November Ratings - 2007

[drumsncode]

Great post SoonerBorn. We've been getting a lot of cool insights here lately, and I assume you read Aaron Tuttle's post too. Very cool.

I think it would be an amazing job to be the News Director of a station in charge of increasing the ratings. I would love to be a fly on the wall at KOCO, trying to figure out how to bump their 10pm share, when they've been so successful at 5 and 6pm.

Maybe they just need Misty to cook up a big plate of "Suck It" and send it to KWTV. Personally, I think the two pivotal ratings chess pieces at KWTV are Amy McRee and Gary England. We will see what happens when each moves on someday.

And KFOR is simply the biggest puzzle to me in the world.

[solitude]

SoonerBorn1973

Sensationalism? If nobody can give you examples, I'll give you a few:

- You joked about it, but that "teaser" crap goes too far. "We'll tell you at 10" is one reason I won't tune in at 10. I actually remember the days of those quick newsbreaks actually being newsbreaks and not marketing snow jobs.

- Crime! Crime!!!! CRIME!!!!!!!! A robbery may have occurred at 9:00 AM at so and so location. Yet, at 10:00 PM the news trucks are broadcasting LIVE!!!! from the location. Can they tell us better from the location than from the newsroom? I'm talking simple little crime stories. Slow news days bring out the need to sensationalize all the more.

- SEX! SEX!!! SEX!!!! If it's about "Kiddie Porn" or "Kiddie Sex" or "Teens Online" - all the better! Because remember, your children are in DANGER!!!

- Not enough sense to come in out of the rain. I saw a couple of years ago a news story from a LIVE! location where the reporter was in the wind and rain doing the story, when he could have just done the report from the foyer of the building where it was dry. I guess it makes it look more LIVE! LOCAL! and LATE BREAKING!!!!!!

The Internet has changed local news coverage? I know it's changed national and international coverage, but could you explain how the Internet has change local news coverage? The Internet can give us a lot of information, but local is the weakness, not the strength. And don't point to this site. MalibuSooner can tell you the traffic to this site comes nowhere close to competing with even a local radio music station. Some of us interested in local building, preservation, etc. may love it here, but it's not exactly news for the masses. So, I would LOVE to hear how the Internet has changed local news coverage.

And if you really don't believe people are turning away from local news in droves, you are fooling yourself. What you call "Statistical Facts" must come from the same mathematical lab that KWTV uses to tout their "Most Watched Newscast In The Nation" BS.

[drumsncode]

Solitude, you make some excellent points. A lot of us have complained about these very things over the past year. The teasers are infuriating, and the "live shots" with no purpose whatsoever are what really burn me.

I've seen KOCO do a "Live Shot" from the breakroom of their studio on several occasions, just so they could do a story and put LIVE on the screen.

I see it on FOX a lot too. The story is filmed in the daylight, yet the reporter is LIVE in total darkness just for the sake of saying LIVE. It must really chap the reporters during the winter time to stand out in the cold for something so pointless.

[SoonerBorn1973]

I'll do my best to answer all of your questions. The only problem is the tone of your post rings loudly, and I don't think I could ever convince you that the media is not this evil empire that is trying to take over the world (as seems to be the popular perception nowadays). Here ya go:

- Those 10pm teasers you see are usually shot between 4pm and 6pm, so the fact of the matter is the newsroom, in most cases, still doesn't have ALL of the facts when they are shot. The anchors are given the assignments that the reporters are working on and they give a broad description of the story. For instance: they may be told that we're doing a story on a man that attacked some people at local parks, but police are still trying to determine if an attack at a different park might be related. Bam! Here's your tease: "A man is accused of attacking women at a local park that could be by your home. We'll tell you where, tonight at 10pm."

- What is one news topic that effects more and more people on a regular basis? Crime. The chances of you, or anyone on this board, being the victim of a crime today are greater than that of you being a winner of a local contest. Crime effects everyone. Period. So, yeah, you're going to see more crime reports than anything. I know we all love the idea of a soldier coming home for the first time in a year to see his newborn baby, but does that really affect you? Can you pull something from that to make you better prepared for what you might face tomorrow? No. But, if you hear that (fake) predator I mentioned above was stalking women at a park your wife likes to go jogging, that's defnitely information you can use.

- I'm still trying to figure out why you're so upset about the media's "obsession" on getting out information about child sex crimes. My two children are the most important things to me in the world and if they're in danger, I sure want to know about it. No need in having to "sensationalize" this subject. We live in a day and age where our children are not safe. Whatever information I can be given to safeguard my children, I'll take it.

- Believe me, most reporters would agree with you on weather coverage. None of them like it. But does it not lend a little credibility to the reporter, and the story for that matter, if they are braving the elements that they're warning you about? If you had two reporters, and one was standing on a foyer and shooting out of a window saying "Look what the wind is doing to these trees" and the other was actually out standing in this storm with their hair and jacket whipping in the wind, which one would you watch? Personally, I want to know what I would be dealing with if I was thinking about slipping outside to run to the store. I'm not sure I could gather that information by watching some trees or flagpoles.

- The internet has changed local news MUCH more than you're giving credit for. People are going to local news websites for their information because THEY can determine the pace and content of their news. It's no secret that KOCO and KFOR have spent a load of money to spruce up their websites (KWTV seems to be missing the boat on this one by allowing The Oklahoman run their website). And you know what? It shows. These websites are getting thousands of hits a day. But in the end, what stations really want is for you to watch the TV newscast because that's where all of the advertising dollars are. So, while we want you to check our website while you're at work, we really want you to watch our newscast when you get home. For better or worse, this has changed the way the news is presented. Period.

- And if you really think that more people aren't watching local news, then you sir/ma'am are the one whose fooling yourself. More and more homes are accepting meters in their homes that are attached to TV's and electronically log everything they watch. More families are volunteering to become "Nielsen Families" and log everything they tune in to. The facts are there. If you want to pish posh the facts because you refuse to believe them, that's on you. But this research is paid for by advertisers, not the media outlets.

Hope I answered all of your questions. I don't expect you to believe any of them, but that doesn't change the truth of the matter. I just want to hammer home that news stations change their presentation to accomodate the viewer because they know they can't change your habits for you. So if you don't like what is on the news, take a look at the person in the mirror.

[kmf563]

very well put my friend. I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears though.

[drumsncode]

Great post SoonerBorn. interesting and articulate. And remind me never to make you mad! :-)

[solitude]

SoonerBorn - I don't think I ever suggested the media was an evil empire that was out to take over the world. I said local news is terrible.

As for your response "falling on deaf ears" etc., what is meant is that there probably won't be answers that satisfy me. This is true, as every answer you gave was ridiculous and sounds like it was written in the marketing department of one of the local TV stations.

Let's look at them...

1) The teasers rarely are "teasers only" because of lack of all the facts. You know that and I know that and trying to say otherwise is an insult to our intelligence. The teasers are almost always "teasing" something that we must tune in at 10, so we'll tune in at 10! For example (and these are made up), "A presidential candidate calls Oklahoma a bad name - find out who called Oklahoma what at 10," (All the facts are known - the person could have just as easily said, "Senator Joe Bill calls Oklahoma a "trailer state" - harsh words, more at 10." Another example, "A big name is selected to be Grand Marshal of the Tulip Parade - we'll tell you who it is - at 10." Lack of facts? No. This goes on repeatedly through the evening. You know it, I know it, and your suggesting there are reasons other than marketing at play is an insult. No drinking the local news Kool-Aid here.

2) You say crime effects more and more people. And your extension of that is that you must report every little crime as if it belongs on an hour long "Forensic Files?" Complete with flashing light, yellow tape, in the background? Laws at the state capitol effect me more than crime, but where are the ratings in that? So - you ignore what goes on at 23rd and Lincoln.

3) You're asking why I am "upset" about local news headlining child sex crimes? First of all, I'm not "upset" about it, I merely used it as an example of local newscasts sensationalizing news. Sex is sex. People are fascinated - for better or worse - by kiddie porn, kiddie sex, teens being enticed online. I don't get it - but look at the success of "To Catch A Predator." But does it require sensational features during every sweeps period? How many times are we told "Ten Tips To Keep Your Kids Safe Online"? Over and over and over again. And sex is always brought into it. Newscasts are more and more mini news-magazine shows rather than newscasts - feature after feature after feature and LESS news. Again, if you can't admit this, you're fooling yourself. But, I can tell you're smarter than that, you're not fooling yourself because you know better - you're simply in "spin mode."

4) Weather coverage is a disgrace. Cancelling the entire evening of network programming to "keep us safe"--- from a run-of-the-mill thunderstorm? Again, sensational journalism.

5) I'm still not sure how the station having a website with news needs to change the content of your newscast. That makes no sense at all. Doesn't the website just compliment the newscast? Drive viewers to the newscast? If it is hurting the newscast, then maybe, don't do it? My point was you blamed US, the viewers, and the Internet in your first post. I'm still at a loss what I have done to change your newscast - or what the Internet has done - or anything else, that you haven't done to yourself.

6) Let's talk meters. If I am watching an entertainment program from 9-10 and then get up and walk away to do laundry, take out the trash, take a shower, anything, the station gets credit for my "watching" the newscast. Did I really "watch" the newscast? No - I did what thousands of families do and left the TV on for background noise, out of laziness, to wait for Leno, whatever. Because of this you get credit for "strong lead-ins."

I can't see that you did anything more than give excuses for the tabloid nature of local television news. You certainly didn't explain anything that wasn't just typical spin from those in the industry trying to justify their relevance. And if you think I am in the minority, again, you're kidding yourself. I'm quite a bit older than you (if the '73 denotes your year of birth) and remember TV news when it offered a real newscast. You know and remember nothing but the schlock that passes for local news now. Your education was geared in that direction. I think that may be our problem here. Some of us remember -- and the contrast is ugly.

[kmf563]

point proven. I said deaf ears...not soonerborn1973. And I believe he said in most cases this was the reason for the "tune in at 10" teaser. Does "in most cases" mean every time? NO.
I would guess you do not have children either. Or they are grown.

[solitude]

point proven. I said deaf ears...not soonerborn1973. And I believe he said in most cases this was the reason for the "tune in at 10" teaser. Does "in most cases" mean every time? NO.
I would guess you do not have children either. Or they are grown.

What point is "proven"? Because I didn't accept the spin from SoonerBorn, I am somehow close-minded and wrong? One could just as easily say the same for you because you don't agree with me! I would never say that. It's like politics, not necessarily a right or wrong - there are simply differing opinions, that's all. I just happen to think more people probably agree with me that local TV news is more a self-serving PR program - than a true labor of journalism. You don't - that's fine - but it doesn't make anyone right or wrong.

[drumsncode]

Interesting points from both you guys. That's what makes a message board great.

Personally, I'm still trying to get over hearing Amy McRee say, "...as a journalist, it's not about me; it's not about how we look; it's not about what our station looks like; it's about doing stories that make a difference in people's lives..."

(I think that's a fairly accurate "quote" of it.)

This coming from a woman whose very job depends on "how she looks", working for a station that put in a new multi-million dollar set just to impress everyone. They will tell you it's to deliver their journalism more effectively, so just how do two spiral staircases enhance the journalism of a newscast?

But hey...I'm not bitter! :-)

To me, this topped the now famous, "Watch Gary England or your children will die promo." :-)

[Rickey P.]

They need to realize that sensaionalism in a 24/7 connected society just will not work on most folks...."We interrupt this program'' should ONLY be used when absdolutely necesary!
Now, If Braum's is out of Ice Cream go ahead and inerrupt.... I will make a bee line for Blue Bell!

[melfox4]

Just a quick question. I watch channel 9 quite often but lately I have noticed that Amy McRee's face seems lsightly distorted. Does anyone know if she has had cosmetic work done? She just doesn't look the same. Has anyone else noticed this?