-
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
I could never figure out why John Roberts was never seriously considered to replace Dan Rather. He is an excellent anchor and has serious press credentials. Why did CBS aloow him to fo to CNN?
Katie, after all, had a "name" and, apparently,
high Q (popularity) scores. Somebody at CBS
didn't feel Roberts was well enough known,
never mind the number of times he'd filled in for
Rather. I definitely agree, since I was one of
the staunchest advocates on this board for
Roberts to get Rather's job, that CBS made a
drastic mistake. Katie would be better suited
to the types of specials Barbara Walters does
on ABC.
I wish Bob Schieffer was about ten years younger;
maybe then he could be persuaded to take the job.
high Q (popularity) scores. Somebody at CBS
didn't feel Roberts was well enough known,
never mind the number of times he'd filled in for
Rather. I definitely agree, since I was one of
the staunchest advocates on this board for
Roberts to get Rather's job, that CBS made a
drastic mistake. Katie would be better suited
to the types of specials Barbara Walters does
on ABC.
I wish Bob Schieffer was about ten years younger;
maybe then he could be persuaded to take the job.
ENOUGH!!
I don't watch the CBS Evening News either but to tell Bob Scheiffer at his age to be the anchor again is just asking way too much.
I myself prefer ABC's World News, it really is a tightly run show.
More than I can say about NBC Nightly News.
The bottom line is CBS isn't going to dump Couric, at least not until a few years.
If they did, it would be even worse than hiring her to begin with because they paid her all that money to come over.
I don't watch the CBS Evening News either but to tell Bob Scheiffer at his age to be the anchor again is just asking way too much.
I myself prefer ABC's World News, it really is a tightly run show.
More than I can say about NBC Nightly News.
The bottom line is CBS isn't going to dump Couric, at least not until a few years.
If they did, it would be even worse than hiring her to begin with because they paid her all that money to come over.
T
toby
Guest
There are supposedly changes in the works for The Early Show at the start of next year.
Katie is a known morning talent.
She would be a much better fit there.
Katie is a known morning talent.
She would be a much better fit there.
Roberts and Pelley are pretty much in the same mold as the other anchors, you can't blame CBS for wanting to try something different. It makes sense, instead of further dividing up the pie to bring in new viewers.
I remember a poster on another thread said "It's not that CBS brought in a woman but Couric was the WRONG woman," and I agree. Perhaps CBS should have persued the "Woman" angle but with a different woman.
I remember a poster on another thread said "It's not that CBS brought in a woman but Couric was the WRONG woman," and I agree. Perhaps CBS should have persued the "Woman" angle but with a different woman.
oldvnewschool said:
I have NOT suggested that Schieffer be named CBS's anchor, not at
age 70. I said that if he were ten years younger it might be a different
story. I do think, however, that some day--sooner or later--someone
at CBS is going to wake up and realize the mistake of passing over
John Roberts.
As for the rest of your thread, I'm in total agreement; I've become a
regular viewer of Charlie Gibson (something about Brian Williams grates
on me). And CBS does have about $15 million invested in Katie. But
when her anchoring contract runs out, the Eye Network ought to give
her the kind of specials Barbara Walters does on ABC.
I glad it's verified!
Sorry ;D
I do agree with her getting specials on CBS.
And as for The Early Show I can see that happen too.
But it would still be a slap on the face in some ways.
Sorry ;D
I do agree with her getting specials on CBS.
And as for The Early Show I can see that happen too.
But it would still be a slap on the face in some ways.
I've given some thought about what perhaps CBS 'should have' done with the Evening News, considering their ratings woes and the replacement of Dan Rather and Bob Schieffer. Someone mentioned the multi-anchor scheme that World News Tonight once employed. And to some extent, Katie Couric's hiring was an attempt toward something different than just another solo white male reviewing the day's events.
So, with the network news audience already declining and aging, I say there would have been nothing to lose by appealing for diversity. CBS had/has talented reporters like the aforementioned John Roberts, Byron Pitts, and Joie Chen. I say make them all co-anchors, alternating them amongst the New York studio and live in-the-field locations. I can't think of a Latino/Latina reporter that CBS employs, but put him or her in the mix as well.
Not only would my plan provide a needed boost toward credible diversity on TV news, it'd also make the network news less of a show. The news itself would be the 'star' instead of the person delivering it.
So, with the network news audience already declining and aging, I say there would have been nothing to lose by appealing for diversity. CBS had/has talented reporters like the aforementioned John Roberts, Byron Pitts, and Joie Chen. I say make them all co-anchors, alternating them amongst the New York studio and live in-the-field locations. I can't think of a Latino/Latina reporter that CBS employs, but put him or her in the mix as well.
Not only would my plan provide a needed boost toward credible diversity on TV news, it'd also make the network news less of a show. The news itself would be the 'star' instead of the person delivering it.
ABC's thinking exactly, back in '78, and although
WNT did finally make a star of Peter Jennings after
he got it solo, the basic idea was indeed to make
the news, not the anchors, the "star." I think you
have a point: it couldn't hurt CBS to try the same thing.
And like ABC in the late '70s, they might even pick up
a younger audience not disposed to watching the evening
news. And don't forget: having an African-American anchor,
Max Robinson, was a radical move for the time (1978).
Dan Rather occasionally mentioned Scott Pelley as his
successor; mainly, I think, because they're both from
Texas and not merely because Rather was impressed
with Pelley's work. Why he never formally named him,
the way Tom Brokaw did Brian Williams, is probably due
to the fact that Brokaw had set his retirement date;
Rather's came rather suddenly after the Bush/Air Force
Reserve flap.
What's so touchy is not that viewers would reject a
female anchor; they want the same credentials they
look for in a male anchor--someone who sounds as
if they know what they're talking about (and Jennings
may have been the best at that, IMO). A former
beauty queen might be OK on the local news (Diane
Sawyer was, and she started out in television doing the
weather on WLKY Louisville) but she'd better have something
more to offer a national audience (again, Sawyer) than a
pretty face or "cutesy" personality. However, I'm not
advocating her as an evening-news anchor; Good Morning
America doesn't need another anchor change this soon. There's
GOT to be a woman somewhere out there who can compete
with Charlie and Brian on their own terms (her name isn't
Julie Chen, that's for sure, IMO).
WNT did finally make a star of Peter Jennings after
he got it solo, the basic idea was indeed to make
the news, not the anchors, the "star." I think you
have a point: it couldn't hurt CBS to try the same thing.
And like ABC in the late '70s, they might even pick up
a younger audience not disposed to watching the evening
news. And don't forget: having an African-American anchor,
Max Robinson, was a radical move for the time (1978).
Dan Rather occasionally mentioned Scott Pelley as his
successor; mainly, I think, because they're both from
Texas and not merely because Rather was impressed
with Pelley's work. Why he never formally named him,
the way Tom Brokaw did Brian Williams, is probably due
to the fact that Brokaw had set his retirement date;
Rather's came rather suddenly after the Bush/Air Force
Reserve flap.
What's so touchy is not that viewers would reject a
female anchor; they want the same credentials they
look for in a male anchor--someone who sounds as
if they know what they're talking about (and Jennings
may have been the best at that, IMO). A former
beauty queen might be OK on the local news (Diane
Sawyer was, and she started out in television doing the
weather on WLKY Louisville) but she'd better have something
more to offer a national audience (again, Sawyer) than a
pretty face or "cutesy" personality. However, I'm not
advocating her as an evening-news anchor; Good Morning
America doesn't need another anchor change this soon. There's
GOT to be a woman somewhere out there who can compete
with Charlie and Brian on their own terms (her name isn't
Julie Chen, that's for sure, IMO).
I
imhomerjay
Guest
I still believe ABC had a long-term, if slower-growning, potential for success with the Vargas-Woodruff World News Tonight. But circumstances happen, and considering the situation they found themselves in, moving Charlie Gibson into the slot to steady the ship was clearly the right thing to do.
It's a shame if the way things happen means Liz Vargas won't be considered for an anchor slot if she wants one down the road. She's solid, credible and capable.
It's a shame if the way things happen means Liz Vargas won't be considered for an anchor slot if she wants one down the road. She's solid, credible and capable.
I think you're on to something. Liz Vargas substituted
for Charlie three nights this week and did just fine. The
pairing with Bob Woodruff didn't last long enough for viewers
to get used to her, but if ABC uses her as a substitute often
enough, people will see how capable she is (and maybe ABC's
execs won't make the same mistake CBS's did by passing over
Roberts when Charlie decides to step down). Meantime, ABC's
got a winner and doesn't need a fix at this point.
for Charlie three nights this week and did just fine. The
pairing with Bob Woodruff didn't last long enough for viewers
to get used to her, but if ABC uses her as a substitute often
enough, people will see how capable she is (and maybe ABC's
execs won't make the same mistake CBS's did by passing over
Roberts when Charlie decides to step down). Meantime, ABC's
got a winner and doesn't need a fix at this point.
- Status