• 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

Cindy Michaels TV Debut

N

Nelz

For the first time in many years I watched ABC7's newscast, primarily to watch Cindy Michaels news anchor debut. As expected, she
not only delivered well, but she also has a TV face. As you know, there are a number of great looking people (at least in person) that look like
hell on camera. Not the case with Cindy.

After a week or two, Cindy will own the place. Like the many great newstypes that have graced the news department at ABC7 through the years, Cindy also has the potential to move on to larger markets or at least higher rated stations...and she will. With hardwork, support, and a great coach/mentor, she'll do great things in the biz.
 
:(

It's too bad we can't watch Cindy in Southern Maine. I know the Time-Warner Cable Service I have (formerly Adelphia) doesn't carry Channel 7 from Bangor. [We have the Channel 7 that originates in Boston].

Nevertheless, I wish Cindy ALL THE BEST in her new anchor position.

argytunes
 
Did I watch the wrong newscast? She looked scared to death and very uncomfortable. I'm sure she will grow into her new role but for now it's tough to watch. They should have given her a few weeks of short on camera segments before putting her in the anchor chair to help her become more comfortable. Best of luck to her.
 
Most times there's nothing like baptism by fire to hasten the comfort factor in front of the camera or behind the mic. Every on-air person goes through that period of adjustment before they find their rhythm....even after they've changed stations. Like I said before, give her a couple of weeks and she'll own the place. I'd hate to hear the comments about me when I first started. Yikes! Every once in a great, great while I'll dig up some old aircheck tapes and laugh my a__ off. I thought I was so good. Holy crap, I sucked. Some would agree that I still do.
 
I think Cindy is doing a pretty good job...considering she's never TV before. I'm sure she'll find her comfort zone really soon. Her bigger challenge is earning the news credibility. It wasn't all that long ago that she played the bachelorette on B97. I'm not saying she won't acheive it...but earning news credentials takes time.
 
Regarding her playing the bachelorette on B97, good point... but....

I don't think too many B97 listeners watch TV news. Different demo. So perhaps she's saved.
 
::)

Just a comment to Nelz and anybody else reading this...

Sometimes television "baptism by fire" takes a little longer for 'radio talent?' The camera is something additional to 'contend with!'

Most of us who only 'use our voices in front of a microphone' don't have to worry about the clothes we're wearing...or whether we look a little scruffy! NOBODY CAN SEE US!

So for the few who might think that Cindy looks a little uncomfortable on-camera, what's wrong with giving her a little time to get used to it? I know a few broadcasters who began in radio, jumped to TV and in some cases, a comfortable transition took almost A YEAR!

argytunes
 
Are you kiddin', Argy? I look great behind the mic! Ha! My mother even told me so.

You're right it may take some time. But if you've done radio for a while, it will help quicken things up a bit. I think the best TV news people were once radio people. She has done promotional events for radio that were covered by local TV stations, and did quite well in front of the camera. I believe she may have even done a TV commercial or two.

The bachelorette thingie is not a big deal. Credibility takes some time, no matter what. You earn it. It's a fact that people like a mature news person. It takes much longer for a young news reporter to earn that credibility on that element alone.

Wow, Cindy is sure getting a lot of attention all ready. It's great!

nelz
 
Yeah, Cindy does seem a little nervous but at Channel 7, I'm sure she is on her own.
I doubt they have a "mentoring"  program. But Cindy is a very hard worker and loves a challenge. In a few weeks, she will have it down and be as good as anyone in the Bangor or Portland markets. She does need someone to work with who can challenge her as an on the air "partner ."  Prediction: She will do very well in TV and will be in a much bigger market within a year.
 
;)

Hi Nelz!

I think it's safe to say that most on-air radio personalities look TERRIFIC in front of a microphone....providing there's no portacam present to catch us spilling our coffee, dropping crumbs or powder from a donut, scratching our heads or picking our noses!

I definitely AGREE that some of the best TV newspeople were originally RADIO PEOPLE! Simply because they have more practice 'adlibbing' whenever there's a technical crisis!

The morning anchor team at WCSH-6 in Portland has faced 'technical gliches' several times. Lee Nelson, Sharon Rose, and Kevin Mannix have all managed to adlib their way out of the problem...and move forward whenever this happens!

Speaking of bachelorettes, Kylie Bennett (one of the evening anchors from NEWS CHANNEL 13 in Portland) became a "Mrs." a few weekends ago. A DEFINITE WISH FOR CONGRATULATIONS TO KYLIE & HER NEW HUSBAND...even though she has probably left thousands of "interested male suitors" a little sad! :'(

argytunes

argytunes
 
Would we even be having this discussion if Cindy wasn't a "hottie" and single? I bet NOT!
 
???

Maybe Channel 7 will do a feature story on Cindy in a few months?

It could begin with a long line of "potential suitors" waiting in the parking lot to invite her to...err...join them for dinner? ;)

argytunes
 
I worked with her for many years, and as a person she is great. We would still have this conversation if she was not a hottie, because, she has a great personality, and an enourmous talent. I missed her first three newscasts. I wanted her to have a few days to work out the kinks before I tuned in, and I have to say, on day 4, she was doing great, like she had been doing it for much longer. Give her a year and watch out Katie Couric! Radio's loss is TV's gain. It's nice to know that WVII/WFVX, with Cindy, is now in a position to grab a lot more viewers!
 
Unfortunately, Cindy's good looks and talent won't do anything for WVII. People already have their favorites. People said Jan Smith would turn things around when she left Ch2 and went to Ch 7. Nothing changed. The same thing is happening with Katie C. on CBS. She is loved by millions...but her newscast is still in last place. Why? Because people already have a favorite and it takes a lot more than a personnel change to make a difference. Nothing against Cindy or Katie. It's just human nature.
 
Plus, the bonehead comments made by the station's G-M about Global Warming stories (article in yesteday's BDN) certainly won't help. WVII will always be....well...WVII.
 
Whether there's "conclusive" evidence to support global warming or not is hardly the point. The fact is: there are a large number of people who DO believe it's an issue of genuine concern. THAT is what makes it newsworthy.

Mr. Palmer should stick to his role of General Manager, and leave the "science" to those on BOTH sides who are qualified to debate the issue.
 
Bang Bang, you're certainly right in principle. But my understanding is that the report that aired on WVII was politically tainted, and that the GM didn't want the news department to be promoting a stance.

There has to be an editor somewhere in each news organization, and I'm not sure that a street reporter is necessarily qualified to set those standards and make those judgements.

Again, from what I've heard about the piece that aired that lit the GM's fuse, it did not leave the science to those on BOTH sides of the issue. I think that was his point.

By the way, this has absolutely nothing to do with Cindy Michaels, does it??
 
I didn't hear anything about the report being politically tainted. But if that IS the case, then the REPORTER is the problem, not the ISSUE.

If the reporter had done a "politically tainted" story on TABOR or health care, would BANNING coverage of the ISSUE make sense? Of course not.

Anyway ... yeah ... Cindy Michaels. That's what we were talking about, right? Ha ha ha. I still haven't seen her on TV, but I'm told by a NUMBER of people that she's doing a great job.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom