A
airwaver
Guest
Believe KOMO 1000 was FIRST in breaking the story around 4:10pm....
710 KIRO was a fast second....all did a good job....
710 KIRO was a fast second....all did a good job....
-
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.
P
porterfreq
Guest
Heard about the story last night (what's up with Seattle these days!) and pulled up KIRO online - Bob Vandine sounded very good discussing the story with callers, came off as credible, informed, injected appropriate empathy. Well done.
airwaver said:Believe KOMO 1000 was FIRST in breaking the story around 4:10pm....
710 KIRO was a fast second....all did a good job....
Don't know about you folks..but I'm pretty much OVER the whole "who got it on the air first". Other than a bunch of neurotic people in the business ... most of the "public" at-large is NOT flipping around from station to station when a breaking event happens to see who got there first, who has best audio remote line quality and so forth.
What SHOULD count is who provides the best coverage that actually comes across as credible (and it's ideal if there isn't just ONE 'leader' on that score). I find myself flipping around during major events to see how stations are dealing with it ... perhaps one of the most memorable is when the M/Jackson verdict came down and I had to listen to Dori snorting about "Michael is a pedophilia" and all the way through downtown Seattle I'm literally screaming at the radio "the WORD is PEDOPHILE you STUPID SACK OF $%$$$". I remember I was more angry with the PD/ND over that incident than I was with Dori because that person clearly didn't care about the credibility of their programming either.
On the TV side...I was cringing on Friday as I listened to reporters start speculating about WHY the shooting happened. When journalism meant something they used to teach and reinforce "just the FACTS...just the FACTS" and if you did that kind of "perhaps...." reporting you'd pretty much count on going behind the woodshed with the news director when you rolled back into the news cage.
Is the race to get details on the air first SO important that it's worth completely bagging your brand's credibility over it? I don't think the audience wants that trade.
A
AQH
Guest
airwaver said:Believe KOMO 1000 was FIRST in breaking the story around 4:10pm....
710 KIRO was a fast second....all did a good job....
You sat there prior to 4:10 p.m. listening to KIRO and KOMO simultaneously? Wow!
A
AQH
Guest
LITTLEBOYBLUE said:Don't know about you folks..but I'm pretty much OVER the whole "who got it on the air first". Other than a bunch of neurotic people in the business ... most of the "public" at-large is NOT flipping around from station to station when a breaking event happens to see who got there first, who has best audio remote line quality and so forth.
What SHOULD count is who provides the best coverage that actually comes across as credible (and it's ideal if there isn't just ONE 'leader' on that score). I find myself flipping around during major events to see how stations are dealing with it ... perhaps one of the most memorable is when the M/Jackson verdict came down and I had to listen to Dori snorting about "Michael is a pedophilia" and all the way through downtown Seattle I'm literally screaming at the radio "the WORD is PEDOPHILE you STUPID SACK OF $%$$$". I remember I was more angry with the PD/ND over that incident than I was with Dori because that person clearly didn't care about the credibility of their programming either.
On the TV side...I was cringing on Friday as I listened to reporters start speculating about WHY the shooting happened. When journalism meant something they used to teach and reinforce "just the FACTS...just the FACTS" and if you did that kind of "perhaps...." reporting you'd pretty much count on going behind the woodshed with the news director when you rolled back into the news cage.
Is the race to get details on the air first SO important that it's worth completely bagging your brand's credibility over it? I don't think the audience wants that trade.
Very well said.
porterfreq said:Bob Vandine sounded very good discussing the story with callers, came off as credible, informed, injected appropriate empathy. Well done.
Indeed. The multi-dimensional DJ-NoName.
LBB...Well said. Give me the facts m'aam.
Leave the "why" for the "expert" witness at the trial. Let's face it, the field reporters are being whipped by editors and PD's to come up with fresh copy 4 times per hour and at the scene there's just not much new to add beyond the "4 w's"...So out comes the speculation and "How does that make you feel?" type of questions...
Leave the "why" for the "expert" witness at the trial. Let's face it, the field reporters are being whipped by editors and PD's to come up with fresh copy 4 times per hour and at the scene there's just not much new to add beyond the "4 w's"...So out comes the speculation and "How does that make you feel?" type of questions...
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.