• 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

CBS: This Morning

E

e-dawg

Since it's been 2 months the show debut, what do you think about this new show? To me, I find it more refreshing that watching Today or GMA.
 
It willl never beat GMA or Today, but it is a solid news alternative for those wanting to avoid all the fluff.

Not sure Charlie Rose is a long term solution, but at least he can get the format established.
 
I love it...real news...solid interviews. At 70, Rose is not the long-term solution, but I'm not sure who could replace him long term. There just aren't many younger solid interviewers right now. Maybe someone like Lester Holt could take over, but that's just about all I can think of right now.
 
Sign him. Bring him in just a couple days at a time. Let viewers get used to him. Then the transition will be much, much smoother!
 
Does anyone know what the ratings are like? In passing Howard Stern was saying the ratings are worse for Charlie Rose & Gayle King than for the previous hosts they replaced.

It's just amazing how CBS has tried and tried to find a morning show to compete with Today and GMA for decades. People call it "The Curse of The Captain" refering to CBS forcing Captain Kangaroo from weekdays to Saturdays to make way for a two hour morning show.


Gregg
[email protected]
 
A handful of people still call it that. The rest of the world doesn't care an iota nor attribute such things to "curses" or other mumbo jumbo. :D
 
There are millions of "curses" that most of the world is unaware of. It's just a pop culture reference...but isn't it at least a bit odd that the Tiffany Network...the one that from a news standpoint led the rest of the US into Television News, hasn't been able to sniff first place in this particular time slot...ever?

Both "Today" and "GMA" have had their tweaks and adjustments over the years, I've long since lost track of how many reboots CBS has had since they drydocked the Captain.
 
formeraa said:
I love it...real news...solid interviews. At 70, Rose is not the long-term solution, but I'm not sure who could replace him long term. There just aren't many younger solid interviewers right now. Maybe someone like Lester Holt could take over, but that's just about all I can think of right now.
Click to expand...

I like the CBS This Morning and CBS Evening news they have a better content than ABC. Ever since
Charles Gibson retired and Peter Jennings death ABC started to lean more on the stories that HLN does.
 
It just goes to show that the majority of the American Public don't want hard news in the morning. As a reminder, CBS tried hard news in the mornings BEFORE GMA was around and couldn't break the stranglehold of The Today Show. Never actually liked Captain Kangaroo much as a kid growing up in the late 60's and 70's.
 
CBS was once very competitive with NBC in the 7-8 AM hour. It was back in 1953, when Jack Paar was doing a talk program in that timeslot live, mixing hard news delivered by Charles Collingwood at the top and bottom of the hour with light features, comedy and live music. Paar had a lot to do with the format and structure of the show. It was formatted a lot like the morning radio show he'd done a decade earlier at WBEN in Buffalo before he was drafted into the Army in World War II. (He never came back to Buffalo after the war, parlaying his radio experience and wartime work with an Army entertainment unit into network radio gigs and occasional film work in LA and New York, and eventually TV stardom.) The show did well--but CBS decided to surrender that hour to the affiliates within a year and move Paar's program into what they thought would be a more lucrative midday hour.

In the short run the move out of the breakfast hour worked for CBS, since Paar continued to draw well with a mid-morning start and brought even more advertising to CBS at better rates until he left for NBC and the Tonight Show in 1957. (He also did prime time summer shows for CBS in the mid-50s--as did his eventual Tonight Show successor Johnny Carson.) It took another decade for CBS to try again in the 7-8 AM hour, and they've yet to find a working formula to compete with NBC and later ABC, or match the early morning audience share Jack Paar brought them back in 1953.

Maybe CBS should go "back to the future" and try once more to do a Paar-style mix of hard news at the top and bottom of the hour with lighter fare the rest of the hour, all pulled together by a smart, witty host who can be funny every morning--or carry a serious show on those occasions when the news of the moment is dark and somber and requires a serious tone and approach. It would be a much different show than the other broadcast and cable networks are offering, and might just be the ticket. We've had people on TV who could carry it off. Paar is gone, Dick Cavett is retired, but someone like Jon Stewart might be just the guy to do it. If they can't get him, maybe they can find a bright young morning radio personality with TV potential and build a show around him or her the same way they did with Paar, who was just an emerging performer in his early 30s when he first got the CBS morning gig.
 
I doubt it would be wise for CBS to attempt a programming strategy last tried nearly 60 years ago.
 
Both Today and GMA have such a surmountable lead over CBS's Morning Show that it will take years before CBS can be competitive.

I've tried watching CBS This Morning and feel that the show has potential. However after making that comment, I've noticed that CBS has also been inserting "fluff pieces" into their broadcasts. They are just not as obvious as Today and GMA.

If you want to watch a pathetic morning show try watching Imus on the Fox Business Channel.
What was once an entertaining show has turned into a TV version of a sleeping pill.
 
Mark_Giardina said:
Both Today and GMA have such a surmountable lead over CBS's Morning Show that it will take years before CBS can be competitive.
Click to expand...

I don't totally agree with this statement. A lot of people said that GMA would never work, people don't want a fluffy show, etc., etc., etc. However, GMA was #1 within less than a decade. If CBS could find a unique formula that works in the morning, they could find their way to #1. However, I don't believe that the current generation really wants hard news in the morning -- they just want sound bites, crashing graphics, and personalities.
 
"I doubt it would be wise for CBS to attempt a programming strategy last tried nearly 60 years ago."

By that logic, NBC ought to dump the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and CBS should cancel The Late Show with David Letterman, because they're all variations on a theme first created by Steve Allen and Pat Weaver back in 1953 on WNBT in New York.

In television, like everything else, it's not necessarily the strategy itself that needs to be all-new--it's the way the strategy is executed. A new iteration of a successful mix of information and light entertainment from the past would be enough of a change of pace in the 7-9 AM daypart to attract sampling--and if it's well done with appealing personalities to present it, it could become a very successful morning show that holds and builds an audience. CBS has little to lose at this point by breaking away from the news parade.
 
Bob1370 said:
"I doubt it would be wise for CBS to attempt a programming strategy last tried nearly 60 years ago."

By that logic, NBC ought to dump the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and CBS should cancel The Late Show with David Letterman, because they're all variations on a theme first created by Steve Allen and Pat Weaver back in 1953 on WNBT in New York.

In television, like everything else, it's not necessarily the strategy itself that needs to be all-new--it's the way the strategy is executed. A new iteration of a successful mix of information and light entertainment from the past would be enough of a change of pace in the 7-9 AM daypart to attract sampling--and if it's well done with appealing personalities to present it, it could become a very successful morning show that holds and builds an audience. CBS has little to lose at this point by breaking away from the news parade.

Agreed. CBS is offering a product that is much different than Today and GMA. I like it. Time will tell if they make any inroads.
Click to expand...
 
The reply button is not working tonight. For some reason this post is not disconnected to the last post. The last sentence was mine. -Searadiofreak.
 
Mid 30s here and I much <i>much</i> prefer CBS This Morning to GMA or Today. I don't mind an occasional puff piece, but I don't care to see Lindsay Lohan's latest misadventure or whatever other celebutant-of-the-week is in trouble to lead the program like they too often do.

I hope Fager and the new CBS News management decide that serving a niche audience isn't necessarily a bad thing.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom