• 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

Local stations covering a National story

I wanted to post this after reading the topic of sending local Phoenix reporters to a national story.

To the point...I don't see the need. A local reporter who already works in that city would be better to hire and do a report for our local viewers.

A case in point... On the evening of the San Francisco/Oakland earthquake back in 1989, San Francisco's KPIX put up their local anchor (whose name was Macelhinny...somebody can correct me on this)in studio on satellite. KOOL-TV, then still a CBS affiliate picked it up and fed it to local viewers.

He took the information that was being given to him and localized it in the sense that people could visualize what was going on. He'd say "there's a gas line break at (name of intersection) and then tell viewers "that's over by Macy's, or a park, down by the wharf, and whatever.

It was aggravating to see channel 10 interrupt this coverage to have a local report at Sky Harbor tell us that flights to and from the area were interrupted.

Gosh! No kidding! I never that of that! (Sarcasm mode: off)

B.S. (before satellites) networks had one line to feed news programming, entertainment, and whatever. It was noted in a TV Guide article (back in the 80s) that KTAR-TV/KPNX would often update the national news because that important national news story was (in the summertime) three hours old when played locally.

That I accept. But, nowadays in the age of satellites, why do local stations feel the need to cover the same stories? I mean, they do not add a local angle to the piece... they just rehash what we just heard, especially since what we just heard had been updated by the network for West Coast viewers.

I understand that people might just be getting home at six o'clock, but I don't want my local anchors to act like the viewers are hearing this from us for the first time. (It might be, but quit giving me these attitudes!)

Bottom line: local newspeople - cover the news here in this city. If its a national story give me a local angle or don't touch the subject at all.

Local stations - if you have any extra money in your budget find some other way to spend it locally to improve your product.

Just my two cents.

Rant mode: on idle.<P ID="signature">______________
Mike
MOR Memories - Class from the Past
http://www.mormemories.com
































</P>
 
I can understand what you're saying but in certain cases there is a viewer need.

For instance in Chicago, we have local reporters down in New Orleans. The Chicago stations make the connection, that during the 30's there was a mass migration of African-Americans from Mississippi and Lousiana to Chicago.

Now this is so. HOWEVER they fail to realize, a vast majority of that migration came from the Delta Area of Mississippi(North MS especially Greenville), not the Biloxi/Gulfport area which was affected. Also this is the case in Louisiana. (You'll note Chicago styles of cooking and music, is very much similar to Memphis)

So while Chicago does have a LOT of viewers with ties to MS/LA, most are from areas in MS north of Jackson and in LA north of Baton Rouge.
So the Chicago stations are linking to things not quite 100% accurate<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom