KOMO’s fixation on crime

[Kelly A]

KIRO did indeed drop the Eyewitness imaging many years ago. And I think they should have kept it. It is a brand and you need to hold on to a known brand.

But what if that branding statement no longer resonates with a modern audience? TV spends a ton more on audience research and perception than radio.

 

[Go_Zags]

I have no doubt about audience research. Clearly, however, they should part ways with their firms—the results just aren’t there. For example, the Spokane market has sets that are much better than KING’s. It looks like a breadbox and for reasons I can’t explain, it slows down the pace and energy of the newscasts. So, the firms haven’t caught onto that?

 

[seatownmedia]

Yes, KING thought it would be cool to be near the stadium district but most viewers don’t care. In return KING got a relatively small space. Yep, Spokane stations have a better look than KING.

 

[Drewgu111]

KING should if they can structurally take down the wall between the news studio and New Day Studio and make a larger studio for both. New Day dropped the studio audience even before COVID.

 

[Kelly A]

KING should if they can structurally take down the wall between the news studio and New Day Studio and make a larger studio for both. New Day dropped the studio audience even before COVID.

And that would improve their news broadcasts how?

 

[Kelly A]

Yes, KING thought it would be cool to be near the stadium district but most viewers don’t care. In return KING got a relatively small space. Yep, Spokane stations have a better look than KING.

You forget that they sold the old building/property for a boat load of cash?

 

[seatownmedia]

No I didn’t forget but true I don’t remember what I had for dinner last night. But seriously trying to move a major market news operation into a small window studio near T-Mobile was not a great move, IMO. I guess they got anamored with the location, but again this means little to viewers. I remember when they first moved there the traffic in the background was not pedestrians but mostly large haul trucks! So they turned the set around to not show that. I don’t know what they were thinking.

 

[KMan]

Do they use the window view at all? IIRC the set was designed so they could have the window background, or the wall background.

 

[seatownmedia]

The last few viewings, no. But I don’t live in Seattle any longer so I could be wrong.

 

[seatownmedia]

But what if that branding statement no longer resonates with a modern audience? TV spends a ton more on audience research and perception than radio.

Well, ask KABC about that. They still use the slogan and still are number one in LA but just in evenings. They certainly have stiff competition in other dayparts, which in LA, is about every hour of the day.

 

[Kelly A]

Well, ask KABC about that. They still use the slogan and still are number one in LA but just in evenings. They certainly have stiff competition in other dayparts, which in LA, is about every hour of the day.

When it comes to slogans, not every market is the same. Different markets have different needs. Some of that is due to the number of stations within a market duking it out for the same audience.

We used to do yearly perceptual studies, checking to make sure each one of the individual station slogans resonated with the audience in that market. From an older viewer/participant' perspective; 'Eyewitness News' meant lots of breaking news, first on the scene, etc. If the market or news department couldn't provide a steady flow of truly breaking-news, the slogan meant little to those older viewers.

Its been shown that many markets would prefer their local news be an advocate for them. That's where you see slogans like: 'On your side' (not one of my favorites), 'Working for you', and 'The Home Team'. If you account for societal-generational shifts too, how often is the term "eyewitness" even used today? The term was commonly used by newspapers to describe someone who saw the event first hand. If you asked a Millennial or Gen-Z participant what the term eyewitness meant to them, you'd probably get a blank stare.

 

[The New Chico]

It's not too hard to fill 3/4's of the broadcast with this kind of content when you see some of the crime that takes place around Seattle.

Or any other major city.

Just easier to find lurid crimes in a city of 700,000 vs. smaller towns. I just looked at the macro data from the FBI over the last 20 years and the numbers really don't show much of a trend at all- pretty steady crime rates. If anything, crime rates in Seattle, WA and nationwide have been slowly and steadily dropping for the last 50 years on a per capita basis.

Not that you would glean this from KOMO's content. But think about how you can stretch out one crime over many days/weeks/months/even years to give the impression of lawlessness in the streets. First there is the crime itself. Then you can file follow up stories about the victims. Then you can file more stories about the search for suspects. Then they get arrested so there is a whole new set of reports. THEN you get arraignments, trial dates, the actual trial, sentencing, appeals and finally the story showing the perps being hauled away. And that is all for one crime. If it is a flashy/sexy/lurid/violent crime you can milk that sucker for dozens if not hundreds of reports. Get another crime, rinse and repeat. Not at all hard to fill a major city's newscast with this full time if you choose.

And remember about all the folks on this board accurately describing the bleads/leads deal. Murders are actually exceptionally rare- so if you get a few extra in a given time frame it is such a small data set that you can accurately lead with "Violent Crime Up 20% over this time last year." But when the blip goes away in 3 months, as they often do, you rarely see the headline "Violent Crime Goes Down 20% over this time last year." That story doesn't sell- it's good news.

Finally, and I have seen a LOT of this recently, there is the ol' "Skyrocketing Crime in Seattle" story where they very carefully cherry-pick the data that will support the headline. Yeah, all crime is way up in Seattle, Lynnwood, Kalamazoo, and I suppose Mexico from this time two years ago. No kidding. WE WERE IN LOCKDOWN TWO YEARS AGO- crime drops through the floor during lockdowns. I mean, c'mon, just think about that. Now that we are not in lockdown, even a resumption of normal crime levels will look pretty horrible if you package it right, without that context. Makes for a great headline- it is intellectually dishonest, but seems like nobody is losing sleep about that situation any more.