• 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

Not enough news coverage on London

K

Kyle_Hojem

Guest
It's either one way or another, not enough news coverage and too much. I've read the posts of people on this board that think there is too much news coverage on the missing teen in Aruba (sp?) and there is not enough local. This time, I think that there was just not enough coverage of what happened in London today. I was told of the attack this morning about 9:20am PT. I flipped around our VHF stations in Los Angeles and saw only one station on the story--KTTV channel 11 (FOX station) giving local coverage.
There is just something wrong with priorities in news today. Thoughts?<P ID="signature">______________

Member of the Los Angeles, Phoenix Radio, and California TV moderation team</P>
 
> It's either one way or another, not enough news coverage and
> too much. I've read the posts of people on this board that
> think there is too much news coverage on the missing teen in
> Aruba (sp?) and there is not enough local. This time, I
> think that there was just not enough coverage of what
> happened in London today. I was told of the attack this
> morning about 9:20am PT. I flipped around our VHF stations
> in Los Angeles and saw only one station on the story--KTTV
> channel 11 (FOX station) giving local coverage.
> There is just something wrong with priorities in news today.
> Thoughts?

BBC America...
 
WLIW in New York aired a lot of the BBC World coverage.
It makes you wonder why BBC World is not offered in the US, as we need a good international news channel, especially after the end of the month when Newsworld International becomes Gore-O-Vision.
<P ID="signature">______________
WCBS = We're Crazy Buffoons and Schmucks
<a href=http://chuck.spotteddogs.org/tv/>Spotted Dog TV Talk - for all your non-news TV Talk</a></P>
 
> It's either one way or another, not enough news coverage and
> too much. I've read the posts of people on this board that
> think there is too much news coverage on the missing teen in
> Aruba (sp?) and there is not enough local. This time, I
> think that there was just not enough coverage of what
> happened in London today. I was told of the attack this
> morning about 9:20am PT. I flipped around our VHF stations
> in Los Angeles and saw only one station on the story--KTTV
> channel 11 (FOX station) giving local coverage.
> There is just something wrong with priorities in news today.
> Thoughts?
>

It is easier too much or too little, but this time I thought it was a reasonable amount without over doing it. There were updates from time to time on CBS, NBC, and ABC and occasionally long breaks for coverage. If it happend here in the US, it would be wall to wall coverage 24 hours for the next 2 days probably.<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin</P>
 
> It's either one way or another, not enough news coverage and
> too much. I've read the posts of people on this board that
> think there is too much news coverage on the missing teen in
> Aruba (sp?) and there is not enough local. This time, I
> think that there was just not enough coverage of what
> happened in London today. I was told of the attack this
> morning about 9:20am PT. I flipped around our VHF stations
> in Los Angeles and saw only one station on the story--KTTV
> channel 11 (FOX station) giving local coverage.
> There is just something wrong with priorities in news today.
> Thoughts?
>
I had CNN on all day, and except for rare weather updates, it was all London coverage, and justly so. How was there not enough coverage?

As I type, World News Tonight has devoted its full show to London and related topics (impact on US, etc.). Newscasts throughout the day focused on London.

There has been ample coverage, and probably will continue to be.
 
> > Thoughts?
>
> BBC America...

removed ... apparently my post was moot<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by jegrant on 07/08/05 09:02 AM.</FONT></P>
 
I think there was a case for ABC, CBS and NBC to have extended their live coverage until 6 P.M. EDT (3 P.M. PDT).

But after that, there were probably not enough new details to have gone wall-to-wall past that time.

Had this occured in the United States, I suspect ABC, CBS and NBC probably would have gone non-stop for 24 hours or so, given the level of casualities, with several half-hour and/or hour-long special programs over the next three or four days.

I'd like to hear from someone in the UK who could let us know how long the live TV coverage there lasted yesterday (July 7th).

I suspect that BBC-1 and ITV probably went wall-to-wall through the end of prime-time, while Five (whose newscasts are now produced by Sky News) probably went with a Sky News simulcast all day and through prime-time.
 
Hi everyone:

> I think there was a case for ABC, CBS and NBC to have
> extended their live coverage until 6 P.M. EDT (3 P.M. PDT).

Actually they quit around NOON ET after the Homeland Security Secretary had his news conference. NBC continued its coverage via CNBC and MSNBC. FOX News only had the DHS news conference on the big FOX Network. But then too, I could just as easily be wrong as KDVR (the local FOX O&O here in Denver) was doing its morning "Good Day Colorado" newscast and either picked up major developments via FOX News directly or the big FOX Network until 8:00 AM when they went on with their regular program schedule.

> But after that, there were probably not enough new details
> to have gone wall-to-wall past that time.

Not past NOON ET no. Most everything that could've been reported WAS reported. But if the attack had happened in a major U.S. city, then yeah, the networks would've FOUND a way to keep on going wall to wall.

In fact, THE LAST network that ended its near wall to wall coverage was the BBC. That happened when BBC America dropped BBC World around 3:00 PM ET. Beyond that was just rehash coverage on the domestic cable networks.

> I'd like to hear from someone in the UK who could let us
> know how long the live TV coverage there lasted yesterday
> (July 7th).

Yeah. This would be interesting. :)

Cheers for now :)

Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado<P ID="signature">______________
patspodcast03a.jpg

http://patspodcast.blogspot.com/
Radio? Uhh.....What's THAT?? :)</P>
 
> Hi everyone:
>
> > I think there was a case for ABC, CBS and NBC to have
> > extended their live coverage until 6 P.M. EDT (3 P.M.
> PDT).
>
> Actually they quit around NOON ET after the Homeland
> Security Secretary had his news conference. NBC continued
> its coverage via CNBC and MSNBC. FOX News only had the DHS
> news conference on the big FOX Network. But then too, I
> could just as easily be wrong as KDVR (the local FOX O&O
> here in Denver) was doing its morning "Good Day Colorado"
> newscast and either picked up major developments via FOX
> News directly or the big FOX Network until 8:00 AM when they
> went on with their regular program schedule.
>
> > But after that, there were probably not enough new details
>
> > to have gone wall-to-wall past that time.
>
> Not past NOON ET no. Most everything that could've been
> reported WAS reported. But if the attack had happened in a
> major U.S. city, then yeah, the networks would've FOUND a
> way to keep on going wall to wall.
>
> In fact, THE LAST network that ended its near wall to wall
> coverage was the BBC. That happened when BBC America
> dropped BBC World around 3:00 PM ET. Beyond that was just
> rehash coverage on the domestic cable networks.
>
> > I'd like to hear from someone in the UK who could let us
> > know how long the live TV coverage there lasted yesterday
> > (July 7th).
>
> Yeah. This would be interesting. :)
>
> Cheers for now :)
>
> Pat Cook
> Denver, Colorado
>

Here in Atlanta, the coverage was fairly good, but being mindful that we had a major outbreak of tornadoes that occured the night before(one which caused 40-50 million dollars of damage to Atlanta Motor Speedway), London was quickly moved to the second or third story on the local news stations behind the damage reports. And today with Dennis roaring through Cuba and heading straight for the FL panhandle, I think that the coverage in Alabama, Georgia and North Florida will be all Huurricane coverage.....

Just my .02 worth
<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
 
> Here in Atlanta, the coverage was fairly good, but being
> mindful that we had a major outbreak of tornadoes that
> occured the night before(one which caused 40-50 million
> dollars of damage to Atlanta Motor Speedway), London was
> quickly moved to the second or third story on the local news
> stations behind the damage reports. And today with Dennis
> roaring through Cuba and heading straight for the FL
> panhandle, I think that the coverage in Alabama, Georgia and
> North Florida will be all Huurricane coverage.....
---------
Hey...remember that girl in Aruba? I notice that sure has taken a back seat, although there has been a bit of news since.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom