Major Breaking News Overnight

[JeeperOne]

In an old thread just recently bumped up, people were talking about Breaking News during AM shows. Well what has become EVEN MORE of a odyssey is breaking news during late night hours

A CLASSIC (And perhaps most recent) example of this was the Aurora Theater Shooting a few years ago which occured a little after Midnight LOCAL time (That's 2:00 AM ET & 11:00 PM PT)

As many of you know, KUSA 9 was the only local station doing ANY kind of reporting at all on the shooting. Because of this, CNN & even Fox News picked them up & just simply let 'em talk (I'm assuming it's because both nets knew they not only had nothing to add but KUSA was able to get more information (Albeit scant) faster than either of them could). MSNBC didn't go live AT ALL with the story until the next morning

Over on the OTA nets, all of them were broadcasting regular programming. Even ABC didn't cut in until two or three hours after the shooting (And their overnight newscast was on most of the network). Shortly after that, KMGH dropped ABC & went local with Marc Stewart reporting from the newsroom (No crew at the theatre). KCNC (Shamefully enough for them) & KDVR went on the air with the story almost simultaneously (If I remember right)

But what AMAZES me is why the West Coast, Alaska & Hawaii stations didn't pick up on it ESPECIALLY since they were on the air with the late news until 11:35 PM PT (12:35 AM MT). Looking at local station websites, there was no mention of it. I didn't get around to checking Gannett owned KXTV 10 in Sacramento but I suspect NOT EVEN THEY picked up on it (And they're a sister station of KUSA)

Can anyone think of any others ??

Cheers & 73

 

[DToTheJ]

I would say major breaking weather activity would warrant breaking into regularly scheduled overnight programming. Just look at Superstorm Sandy.

 

[JeeperOne]

I would say major breaking weather activity would warrant breaking into regularly scheduled overnight programming. Just look at Superstorm Sandy.

An apple vs. a carrot

Sandy was expected for DAYS. I'm talking about COMPLETELY UNEXPECTED & UNPLANNED events like the Aurora Theater Shooting

Cheers & 73

 

[PTBoardOp94]

If one guy shot his wife at a theatre, that's not breaking news that you'd interrupt programming for in Denver, and especially not in Sacremento. It was about 12:54 AM before the number of casualties became apparent. That's well after all the newscasts are concluded in all time zones. There's no reason to criticize stations in Pacific Time for not reporting this in their late news.

The other situation I'd mention would be the shootout with the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston. I think that took place around 11:30 ET, but I don't recall any special reports on the broadcast networks until morning when Boston was shut down.

 

[JeeperOne]

If one guy shot his wife at a theatre, that's not breaking news that you'd interrupt programming for in Denver, and especially not in Sacremento. It was about 12:54 AM before the number of casualties became apparent. That's well after all the newscasts are concluded in all time zones. There's no reason to criticize stations in Pacific Time for not reporting this in their late news.

There was more than one person killed

Does the name JAMES HOLMES jog your memory ??

The other situation I'd mention would be the shootout with the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston. I think that took place around 11:30 ET, but I don't recall any special reports on the broadcast networks until morning when Boston was shut down.

Except the manhunt for the Tsarnaev brothers took the whole week & didn't involve hundreds of people at a public place

Plus, the shootout only lasted a few minutes & the media knew the police didn't have any more details than they hadn't already elaborated. Finally, there was Twitter & Facebook (Of course Twitter & Facebook existed during the Theatre Shooting too but that scene was chaotic & because of that, solid, verifiable details were scant for the first few hours

Cheers & 73

 

[PTBoardOp94]

There was more than one person killed

Does the name JAMES HOLMES jog your memory ??

There's no need to be snide.
I'm telling you that a report of a shooting at a theater, with unknown number of victims, in suburban Denver isn't "Breaking News" in Sacramento. People get shot all the time in all kinds of places, there was nothing special about the Aurora theater shooting until it became clear it was a mass murder, just before 1AM mountain. By then all the Pacific Time stations were done with their newscasts and the stations were going to let the networks decide whether or not to break in.

I don't claim to explain why the networks didn't break in during the 1AM MT/3AM ET hour. I'd guess lack of audience.

 

[Ultimajock]

...in the old days of radio, The UK and France declaring war on Germany in 1939 and the D-Day Invasion in 1944 both broke in the overnight hours US time. The assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 occurred well after most East Coast stations would have signed off for the night...

 

[danderson4411]

In an old thread just recently bumped up, people were talking about Breaking News during AM shows. Well what has become EVEN MORE of a odyssey is breaking news during late night hours

A CLASSIC (And perhaps most recent) example of this was the Aurora Theater Shooting a few years ago which occured a little after Midnight LOCAL time (That's 2:00 AM ET & 11:00 PM PT)

As many of you know, KUSA 9 was the only local station doing ANY kind of reporting at all on the shooting. Because of this, CNN & even Fox News picked them up & just simply let 'em talk (I'm assuming it's because both nets knew they not only had nothing to add but KUSA was able to get more information (Albeit scant) faster than either of them could). MSNBC didn't go live AT ALL with the story until the next morning

Over on the OTA nets, all of them were broadcasting regular programming. Even ABC didn't cut in until two or three hours after the shooting (And their overnight newscast was on most of the network). Shortly after that, KMGH dropped ABC & went local with Marc Stewart reporting from the newsroom (No crew at the theatre). KCNC (Shamefully enough for them) & KDVR went on the air with the story almost simultaneously (If I remember right)

But what AMAZES me is why the West Coast, Alaska & Hawaii stations didn't pick up on it ESPECIALLY since they were on the air with the late news until 11:35 PM PT (12:35 AM MT). Looking at local station websites, there was no mention of it. I didn't get around to checking Gannett owned KXTV 10 in Sacramento but I suspect NOT EVEN THEY picked up on it (And they're a sister station of KUSA)

Can anyone think of any others ??

Cheers & 73

do you know who anchored for kusa i rember watching their coverage online

 

[JeeperOne]

do you know who anchored for kusa i rember watching their coverage online

No one at the anchor desk or in the newsroom. They just had the two reporters (One of whom is now an anchor there) near the theatre itself

As indicated earlier,both CNN & (Ironically) Fox News used that coverage when breaking the news of it to the nation. MSNBC OTOH just stuck with its reruns of the previous night's primetime shows

ABC eventually broke the news during its overnight newscast using reporting from a variety of sources (KUSA obviously not being one of them, though I'm sure even they used some of the video footage since that was the only video available). Shortly after that, KMGH finally dropped ABC & went local with Marc Stewart in the newsroom (I'm sure they felt a little embarrassed the network beat them to a story IN THEIR OWN BACKYARD though so I'll show a little mercy )

BTW - KMGH had (And still does) a dedicated 24/7 news channel on 7.2 which was the (And still is) available on Comcast channel 247 (Get it ?? 247 as in 24/7 ) they could've used (All it does in non newscast hours & whenever there's not breaking news of local interest only is repeat the latest newscast). Not sure why they didn't start their coverage on NewsChannel 247 (That's the name of it BTW) & expand the coverage to include 7.1 as well once the magnitude of the story became clear though. Weird.....

CBS didn't even MENTION the news (Let alone utilize UTTM to begin covering it like ABC did with WNN) & KCNC didn't drop CBS to go local either. As for KDVR (Or even KWGN), I wasn't all that surprised they didn't break in given their resources (But I was a little surprised they didn't mention it on THEIR WEBSITE though)

Anyone else recall other such major UNEXPECTED breaking news events that broke overnight ?? I personally can't think of anything that pales in comparison to this.....

Cheers & 73

 

[Silkie]

Middle of the night or any other "breaking news" generally has to fit a narrative for it to broadcast everywhere. Rural places especially do not mind at all that everyone else does not know the sorts of things that may go on in their part of the country or world; and they don't generally know the embarrassment they incur on themselves when they try to sweep it all under the rug by their various methods.

 

[nathannah]

The first problem with big breaking news stories overnights is that there's few people up to make the call on whether to break in at all at that time of evening; all you have is the late night stringers, maybe the morning anchors if you can rouse them awake early, and for the most part, the night beat in many cities is either covered by third shifters who might not feel comfortable making the call to break in, or freelancers that still have that second step of footages prices and copying before video is offered to a station. In the theater shooting for instance the local stations probably sent their usual overnight team at first used to covering small accidents and the usual assortment of robberies and stabbings/shootings. It took awhile to realize that it probably wasn't enough to encapsulate in the usual 'crime roll' block where it was quickly forgotten.

The Boston story actually started around 10pm; I remember tracking Twitter and the scanners all night on that one. Again, the networks are pretty much done at that time (blame for instance, the Yassar Arafat death report on CBS for networks no longer letting overnight teams make the calls themselves to go into coverage). The local stations were on it at first with the shooting at MIT and didn't make the connection until the chase into the suburbs started, while even the cable news channels stuck to tape until about 1am when it became clear the events were connected. At least in that case, ABC and CBS did allow their overnight shows to go live; as usual, repeat-filled NBC usually directed local stations to grab MSNBC once they finally got on a rolling feed of WHDH on.

.2 subchannels are very hard to break into, from my experience; very few watch (in Milwaukee, one station has a .2 rolling news feed, but it has zero cable coverage thanks to their former owner's stubbornness), and pretty soon stations learned that nobody knows how to work them because master control usually only works the main channel and not .2.

One more thing builds into it; infomercials. Stations would probably rather want all the full facts than lose revenue by pre-empting paid programming. It's all about the lack of staff and the set-in grudge against them being able to break in, despite most of the third shift work being the foundation of many a morning newscast.

 

[TheBigA]

This thread is based on the idea that the media still operates the way it did 50 years ago when we had 3 broadcast networks and antennas on our roofs. Back then, it wasn't unusual for the networks to break into regular programming with a bulletin that the President is dead.

As far as breaking news overnight, even the cable news channels usually are doing re-runs overnight, but have access to staff if they need to ramp up for an emergency. Most network affiliates have access to national news alerts. I doubt an out of town affiliate would go wall-to-wall with a local major news story like a theater shooting. That's big local news, and might be worth interrupting repeats on CNN, but not a local out of town station.

These days, we don't program in a linear way. We don't program a stations to be all things to all people. We specialize. So if a tornado is coming to Oklahoma, you staff up for it, and go wall-to-wall. But a local station in Minnesota doesn't care. Anyone there who does most likely has access to a cable news channel. Because when you interrupt regular programming, you interrupt the viewing habits of that audience. And you're doing it with information that most people don't care about. The breaking news most likely also runs without commercials, so you lose revenue. If running breaking news angers regular viewers, and costs money, the question is: Why do it? If you don't have a good reason, you don't do it.

 

[Silkie]

The problem is that three broadcast networks are little more than throwbacks, and you can throw a couple of cable networks in there too, since they are pretty much affiliated.

 

[TheBigA]

That's what I said.

 

[Tim-In-Houston]

I was producing the 7am newscast the morning of the aurora shooting, for the Houston Fox O&O. We didn't hear about it until our morning live reporter walked into the newsroom and mentioned it after hearing it on the radio at about 3:15a CT.

Up to that point, there hadn't been so much as an AP alert come across our newsroom computer system and certainly nothing from the affiliate desk in New York (they can alert the affiliates directly to changes in the satellite feed).

It wasn't to long, though, after she arrived that the first reports of mass casualties started coming in.

Prior to that, the last big overnight breaking news I can recall was the Haiti earthquake. I was working mornings in Montana and abc world news now was wall to wall with coverage.

 

[danderson4411]

i watched kusas coverage on the web i scared me because of what happened

 

[ixnay]

The first problem with big breaking news stories overnights is that there's few people up to make the call on whether to break in at all at that time of evening; all you have is the late night stringers, maybe the morning anchors if you can rouse them awake early,

And if they're anchorwomen, you gotta make'em *pretty* for when the floor director gives the cue... Thank God I'm a man, iykwim...

ixnay

 

[newsmark]

The first problem with big breaking news stories overnights is that there's few people up to make the call on whether to break in at all at that time of evening; .

Most stations don't have any directors, audio operators, graphics people or studio crew in place to go live overnight. Even a skeleton crew would require 2-3 production employees, and most morning production folks don't get in 'til an hour or two before the show starts. Then if the producers have to go to the control room to oversee live coverage, there's no one left to prepare the regular morning newscast.

I think in most markets, viewing levels aren't high enough at 1 or 2 AM to justify bringing all of those folks in. Now, in the event of something happening in the evening that carries over into the overnight, you might have an audience.

 

[TheBigA]

Most stations don't have any directors, audio operators, graphics people or studio crew in place to go live overnight.

The issue in the OP isn't even a local story. It's about reporting an out-of-town story as breaking news. My point is that's superfluous.

 

[newsmark]

The issue in the OP isn't even a local story. It's about reporting an out-of-town story as breaking news. My point is that's superfluous.

True. However the OP also mentioned the networks not being on the air with the Aurora Theater Shooting. It would take several hours, minimum, for the nets to get people into place to go live with the story, so they'd have to rely on the local station--even if it's just to take their live picture. If the stations aren't geared up to go live, the nets are stuck.