Dave McKinley's departure to Channel 2 in Buffalo leaves WROC with virtually no veteran beat reporters who are familiar with the Rochester area, let alone have nutured informed sources over the years like McKinley did while at Channel 8 and WHAM radio. I believe Elizabeth Hartness is the only beat reporter left with seniority and I wouldn't be surprised if she's looking to bail out too. It's a shame that the company that owns Channel 8 won't spend money and hire local, experienced talent. Then again who wants to work for a company that has a reputation of re-negotiating contacts by offering people less money than they are currently making?
-
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
McKinley's Departure: What it means for Channel 8
- Thread starter The Voice of Reason
- Start date
Well I suppose they will have at some point search for local talent to grow. Realistically speaking I can't imagine those being transferred to Rochester or any other upstate are thrilled, unless they are some truly bottom of the barrel reporters who finding it next to impossible to find work or some untalented hack who plans use a two-year experience in Rochester on their resume as their stepping stone towards their dream goal of anchoring the perennially last place weekend morning newscast in Miami or something fancy like that.
It seems sometime Nexstar prefers the latter group...
It seems sometime Nexstar prefers the latter group...
dustintv said:
No local talent worth their salt would leave Channels 10 or 13 and go to work for 8. 8 will have to import more of those "Elmira refugees" or people with 2 years or less experience in order to fill their depleted on-air staff. The only thing keeping 8 going is their anchor team; and eventually some of those people might just get fed up enough to leave as well. Unfortunately they will have to leave town because 10 and 13 won't hire them.
I am sure Channel 8 will be able to move on just fine. 8 has remained competitive in recent years despite the turnover--so something tells me viewers aren't tuning in for the reporters.
As far as Dave goes, it is not like he cured cancer or anything--he was a good reporter in a smallish market. Anybody who was in Rochester that long should have been able to break a story from time to time.
As far as Dave goes, it is not like he cured cancer or anything--he was a good reporter in a smallish market. Anybody who was in Rochester that long should have been able to break a story from time to time.
Rochwatcher said:
Competitive! What channel are you watching? Not that they are much better but 10 and 13 far surpass 8 when it comes to breaking stories. 8 did break a number of stories however when Rachel was still employed there; but we all know what happened to her.
If you compare Dave to the rest of WROC's "2 years in the business veterans", he is a far superior reporter and news-gather; plus had knowledge of the Rochester market.
Voice--It is about ratings, plain and simple. 8's ratings are not as far back from 10 and 13 as you would think based on their product. That would seem to indicate that this is an ANCHOR town--viewers don't care about reporters, or even if there is a high turnover of reporters like there is at 8.
As far as reporters breaking stories, the likes of veteran reporters like Walsh, Flasch, Brean and Davidson broke just as many stories as Dave did, easily.
Sure Dave broke a few stories for 8, but shouldn't he have? He was in the market for many years, and surrounded by pups for colleagues at 8, of course he should have broken a story from time to time.
The same thing happened with Rachel, she left 8, and suddenly she isn't breaking the number of stories she was at 8--Dave and Rachel were both big fish in little ponds.
The world will continue to rotate without this guy at 8 or in the market. I think it is funny that some of you think the sky is falling because one person leaves a station--and it is a reporter at that.
As far as reporters breaking stories, the likes of veteran reporters like Walsh, Flasch, Brean and Davidson broke just as many stories as Dave did, easily.
Sure Dave broke a few stories for 8, but shouldn't he have? He was in the market for many years, and surrounded by pups for colleagues at 8, of course he should have broken a story from time to time.
The same thing happened with Rachel, she left 8, and suddenly she isn't breaking the number of stories she was at 8--Dave and Rachel were both big fish in little ponds.
The world will continue to rotate without this guy at 8 or in the market. I think it is funny that some of you think the sky is falling because one person leaves a station--and it is a reporter at that.
R
rocktv
Guest
Dave's leaving 8 IS a big deal. He knows the market, can judge what's a story and what's not, and has credibility that no one there has except for the main anchors. Rachel left 8 and now 13 is breaking her stories - not 8. The same will happen when Dave leaves - it helps 13 and 10.
Where Dave's leaving will hurt the most will be 8's sheer lack of institutional knowledge. You want to talk about people who have and know history? Dave's been there. From Terry Anderson being freed, to Arthur Shawcross, to the discovery of Kali Ann Poulton, to the Northeast Blackout, to 9-11, Dave has witnessed and reported them all. If you ask anyone in that Ch 8 newsroom who Kali Ann Poulton is, hands down one person for sure will know...John Kucko, that's it. No one else was there at the time and no one now would know who she was. Dave's strengths have come in his ability to showcase his knowledge of Rochester's news history. Something like that is priceless. I've watched countless stories that these newbies have done and cringed because they've missed some historical fact or point that could've made the story that much better. By WROC getting rid of Dave, Rachel, Levine and others, they've thumbed their nose at years of historical knowledge that could've been used to enhance their coverage. One post mentions ratings. Ratings are a farce in this market. While the rest of the country is moving on from "people meters", this one still languishes in the diary system. A system that only passes out some 2,000 books to a population of over 800,000 in this market!! What a joke!! It's such a flawed system that relies exclusively on the humen element. You are asking people to fill these things out and it only causes problems. I've seen these things and let me tell you, it ain't pretty. One viewer filled out a diary and said that she watched Don Alhart on RNews and just loved John Hambleton for the weather!! 
What?! Isn't Hambleton dead? I dunno. But I do know that Alhart isn't on RNews. You can skew numbers any which way you'd like, but until this market catches up and enters the 21st century, I'm not even entertaining or listening to arguments that categorize the stations as #1, #2, #3. If 8 wants to hire reporters that were born when Nirvana came on the music scene, fine. Just don't expect much in terms of local news gathering. I'm sorry to see Dave go. I wonder what's going to happen to all that film in the basement at 201 Humboldt? Maybe they can donate it to the Eastman House where it will be appreciated. :-\
What?! Isn't Hambleton dead? I dunno. But I do know that Alhart isn't on RNews. You can skew numbers any which way you'd like, but until this market catches up and enters the 21st century, I'm not even entertaining or listening to arguments that categorize the stations as #1, #2, #3. If 8 wants to hire reporters that were born when Nirvana came on the music scene, fine. Just don't expect much in terms of local news gathering. I'm sorry to see Dave go. I wonder what's going to happen to all that film in the basement at 201 Humboldt? Maybe they can donate it to the Eastman House where it will be appreciated. :-\
Our neighbors over in Buffalo did something magnificent with their news film - all three of the news operations in town donated their film archives to the Buffalo Broadcasters Foundation, which is now raising money to preserve and digitize it all.
If 8 isn't going to keep doing "News 8 Then" (and, really, how could they without Dave?), maybe it's time for a Rochester Broadcasters Foundation to start a similar project here. I believe 13 still has most of its film stored somewhere. 10 dumped its film when they went to ENG in the 70s, but much of it was salvaged and now resides at RMSC, albeit not very well cataloged the last time I saw it.
If 8 isn't going to keep doing "News 8 Then" (and, really, how could they without Dave?), maybe it's time for a Rochester Broadcasters Foundation to start a similar project here. I believe 13 still has most of its film stored somewhere. 10 dumped its film when they went to ENG in the 70s, but much of it was salvaged and now resides at RMSC, albeit not very well cataloged the last time I saw it.
What an absolutely wonderful idea Where do we start?
Where do we start?Scott Fybush said:
Do we even have a Rochester Broadcasters Foundation here?
I know that there are some archived materials from radio dating back to the 40's 50's and early 60s at St. John Fisher College; but it's contained in a very small space.
tvnewswatcher said:Where Dave's leaving will hurt the most will be 8's sheer lack of institutional knowledge. You want to talk about people who have and know history? Dave's been there. From Terry Anderson being freed, to Arthur Shawcross, to the discovery of Kali Ann Poulton, to the Northeast Blackout, to 9-11, Dave has witnessed and reported them all. If you ask anyone in that Ch 8 newsroom who Kali Ann Poulton is, hands down one person for sure will know...John Kucko, that's it. No one else was there at the time and no one now would know who she was. Dave's strengths have come in his ability to showcase his knowledge of Rochester's news history. Something like that is priceless. I've watched countless stories that these newbies have done and cringed because they've missed some historical fact or point that could've made the story that much better. By WROC getting rid of Dave, Rachel, Levine and others, they've thumbed their nose at years of historical knowledge that could've been used to enhance their coverage. One post mentions ratings. Ratings are a farce in this market. While the rest of the country is moving on from "people meters", this one still languishes in the diary system. A system that only passes out some 2,000 books to a population of over 800,000 in this market!! What a joke!! It's such a flawed system that relies exclusively on the humen element. You are asking people to fill these things out and it only causes problems. I've seen these things and let me tell you, it ain't pretty. One viewer filled out a diary and said that she watched Don Alhart on RNews and just loved John Hambleton for the weather!!
All excellent points as to why McKinley's departure is so unfortunate for viewers, but I am sure a good career move for him.
The sad point made clear in your posting is that a majority of TV viewers are clueless when it comes to the hard work of many veteran on-air reporters.
I had to chuckle about Alhart and R-news, but it is typical that some people know who Don Alhart is, but have no idea what channel he's on. Changing 13's call letters to WHAM didn't help either, as far as I am concerned.
As for John Hambleton , I believe he is still alive and living down south somewhere. He's been out of the Rochester market for at least a decade now, perhaps even longer.
I seldom watch local news anymore mostly because unless its the sweeps the news consists of murders, fires, traffic accidents, and fluff. But when I do watch I'm amazed not only at the number of new faces I see, but the lack of professionalism displayed on-air. As for having any history about Rochester, you're right; they are clueless!
Considering the decline in TV news viewership over the years I don't think people really give a damn anymore what passes for journalism. If you look close enough you can even see it on the faces of some of the veteran reporters. They have this "what the hell am I reporting this story for look."
The big media companies managed to destroy local radio news over the years, now apparently they are setting their sights on TV news. The only reason many stations even bother to carry news anymore I believe is because it still generates revenue; and that's all that counts: The bottom-line.
- Status