-
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
HOT ANCHOR COMING TO KTVK
- Thread starter jonbruce
- Start date
I think a guy anchor would be hotter. 
Which brings up the question: how many morning anchors does it take to produce a 5.5 hour morning show? ;D
Seriously, they already have 2 anchors and 2 anchor/reporters!!! Then, again, I just looked at Allison Alexander's profile and it says "Fill-in Anchor/Reporter". So, perhaps Stella from Palm Springs, is the "permanent" secondary female anchor (kind of like Olivia Fierro was before she went to Vegas). Of course, with Tara's salary gone, they can probably hire 2 or 3 more "anchors".
Seriously, they already have 2 anchors and 2 anchor/reporters!!! Then, again, I just looked at Allison Alexander's profile and it says "Fill-in Anchor/Reporter". So, perhaps Stella from Palm Springs, is the "permanent" secondary female anchor (kind of like Olivia Fierro was before she went to Vegas). Of course, with Tara's salary gone, they can probably hire 2 or 3 more "anchors".
Wouldn't it be nice if we just had accomplished journalists doing the news?
Oh yeah, local news...models/actors, no brains required.
Oh yeah, local news...models/actors, no brains required.
Legend City said:
Yes, it would be nice if accomplished journalists did the news. For example, it takes "The New Times" to break the Paul Babeu story. Why on earth wasn't it one of the television news departments that endlessly advertise their investigative teams?!?
Oh, yes, the tv news departments are full of people who wear clothes well or were former beauty pageant participants.
formeraa said:
Jimmy Larkin & Mike Lacey are journalists fifty times over compared to select TV/Radio news reporters... 8)
Maybe, the Paul Babeu "New Times" piece will nudge an investigative type reporter on TV/Radio to get to work? ???
Maybe, the Paul Babeu "New Times" piece will nudge an investigative type reporter on TV/Radio to get to work?
Get to work? It's hardly their fault. They have a morning meeting everyday. They're given assignments. Period.
Blame Program directors, Assignment managers and/or News directors. These people I've mentioned are such control freaks that even if a reporter wanted to do an enterprising story, they would still need the OK from above...and usually it's too late.
Get to work? It's hardly their fault. They have a morning meeting everyday. They're given assignments. Period.
Blame Program directors, Assignment managers and/or News directors. These people I've mentioned are such control freaks that even if a reporter wanted to do an enterprising story, they would still need the OK from above...and usually it's too late.
formeraa said:
Allison posted this on her Facebook page in reply to a question about if she was still at 3TV: "I was hired with 3 on a temporary basis to fill in while kaley was on maternity leave. She's back, so I'm no longer there...but I loved the people there. "
OneHorse:
"Maybe, the Paul Babeu "New Times" piece will nudge an investigative type reporter on TV/Radio to get to work?"
I should have been more specific... should have said maybe this will wake up "Management" ???
sshheeeesh ??? The end result is what counts... INVESTIGATE.
"Maybe, the Paul Babeu "New Times" piece will nudge an investigative type reporter on TV/Radio to get to work?"
I should have been more specific... should have said maybe this will wake up "Management" ???
sshheeeesh ??? The end result is what counts... INVESTIGATE.
I can't say I'm a fan of local investigative reporting. It seems to me that these "reporters" are more concerned about being the news and destroying other people's lives for the sake of ratings rather than reporting the news. I'd be quite interested in others doing some of their own investigating work to see if these "reporters" are even qualified to report news . Who knows what kind of skeletons we could find in their closets.
2Son said:
I just also want to add this: I do not mind the facts being reported. It's just when the "investigative reporting" reports only allegations. How often do these reporters go back and say, "but they were disproven" or "but we were wrong" when allegations (because of their reporting) are proven to be wrong?
They do not care about the truth; they care only about ratings. A famous TV reporting quote is, "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story."
The sad, honest-to-goodness truth is that one or two people control the news that is put on TV, and they're not reporters. They're the people who work at the desk and work on the "daybook" in the computer. The movie "Anchorman" is not far off that they'll read anything put on the teleprompter. There is very little info confirmed or fact-checked. It's laughable to think journalism has rules that facts should be confirmed by two independent sources. It just doesn't exist in this day of breaking news-for-ratings.
For example, this is evidenced in the TV reporting of Gabby Giffords death, that her husband had to hear. If stations cared about the info they were disseminating as opposed to ONLY caring about being the first to break news to get ratings, that poor man would've been saved a whole lot of heartache. They reported it because someone said it. That's it. No one got an official word from a coroner or the police, or the U.S. government or her office, they just simply reported it because someone heard it.
It's really pathetic. If the general public really knew what goes on in the media behind the scenes, they'd be shocked. That's why I don't work for a TV station anymore...I couldn't deal with my co-workers betting money when the first light rail fatality was going to occur, or telling me that nobody cares about a dead hooker. I couldn't take enough showers.
I should've listened to Don Henley in 1982...he tried to tell us!
The sad, honest-to-goodness truth is that one or two people control the news that is put on TV, and they're not reporters. They're the people who work at the desk and work on the "daybook" in the computer. The movie "Anchorman" is not far off that they'll read anything put on the teleprompter. There is very little info confirmed or fact-checked. It's laughable to think journalism has rules that facts should be confirmed by two independent sources. It just doesn't exist in this day of breaking news-for-ratings.
For example, this is evidenced in the TV reporting of Gabby Giffords death, that her husband had to hear. If stations cared about the info they were disseminating as opposed to ONLY caring about being the first to break news to get ratings, that poor man would've been saved a whole lot of heartache. They reported it because someone said it. That's it. No one got an official word from a coroner or the police, or the U.S. government or her office, they just simply reported it because someone heard it.
It's really pathetic. If the general public really knew what goes on in the media behind the scenes, they'd be shocked. That's why I don't work for a TV station anymore...I couldn't deal with my co-workers betting money when the first light rail fatality was going to occur, or telling me that nobody cares about a dead hooker. I couldn't take enough showers.
I should've listened to Don Henley in 1982...he tried to tell us!
The advent of the internet and social media has certainly even made reporting rumors even more likely. After the death of Whitney Houston, KTVK and other outlets were reporting what stars had posted on their Facebook and Twitter accounts.
My question was: How do you know if it's the official/actual Facebook or Twitter account of the particular star? I see a lot of fake "similar" Facebook and Twitter accounts out there. I guess it was okay, though, because it was celebrity news.
My question was: How do you know if it's the official/actual Facebook or Twitter account of the particular star? I see a lot of fake "similar" Facebook and Twitter accounts out there. I guess it was okay, though, because it was celebrity news.
Brian4, do you know how the verification process works? Does Twitter actually call the star's agent or something? My fear is that they do it totally by email or something that really isn't "true" verification.
Facebook is rife with imitators -- you have to look very carefully to determine what is real or what is not.
Facebook is rife with imitators -- you have to look very carefully to determine what is real or what is not.
formeraa said:
Former, when Twitter first starting doing Verified Profiles, one of the owners explained that they confirm it's the real person. I can't remember what their internal process was. When Charlie Sheen has his meltdown, I believe his agent contacted Twitter and got his account verified.
2Son said:
It's becoming even more apparent to me that one station is going all out with this Babeu thing. Their young reporter is coming across as quite the little pushy one. Truths are important and I still am waiting for some concrete evidence since they keep shoving this story in our faces, but all I see are generalizations and hearsay being made by their "sources". I'm pretty turned off by this station now. I haven't seen the other stations pick up this "continuing" story, but it seems this station is making an all out crusade against this man by digging for anything and everything to ruin him. You can't convince me that this story isn't politically motivated. The station also keeps updating this "story" every so often to keep it bumped to the top of their webpage and it appears that they are now filtering the comments in their comments section.
- Status