. Lack of any leadership in the market. A failed cable news product. What is left?
One could argue that local TV is a lot different that it used to be. The same argument could be, and has been, made with radio. For right or wrong, group TV owners have had to adjust for the times. With the next generation of media consumers getting their news and information from places like Facebook and other social media sites, the days of large studios, expensive sets, SNG trucks and expensive talent is being replaced with lower cost alternatives. Now there are options like: green screens that can fit into an office space, virtual sets, and bonded cellular remotes. Millennial's don't care about hair and teeth anchors dressed in a suit and tie. They trend is toward real-looking talent, like they would see on YouTube.
TV in general, local TV news is transitioning from appointment viewing to on-demand. Sure, there still is the need to support legacy viewership (guys like us), but you're right about one thing, there is definitely is a shift in the TV production and content gathering model.
At the network where I work, we've hired a large "digital" staff, that runs around shooting things on their IPhones for Facebook Live. They don't need a big studio or ENG/SNG trucks to get the story. Is it "big-J journalism"?, certainly not, more sensational in nature. But that's what sells and it doesn't require huge facilities and expensive talent.
Exactly...people who complain about changes in media (radio & TV) don't seem to recognize that consumers have driven a lot of these changes, through their use of new technologies. It would be nice to hold on to the past, but today, professionals are competing with newly empowered citizen journalists who have access to the same facilities and platforms to reach the same audience. None of that existed just 10 or 15 years ago.
I must agree with TheBigA and Kelly. Times are changing. The media companies are trying to figure out what works and what sells. Seattle has been extraordinarily lucky to have relative stability in broadcast journalism over the years (until the past few years perhaps). Now, the longtime journalists are being asked to retire to enable the next generation. As much as I enjoyed seeing Jean Enersen every time I visit Seattle (Jean had been on since I was five years old), it probably doesn't make sense to retain a 70 year old anchor at a very high salary in the current economic environment.
Here in Phoenix, the news is not as good as Seattle admittedly. However, I do see the stations experimenting with varied formats and story line-ups. The TEGNA station here is trying more human interest stories, which may or may not be successful, but it is different from the usual "crash-and-burn" newscasts with 8 live reports from stuff that happened hours ago. I'm sure we will continue to see experimentation and evolution of news.
The real issue isn't the salary. At some point, people need to start allowing new generations of people to take those roles. Being a TV anchor isn't supposed to be a job for life. The whole industry is so clogged up with aging staffers that we've missed at least two generations of new talent who might have chosen TV as a career.
There is no question you guys are correct. I'm not really arguing that media has and continues to change.
I was a child of the 60's, a teen of the 70's, and a young adult in the 80's. Folks my age accept the change but many miss the old days. This is terribly "human" on many levels, and it isn't just media.
However, one exception in Seattle to note. In the past year KOMO, KING, KIRO, and KCPQ all went to entirely new sets and graphics. In the case of KOMO and KIRO the sets are large and even garish to some extent. So perhaps big studios, graphics, and talent still are relatively important.
I was a child of the 60's, a teen of the 70's, and a young adult in the 80's. Folks my age accept the change but many miss the old days. This is terribly "human" on many levels, and it isn't just media.
However, one exception in Seattle to note. In the past year KOMO, KING, KIRO, and KCPQ all went to entirely new sets and graphics. In the case of KOMO and KIRO the sets are large and even garish to some extent. So perhaps big studios, graphics, and talent still are relatively important.
I can't speak to what TEGNA, Cox, or Tribune takes into consideration during their capital planning, but my guess is since TEGNA was having to move locations in Seattle anyway, they pulled the trigger on whatever future strategic planning for their group model, building their new facility accordingly. Can't see as I blame them, really. If I had to move a station right now, I'd probably design in as much consideration for the way TV facilities are going, rather than the way they had been.
Regarding new sets; this is simply a local market arms race. When someone on the inside at a station, or a set vendor gets an RFP for a new set, word travels fast. Next the GM is on the phone to corporate with an alert that he competition is going with a new set, and we can't be left behind.. yadda..yadda. I've heard the argument many times. Here's how it generally goes: "We have reason to believe KXYZ has purchased a new set from Framastat Fabricators, and will be launching it going into sweeps." "I'm concerned we may not be able to hit our prior news ratings or revenue targets in 2017 if they steal the promotional thunder." "We need to at least be at parity with a new set around that same time." "Besides, we've had a new set in out capital request budget for the past four years."
As I mentioned prior; things like new sets are to protect the Boomer audience while station groups continue in the background to try and capture the next generation of news and TV content consumer.
Last edited:
Fair enough, and I enjoyed your faux conversations. I can definitely feel that vibe.
So...protecting the Boomer audience is important, don't you think? Afterall, this is your short-term ratings solution, right?
OK, beyond that, yes, we need to look to the future, no doubt. I don't deny that at all. But we need to live in the present with an eye to the future. Those of us near the high school class of '77 are somewhat in between right now. We understand media is changing, but we can't close the door on the past either. We are indeed in a transitional time, and both models still are important here as we enter into 2017.
Sure, Boomers are important to TV. All those erection, sleep, joint pain, cholesterol, pharmaceutical spots are there for a reason. But agencies are also still clamoring for a younger demographic, and how TV stations and cable networks make that transition to a generation that has a completely different set of values when it comes to how they get their news or consume media, is the trick that no one has nailed yet.
This is the inherent problem with all ad-supported media. The media is only interested in reaching the people the advertisers want to reach. So they only program to those people. This is partly why there are more music genres on satellite radio (since their music channels are not ad-supported) or public radio. This is why the CBC in Canada is proposing to drop advertising and become all-tax supported. The money has to come from somewhere. If it comes from advertisers, they get to determine what programming you receive. If that's not what you want, you have the option of paying for it yourself.
Or,as is the case with YouTube and Facebook, make your own.
Six
R
Radio-X
Guest
Big question I have is...what goes on Com-crap Channel 2 in Western WA now that NWCN goes away?
As it is the default channel when your cable box resets, I'd imagine someone would want that spot bad enough.
Radio-X
As it is the default channel when your cable box resets, I'd imagine someone would want that spot bad enough.
Radio-X
- Status