-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
News out of Humboldt St.
- Thread starter tvfriend
- Start date
M
Mark_Giardina
Guest
> Latest person to exit is investigative reporter Steve
> Levine. Going to Baltimore.
>
Normally a news department would promote a current employee who is already familiar with the community and has established both contacts and credibility.
Using that scenario the smart move on 8’s part would be to make either McKinley or Barnhart the new investigative reporter. Both are more than capable of handing such a task.
However I’m willing to take bets that Channel 8 will hire someone from outside the Rochester market to replace Steve Levine. Someone currently employed in a smaller market, who will agree to work for less money than Levine was making.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
> Levine. Going to Baltimore.
>
Normally a news department would promote a current employee who is already familiar with the community and has established both contacts and credibility.
Using that scenario the smart move on 8’s part would be to make either McKinley or Barnhart the new investigative reporter. Both are more than capable of handing such a task.
However I’m willing to take bets that Channel 8 will hire someone from outside the Rochester market to replace Steve Levine. Someone currently employed in a smaller market, who will agree to work for less money than Levine was making.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
J
Jarvis
Guest
> > Latest person to exit is investigative reporter Steve
> > Levine. Going to Baltimore.
> >
> Normally a news department would promote a current employee
> who is already familiar with the community and has
> established both contacts and credibility.
>
> Using that scenario the smart move on 8’s part would be to
> make either McKinley or Barnhart the new investigative
> reporter. Both are more than capable of handing such a task.
>
>
> However I’m willing to take bets that Channel 8 will hire
> someone from outside the Rochester market to replace Steve
> Levine. Someone currently employed in a smaller market, who
> will agree to work for less money than Levine was making.
>
As someone who used to work at that extravagent and generous facility, I would say you are correct Mark. To think I fought for a year for a 20 cent raise...
> > Levine. Going to Baltimore.
> >
> Normally a news department would promote a current employee
> who is already familiar with the community and has
> established both contacts and credibility.
>
> Using that scenario the smart move on 8’s part would be to
> make either McKinley or Barnhart the new investigative
> reporter. Both are more than capable of handing such a task.
>
>
> However I’m willing to take bets that Channel 8 will hire
> someone from outside the Rochester market to replace Steve
> Levine. Someone currently employed in a smaller market, who
> will agree to work for less money than Levine was making.
>
As someone who used to work at that extravagent and generous facility, I would say you are correct Mark. To think I fought for a year for a 20 cent raise...
O
odomski
Guest
Nexstar will do anything in their power to cut corners, screw over the unions, hire cheap talent who know nothing about the business, etc, etc. The list goes on. I wish Nexstar would just disappear. Get out of broadcasting altogether. Stop putting their employees through hell.
> Nexstar will do anything in their power to cut corners,
> screw over the unions, hire cheap talent who know nothing
> about the business, etc, etc. The list goes on. I wish
> Nexstar would just disappear. Get out of broadcasting
> altogether. Stop putting their employees through hell.
>
The stock is in the tank. Expect more of the same out of these folks.
> screw over the unions, hire cheap talent who know nothing
> about the business, etc, etc. The list goes on. I wish
> Nexstar would just disappear. Get out of broadcasting
> altogether. Stop putting their employees through hell.
>
The stock is in the tank. Expect more of the same out of these folks.
O
odomski
Guest
I hope the company disappears totally. While I will feel bad for the hard-working employees of Nexstar, I will NOT feel sorry for the corporate stiff-necks who created this monster. Sook the Schnook and his Cronies will suffer the consequences. They deserve whatever happens to that company. No wonder their corporate news director is leaving. She's bailing out and for good reason. From what I read, she's taking a job with Raycom. Hey Perry, doesn't that tell you anything? You lost your corporate news director to another company? What's that tell you? Probably nothing, because you don't get it and never will. Sad.
M
Mark_Giardina
Guest
Nothing Changes
Not that I am defending Nexstar, but name me one company where employees are paid what they deserve and the operation is run for the sole purpose of providing the best quality news and programming possible ?
Also name me a company where top executives don’t get golden parachutes while employees get golden showers.
I certainly can’t think of any.
In my 30 years in broadcasting I can only think of one company that I had the privilege to work for, Malrite, where employees were treated with respect. And that was because of two general managers who ran the place. After those two gentlemen left, and the station was sold, the place went to hell in a hand basket.
What you describe will continue to happen as long as there are people willing to work for peanuts just to appear on TV. And management doesn’t give a damn if those people are there for just a few months or years and move on, just as long as the station makes money. Well here’s a little secret. Stations with high employee turn-over rates normally are at the bottom of the ratings pile because the viewing public likes consistency.
This is why 13 and 10 have such a loyal following. Even though those stations have their share of Elmira TV graduates, at least their anchors have been around long enough to know their zip codes and how to pronounce the name of the Town of Chili (Chi lie)
What is truly a shame is that Channel 8 has broken a number of stories that 10 and 13 have to play catch-up on the following day. Yet, because 8’s ratings are far below those of their competitors, the average viewer will think that the other two stations were on top of a story that actually was featured on 8 the previous day.
I’ve said it before and I will say it again. What Channel 8 needs to compete in the Rochester market is brand new ownership. A broadcasting operation that is willing to spend the money to hire and keep good talent. Not discard hard-working employees just to save a buck, or bring on board someone with little experience because they make for good eye-candy and work cheap. Unfortunately 8 has had a series of owners who are more concerned with the bottom-line than they are with trying to garner more viewers.
My 2006 predictions have already come true. I said that there would be one or two on-air people at 8 that would not be around after 2006. Steve Levine has already left. Whose next?
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
Not that I am defending Nexstar, but name me one company where employees are paid what they deserve and the operation is run for the sole purpose of providing the best quality news and programming possible ?
Also name me a company where top executives don’t get golden parachutes while employees get golden showers.
I certainly can’t think of any.
In my 30 years in broadcasting I can only think of one company that I had the privilege to work for, Malrite, where employees were treated with respect. And that was because of two general managers who ran the place. After those two gentlemen left, and the station was sold, the place went to hell in a hand basket.
What you describe will continue to happen as long as there are people willing to work for peanuts just to appear on TV. And management doesn’t give a damn if those people are there for just a few months or years and move on, just as long as the station makes money. Well here’s a little secret. Stations with high employee turn-over rates normally are at the bottom of the ratings pile because the viewing public likes consistency.
This is why 13 and 10 have such a loyal following. Even though those stations have their share of Elmira TV graduates, at least their anchors have been around long enough to know their zip codes and how to pronounce the name of the Town of Chili (Chi lie)
What is truly a shame is that Channel 8 has broken a number of stories that 10 and 13 have to play catch-up on the following day. Yet, because 8’s ratings are far below those of their competitors, the average viewer will think that the other two stations were on top of a story that actually was featured on 8 the previous day.
I’ve said it before and I will say it again. What Channel 8 needs to compete in the Rochester market is brand new ownership. A broadcasting operation that is willing to spend the money to hire and keep good talent. Not discard hard-working employees just to save a buck, or bring on board someone with little experience because they make for good eye-candy and work cheap. Unfortunately 8 has had a series of owners who are more concerned with the bottom-line than they are with trying to garner more viewers.
My 2006 predictions have already come true. I said that there would be one or two on-air people at 8 that would not be around after 2006. Steve Levine has already left. Whose next?
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
O
odomski
Guest
Re: Nothing Changes
Mark: excellent analysis. I enjoyed reading your post. Good work. Keep it up.
Mark: excellent analysis. I enjoyed reading your post. Good work. Keep it up.
M
mike704
Guest
Will they ever move Channel 8 out of there? I mean the building was made for 1940's radio. They never even built the TV wing that had been planned. The place is jinxed.
I auditioned for a radio job there during the Rust-Craft days. What a strange place. They had me doing news on the AM in the morning, jocking on the AM mid day and running into the next studio to cut news for the FM during the hourly network news. There's so much more I could say but the bottom line mentality has been there for decades.
It's a shame really because I look at that grand building that was built by Stromberg Carlson and I think, wow this was someone's dream and it turned into a nightmare....sad.
MikeM
I auditioned for a radio job there during the Rust-Craft days. What a strange place. They had me doing news on the AM in the morning, jocking on the AM mid day and running into the next studio to cut news for the FM during the hourly network news. There's so much more I could say but the bottom line mentality has been there for decades.
It's a shame really because I look at that grand building that was built by Stromberg Carlson and I think, wow this was someone's dream and it turned into a nightmare....sad.
MikeM
M
Mark_Giardina
Guest
No Moves On Humboldt Street
> Will they ever move Channel 8 out of there? I mean the
> building was made for 1940's radio. They never even built
> the TV wing that had been planned. The place is jinxed.
>
The answer to your question is that it’s very unlikely that Channel 8 will move from its location on Humboldt Street; especially now that 8 has an agreement with Sinclair to carry FOX News. As you may, or may not be aware, FOX moved its operations from its dank and small location on East Avenue over to Humboldt Street from September to November of last year. So all of that palatial space has been occupied.
It’s not the building that is jinxed, just that 8 unfortunately has had a series of owners interested only in bleeding the station dry then selling it to other owners who make Jack Benny look like the biggest philanthropist on the face of the Earth.
In hindsight had WROC years ago kept WHAM radio, groomed staff to take over when Tom Decker, Bob Mills and Mort Neusbaum retired, didn’t have the labor strike back in the 1970s, and didn’t have a revolving door policy when it came to keeping good personnel, Channel 8 might be a major player in the market today. Instead it languishes in last place in the ratings and now has taken on the additional responsibility of carrying FOX 31 news, which in my opinion has turned out to be nothing but an abbreviated version of Channel 8 news at 10 pm.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
> Will they ever move Channel 8 out of there? I mean the
> building was made for 1940's radio. They never even built
> the TV wing that had been planned. The place is jinxed.
>
The answer to your question is that it’s very unlikely that Channel 8 will move from its location on Humboldt Street; especially now that 8 has an agreement with Sinclair to carry FOX News. As you may, or may not be aware, FOX moved its operations from its dank and small location on East Avenue over to Humboldt Street from September to November of last year. So all of that palatial space has been occupied.
It’s not the building that is jinxed, just that 8 unfortunately has had a series of owners interested only in bleeding the station dry then selling it to other owners who make Jack Benny look like the biggest philanthropist on the face of the Earth.
In hindsight had WROC years ago kept WHAM radio, groomed staff to take over when Tom Decker, Bob Mills and Mort Neusbaum retired, didn’t have the labor strike back in the 1970s, and didn’t have a revolving door policy when it came to keeping good personnel, Channel 8 might be a major player in the market today. Instead it languishes in last place in the ratings and now has taken on the additional responsibility of carrying FOX 31 news, which in my opinion has turned out to be nothing but an abbreviated version of Channel 8 news at 10 pm.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
Re: No Moves On Humboldt Street
r
it languishes in last place in
> the ratings and now has taken on the additional
> responsibility of carrying FOX 31 news, which in my opinion
> has turned out to be nothing but an abbreviated version of
> Channel 8 news at 10 pm.
Hey, let's give them some credit here. Fox news at Ten is much, much, much, much, etc. better than New Central. New Central was an insult to Rochester viewers. I still cringe when that moron from New Central comes on at the end with The Point. Fox News @ Ten keeps the traditional Fox jounrnalistic integrity with lots of stories about pretty girls in bathings suits and three legged dogs that can sing opera but it's still a pretty good newscast, especially for those of us that can't stay up to 11:00 or people who don't have cable.
>
r
it languishes in last place in
> the ratings and now has taken on the additional
> responsibility of carrying FOX 31 news, which in my opinion
> has turned out to be nothing but an abbreviated version of
> Channel 8 news at 10 pm.
Hey, let's give them some credit here. Fox news at Ten is much, much, much, much, etc. better than New Central. New Central was an insult to Rochester viewers. I still cringe when that moron from New Central comes on at the end with The Point. Fox News @ Ten keeps the traditional Fox jounrnalistic integrity with lots of stories about pretty girls in bathings suits and three legged dogs that can sing opera but it's still a pretty good newscast, especially for those of us that can't stay up to 11:00 or people who don't have cable.
>
M
Mark_Giardina
Guest
FOX 31 News
> News Central was an insult to Rochester viewers. I still cringe
> when that moron from New Central comes on at the end with
> The Point. Fox News @ Ten keeps the traditional Fox
> jounrnalistic integrity with lots of stories about pretty
> girls in bathings suits and three legged dogs that can sing
> opera but it's still a pretty good newscast, especially for
> those of us that can't stay up to 11:00 or people who don't
> have cable.
> >
>
As part of the ‘agreement’ between Nexstar and Sinclair, FOX 31 still has to carry that idiot’s editorial. But you notice it’s after the newscast concludes and many times a few commercials are tossed in as a buffer.
Yes I agree that FOX 31 is a vast improvement over “News Central.” But then again any cable access station carrying reruns of Gilligan’s Island would be an improvement over “News Central.”
The reason that FOX 31 looks professional now is because it has the staff at Channel 8 doing the anchoring and field reports. So what you are seeing is an abbreviated version of Channel 8’s 11:00pm news at 10 O’Clock.
Actually 31 once had a decent local news operation before Sinclair purchased the station, fired most of the staff, and inserted that suppository called News Central in its place.
It will be interesting to see just how FOX 31 news does in future ratings books.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
> News Central was an insult to Rochester viewers. I still cringe
> when that moron from New Central comes on at the end with
> The Point. Fox News @ Ten keeps the traditional Fox
> jounrnalistic integrity with lots of stories about pretty
> girls in bathings suits and three legged dogs that can sing
> opera but it's still a pretty good newscast, especially for
> those of us that can't stay up to 11:00 or people who don't
> have cable.
> >
>
As part of the ‘agreement’ between Nexstar and Sinclair, FOX 31 still has to carry that idiot’s editorial. But you notice it’s after the newscast concludes and many times a few commercials are tossed in as a buffer.
Yes I agree that FOX 31 is a vast improvement over “News Central.” But then again any cable access station carrying reruns of Gilligan’s Island would be an improvement over “News Central.”
The reason that FOX 31 looks professional now is because it has the staff at Channel 8 doing the anchoring and field reports. So what you are seeing is an abbreviated version of Channel 8’s 11:00pm news at 10 O’Clock.
Actually 31 once had a decent local news operation before Sinclair purchased the station, fired most of the staff, and inserted that suppository called News Central in its place.
It will be interesting to see just how FOX 31 news does in future ratings books.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
U
unverviking
Guest
> Latest person to exit is investigative reporter Steve
> Levine. Going to Baltimore.
>
Last night on the 11PM news, they introduced JoyLynn Whitfield as the "8 on your side reporter" Looks like maybe they promoted from within ?? Or is it temporary until they hire someone else ??
> Levine. Going to Baltimore.
>
Last night on the 11PM news, they introduced JoyLynn Whitfield as the "8 on your side reporter" Looks like maybe they promoted from within ?? Or is it temporary until they hire someone else ??
M
Mark_Giardina
Guest
8's New Investigative Reporter?
> Last night on the 11PM news, they introduced JoyLynn
> Whitfield as the "8 on your side reporter" Looks like
> maybe they promoted from within ?? Or is it temporary until
> they hire someone else ??
>
Okay I am willing to make a bet. And that bet is unless 8 can find someone who works for less money, then JoyLynn has the job as investigative reporter full-time.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
> Last night on the 11PM news, they introduced JoyLynn
> Whitfield as the "8 on your side reporter" Looks like
> maybe they promoted from within ?? Or is it temporary until
> they hire someone else ??
>
Okay I am willing to make a bet. And that bet is unless 8 can find someone who works for less money, then JoyLynn has the job as investigative reporter full-time.
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
Re: 8's New Investigative Reporter?
> > Last night on the 11PM news, they introduced JoyLynn
> > Whitfield as the "8 on your side reporter" Looks like
> > maybe they promoted from within ?? Or is it temporary
> until
> > they hire someone else ??
> >
> Okay I am willing to make a bet. And that bet is unless 8
> can find someone who works for less money, then JoyLynn has
> the job as investigative reporter full-time.
>
You're both wrong.
Though Steve Levine did the majority of investigative work, "8 on your Side" is more of a franchise and less a person.
What I'm trying to say is that they will brand ANY investigative piece by referencing the "8 on Your Side" slogan, no matter if it's Whitfield, McKinley, Chandler, or whoever doing the story.
(Kind of like at Ch. 10...Where Davidsen does most of the "I-Team" stuff, but if Jennifer or Jessica or Berkley happend to be doing a story of an investigative nature they call it an "I-Team" investigation
> > Last night on the 11PM news, they introduced JoyLynn
> > Whitfield as the "8 on your side reporter" Looks like
> > maybe they promoted from within ?? Or is it temporary
> until
> > they hire someone else ??
> >
> Okay I am willing to make a bet. And that bet is unless 8
> can find someone who works for less money, then JoyLynn has
> the job as investigative reporter full-time.
>
You're both wrong.
Though Steve Levine did the majority of investigative work, "8 on your Side" is more of a franchise and less a person.
What I'm trying to say is that they will brand ANY investigative piece by referencing the "8 on Your Side" slogan, no matter if it's Whitfield, McKinley, Chandler, or whoever doing the story.
(Kind of like at Ch. 10...Where Davidsen does most of the "I-Team" stuff, but if Jennifer or Jessica or Berkley happend to be doing a story of an investigative nature they call it an "I-Team" investigation
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.