NBC turning the Weather Channel into Weather Plus 2.0?

[BRNout]

and not for the better[/b]. They claimed that "sugar is sugar", no matter what form it is. I beg to differ. If you want to get the original formula of Coca-Cola, buy it in Mexico or go to the Kosher Markets.

Absolutely true - at least in the US and (I believe) Canada. In fact, Coke, Pepsi and the other major sodas all use high-fructose corn syrup. As do many other products. Go elsewhere in the world and products like Coke and Pepsi are made with pure cane sugar. Mexicans know the difference which is why Mexican Coke is sold (supposedly under the radar of Coke) in many stores. In fact, Coca-Cola sold anywhere in Latin America and in most of the world still uses cane sugar.

The thing with corn syrup is that it's cheap, our government subsidizes it while having tariffs on sugar that keep the price up. Furthermore, your body will burn off the sugar like high-octane fuel. The high-fructose corn syrup isn't broken down in the same way and ends up translating into more fat on your body. It's not good for you, but it's the result of a powerful corn lobby in Washington.

Yet another example of how not all change is good. Then again, Homer would tell me that I am stuck in 1965 because I prefer Coke with real sugar than with chemically-enhanced corn sweetener.

But (to bring the thread back around) the Coke analogy is apt when speaking about the Weather Channel. New Coke was 'modern change' and it was an unmitigated flop. The replacement "Coke Classic" regained popularity - but isn't as good as it once was. In each case, quality was forsaken in the interest of change and profit. Yet some of the most profitable companies out there are those than rely on consistency and quality to sell their products. NBC has not been one of those entities in a very long time.

In fact, anyone who finds them self on the side of defending NBC's point of view needs to take a long look at their argument. Because, pretty much every move that company has made in the past couple of years has been a mistake. They have the "Midas" touch.....in reverse. And their fingerprints are all over the botched mess that TWC has become.

 

[anotherguyTN]

They are starting the movies back this Friday under the name 'Forecast And A Flick'.

Is this true? I couldn't find any news on this. And a Google search turned up a result of a blog which appears to have been deleted.

They've been advertising it this week, unless something changed at the last moment.

 

[imhomerjay]

Yeah, because USA has been such a failure. And the transition in NBC morning show hosts failed...and the transition in evening news anchors failed....and the transition of Meet the Press failed. Sure is a big failure when you maintain the number one position vs your major competitors.
:
And of course's there's no difference between food products and entertainment. That's an apples to apples comparison....please. Guess what--everything isn't "new Coke." And throwing it around as if it applies to every single change ever made shows a stunning lack of insight.

 

[DToTheJ]

They are starting the movies back this Friday under the name 'Forecast And A Flick'.

They've been advertising it this week, unless something changed at the last moment.

Yup... I guess it all starts next Friday with "Into Thin Air":
http://tvlistings.zap2it.com/tvlist...t&fromTimeInMillis=1269576000000&stnNum=11187

D'oh!

 

[BRNout]

Yeah, because USA has been such a failure. And the transition in NBC morning show hosts failed...and the transition in evening news anchors failed....and the transition of Meet the Press failed. Sure is a big failure when you maintain the number one position vs your major competitors.
:
And of course's there's no difference between food products and entertainment. That's an apples to apples comparison....please. Guess what--everything isn't "new Coke." And throwing it around as if it applies to every single change ever made shows a stunning lack of insight.

Thanks Homer! Now that's what I call cherry picking! Oh yeah, NBC is SO successful nowadays! Constantly making the right moves. Perhaps now you can run down some of AIG's financial successes of the past 3 years for us too...... ;D

Stunning lack of insight indeed. At least I now know who it was who asked: "aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?" Failure after failure at NBC Universal and you fail to even admit that's the case. How has the Weather Channel done since they took over? Hmmmmm.....

As for the Coke thing, it was merely a metaphor to counter your stock answer to every single critique on this board that we're 'luddites' (LOVE that old word) who are resistant to change. Well, if the change was an improvement, we wouldn't be against it now would we?

 

[imhomerjay]

Yes, I'd wager you pretty much would be, because you don't like it. "Improvement" isn't defined by a handful of cranks/luddites/wanna-be "experts" who inhabit a message board, though perhaps you'd like to give yourself that level of credit.

Now, as to the examples, not once, if you bothered to read or were willing to have honest discussions--which we know not to be the case--did I use the phrase (or a paraphrase thereof) that every move was the right one. But neither is everything the company has done a collosal failure. It's the old "win some/lose some" concept. The most successful companies across many industries all have their efforts that didn't go as hoped, but intellectual honesty necessitates looking at all things, not "cherry picking" as you have done (by the way, I won't even give you a "good try" on the transparent attempt at transferrence there).

 

[DToTheJ]

NBC-U ruins everything it touches. Al Roker is a friggin' joke, and Stephanie Abrams (sic) is too spastic. Both need to go...

I wouldn't be surprised if NBC eventually lets Abrams anchor "NBC Nightly News" when Brian Williams retires... wait, let me stop before I give them any ideas! (At least yet another idea to add to all of their bad ones...)

 

[MediaBoy4Radio]

You almost had it right.

The real plan is for Kathie Lee & Hoda to do the "Nightly News", but with an audience.

They will be reporting on the end of the world.

 

[BRNout]

Yes, I'd wager you pretty much would be, because you don't like it. "Improvement" isn't defined by a handful of cranks/luddites/wanna-be "experts" who inhabit a message board, though perhaps you'd like to give yourself that level of credit.

Now, as to the examples, not once, if you bothered to read or were willing to have honest discussions--which we know not to be the case--did I use the phrase (or a paraphrase thereof) that every move was the right one. But neither is everything the company has done a collosal failure. It's the old "win some/lose some" concept. The most successful companies across many industries all have their efforts that didn't go as hoped, but intellectual honesty necessitates looking at all things, not "cherry picking" as you have done (by the way, I won't even give you a "good try" on the transparent attempt at transferrence there).

Oh please! NBC is mired in 4th place. They're losing a lot more than they are winning. And quit with the "luddite" references. For one thing, it's not even true (of me at least) and secondly, hardly anyone ever uses that word outside of this board.

No, NBC will not be taking advice from those of us on a message board. I wouldn't expect them to. But that doesn't mean that we're wrong and they're right. That network's management has made a ton of mistakes in the past several years. And, the corporate-think that's gone in to their programming of TWC is just breathtaking. It's as if the reincarnation of Herb Tarlek is running that place.

Look, you don't know anything about me and that's fine. In fact, that's how these message boards work and it facilitates the free-flow of opinion and information. But I'd like to assure you that I am far from being some crank who lives in Mom's basement. Yes, I've worked in TV and I've even designed weathercasts. TWC used to be a great channel - I'd say that they hit their zenith about 4 or 5 years ago. Ever since NBC-U has taken over, they've diluted the brand with NBC's mediocrity.

That you've tried to twist and manipulate this discussion into some sort of a referendum on whether change is good and how posters on a message board are clueless, bitter and resist change is a shame. Because that totally avoids the nuts and bolts of this discussion (which, despite the comment made in your tantrum, I am willing to have).

Fact is, there are a lot of people (who know little about weather and weathercasting) now calling the shots at The Weather Channel who are pretty mediocre at programming but who are pretty good at sucking up to the right folks at corporate. Wake Up With Al (and the various taped segments played repeatedly all morning in place of live coverage) is a clear indicator of how their minds work. If they were making positive changes to the channel, I'd be the first one here with laudatory remarks. Unfortunately, they are going in the wrong direction - right down to the leftist political overtones that have become part and parcel of all NBC-U outlets. That was never what The Weather Channel was supposed to be about.

These buffoons are ruining it Homer, it is as simple as that.

 

[imhomerjay]

Gee, “luddites” seems to have hit a nerve. Oh well, not really my concern.

It doesn’t matter in the least what any particular channel was “intended” to be. It matters what today’s business realities are, not 2005’s, not 2000’s, not 1995’s. Things change, and business plans need to adapt. Some tactics will work, some will not; those that don’t will be discarded and replaced. Most importantly, what “works” isn’t defined by whether the bi-weekly meeting of the “It didn’t used to be that way” club is happy with it or not. Nor is what’s “good” defined by that group.

In a world of rising broadband availability, of iPhone apps, of three, four or five newscasts on the same TV “dial” as The Weather Channel running weather updates every “X” minutes (or constantly in some cases), how much relevance did the way the Weather Channel did things have for anything beyond a dwindling niche audience? Not a whole heck of a lot. (I’ve found it interesting in business travel over the last 15 years or so that where you could often find TVs in workout rooms and lobbies tuned to the Weather Channel, it’s far less the case today. Did business travelers suddenly stop caring about weather? Hardly. But when you can get it from a glance at your Blackberry, sitting through scads of irrelevant-to-you meteorological talk is a waste of time.)

Hard as it may be to fathom, you not liking something doesn’t make it bad TV, let alone bad business. I can’t stomach most reality TV (though I hardly get worked up to the level some folks seem to; I simply watch what I prefer and let others—who may just as strongly dislike what I enjoy—do the same). It’s the “to each their own” principle, and, thankfully, Radio-Info isn’t the arbiter of what is or isn’t worthy of being “on the air.”

If it was my job, though, to maximize profits, and if a reality show delivered the ad revenue at a lower cost, then the business decision would be simple. (As simple as if I were running a retail store and decided to drop a lower-selling, more expensive product from my limited shelf space to make room for something that actually sold well and put more money in the cash register.) Isn’t that the essence of capitalism?

There is nothing they can do that will appeal to everyone. I don’t “get” Al Roker’s appeal, but understand that other people have a different view of him—and a significant number of people at that. Doesn't make them right or wrong, nor me--just different tastes. If using that existing popularity brings in more eyeballs, and it’s more cost-effective, so be it. They’re not getting me to watch, but they didn’t get me to watch before, either, because they offered nothing I couldn’t get from a click of my computer, five minutes with any of the local morning news shows, or by checking my iPhone. At best, they might get me through the WeatherScan Local channel if I wanted to immediately see the radar, but the main channel? Nope. So trying to do something cheaper that may (a) get people to pay attention in a more cluttered world and (b) stay with it for more than a few seconds? Sorry, it ain’t about appealing to BRNout’s personal tastes, it’s about trying to improve the bottom line. If the ultimately decide they’re not happy with Roker’s results, they’ll change it—simple business.

If pretending that everyone who doesn’t share your tastes is stupid, great. Hope it makes you feel better, but it doesn’t make it true just because you believe it in your little bubble.

 

[azumanga]

Fact is, there are a lot of people (who know little about weather and weathercasting) now calling the shots at The Weather Channel who are pretty mediocre at programming but who are pretty good at sucking up to the right folks at corporate.

One of these is Geoffrey Darby, former executive at Nickelodeon, who's now running the show at TWC. While he was at Nick during the 1980s and 1990s (when Nick was at its most memorable), he's running TWC like he's running Nick -- a lot of style with little substance.

 

[benwolf]

Gee, “luddites” seems to have hit a nerve. Oh well, not really my concern.

In a world of rising broadband availability, of iPhone apps, of three, four or five newscasts on the same TV “dial” as The Weather Channel running weather updates every “X” minutes (or constantly in some cases), how much relevance did the way the Weather Channel did things have for anything beyond a dwindling niche audience? Not a whole heck of a lot. (I’ve found it interesting in business travel over the last 15 years or so that where you could often find TVs in workout rooms and lobbies tuned to the Weather Channel, it’s far less the case today. Did business travelers suddenly stop caring about weather? Hardly. But when you can get it from a glance at your Blackberry, sitting through scads of irrelevant-to-you meteorological talk is a waste of time.)

There is a mere fraction of IPhones out there compared to TV's. Plus the real reason for the (former) success of the Weather Channel was the added personality, and their research showed most people liked to watch it to picture themselves in other places.

But getting back to your assessment...I still don't understand how Al Roker playing a lame Jimmy Fallon clip, or Stephanie Abrams playing basketball with the Harlem Globetrotters for 5 minutes this morning (zzzzz) is an improvement.

 

[DToTheJ]

The Harlem Globetrotters are merging with the WNBA? :

 

[imhomerjay]

It may not be for you; it certainly isn’t for me. But that’s not the point—if, over time, it’s something that interests enough people to draw more eyeballs, potentially for a longer time, than what existed before would draw, then it’s an improvement to the bottom line.

The ratio of iPhones (and that was one branded example; one can include all kinds of portable devices) is likewise not the primary issue. It’s that the growing ubiquity and convenience of all kinds of other ways to get the “weather” more people now have (and that more people have every day) diminishes the need for/utility for the old approach. TVs will outnumber just most single devices for the foreseeable future; collectively, though, the growth of “instant access” cuts into what was already a small slice of the pie.

 

[BlueWanderer]

The major issue I've noticed with the new graphics other than no constant time or date is that there is a patch of empty space on the lower left side of the standard def. screen. The previous graphics, which is still being used in my area when Locals on the 8s comes on, does not waste much space. However, the main issue I have with the previous graphics is the letters and numbers are too small and can be very hard to read when looking on a standard def. screen.

One positive about the new graphics is seeing the radar, especially when "Storm Stories" or whatever else come on and Locals on the 8s gets delayed until the show is over.

A few changes have been made since my post was made. The clock is back and it rotates through four time zones. The empty space that I was talking about earlier is currently being used to promote their upcoming "Tornado Week" special. Finally, I've noticed during "Storm Stories" that the bottom line display is back to regular size but with the newer graphics. That means no local radar on the bottom line display during this time.

So, if you want to see the local radar you better hope that "Storm Stories" or some movie isn't on. Otherwise, you'll have to go elsewhere for that.

 

[BRNout]

Gee, “luddites” seems to have hit a nerve. Oh well, not really my concern.

No, it hasn't. It's just very tiresome because you use this term all the time. Boring. :

It doesn’t matter in the least what any particular channel was “intended” to be. It matters what today’s business realities are, not 2005’s, not 2000’s, not 1995’s. Things change, and business plans need to adapt. Some tactics will work, some will not; those that don’t will be discarded and replaced. Most importantly, what “works” isn’t defined by whether the bi-weekly meeting of the “It didn’t used to be that way” club is happy with it or not. Nor is what’s “good” defined by that group.

It's called positioning. The concept of cable offering various themed channels is that we have a variety of choices to serve various needs and tastes. By homogenizing them as NBC-U and Viacom are doing, they're diluting their brands. The net effect of that is inferior service for the rest of us.

If pretending that everyone who doesn’t share your tastes is stupid, great. Hope it makes you feel better, but it doesn’t make it true just because you believe it in your little bubble.

That, my friend, is a mischaracterization of my comments. If anyone here lives in a bubble, I'm afraid it's you. In my various travels, I've seen how cable channels are operated in other countries and they tend to stick to their individual 'formats'. When those formats don't work out, I've also seen them replaced,

But, to make the Weather Channel into some diluted shadow of itself, a mere "platform" from which to promote other NBC fare - that's lazy and poor programming. It is about this that I am calling a foul; not merely that they have changed something. To imply otherwise is intellectually dishonest and it manages to avoid addressing the point that I've made repeatedly here.

Blue Wanderer's latest post indicates that TWC's graphics are being altered yet again - this time more like what they had before. Could it be because they smelled trouble? Perhaps my little bubble is a lot larger than you thought. ;D

 

[ixnay]

They are starting the movies back this Friday under the name 'Forecast And A Flick'.

They've been advertising it this week, unless something changed at the last moment.

Yup... I guess it all starts next Friday with "Into Thin Air":
http://tvlistings.zap2it.com/tvlist...t&fromTimeInMillis=1269576000000&stnNum=11187

D'oh!

Why'd TWC drop movies in the first place? Why are they bringing them back?

ixnay

 

[jsu5381m]

I wonder why FOX hasn't tried to create their own weather channel to compete with NBC?

 

[azumanga]

I wonder why FOX hasn't tried to create their own weather channel to compete with NBC?

Maybe because it's difficult to put a conservative slant on the weather?

 

[YEKIMI]

Not really. Fox would just say "This tornado brought to you by Obama" or "This devastating hurricaine that destroyed your home/business and killed your grandchildren was brought to you by the Democratic party".