This Just in From a News Leader in Los Angeles

[Michael Rivers Kramer]

Today's lead-in headline on KABC-TV at 4:00!

Marriage troubles for Sandra Bullock.....

This is being said while the screen shot of coverage of a kidnapping attempt at a Ranch Palos Verdes elementary school from earlier today. They then went live to the chopper report from above Ranch Palos Verdes.

Granted, horrible things happen all the time in an area as large as LA, but fluff as the lead in story BEFORE their update on the kidnapping attempt?

That's what I get for turning on the TV

 

[RicoGregg]

This is the same station that:

1) pioneered "happy talk" news in Los Angeles ("It's not like watching news, it's like watching family.");

2) in 1977 made a week-long series, dramatic music and undertones and all, on their own anchor Christina Lund having a baby;

3) created regional hysteria and a lynch mob mentality due to the sleazy reporting of Wayne Satz on the McMartin Pre-School arrests and trials. Even in the station's advertising on their McMartin coverage, they declared the family guilty. They were ultimately cleared after seven years, 209 counts, God-Knows how many millions in wasted tax dollars, and not one single conviction. Satz quietly slithered over to Channel 13 with his tail between his legs;

4) let the network's Entertainment Division more or less take over the News Dept. and use the newscast to promote and be PR shills for ABC programs. Virtually every KABC-TV newscast winds up being a promo for Oprah or "Lost", or some prime-time programming.

The Sandra Bullock story just adds to the rich history of Eyewitness News doing things like this.

I wondered when someone would have the first post in the month of March in this category.

 

[Ultimajock]

...not to mention the less-than-classic teaming of those two inflated egos that couldn't stand one another, Paul Moyer and Ann Martin ;-) ...

 

[recto101]

This is the same station that:

1) pioneered "happy talk" news in Los Angeles ("It's not like watching news, it's like watching family.");

2) in 1977 made a week-long series, dramatic music and undertones and all, on their own anchor Christina Lund having a baby;

3) created regional hysteria and a lynch mob mentality due to the sleazy reporting of Wayne Satz on the McMartin Pre-School arrests and trials. Even in the station's advertising on their McMartin coverage, they declared the family guilty. They were ultimately cleared after seven years, 209 counts, God-Knows how many millions in wasted tax dollars, and not one single conviction. Satz quietly slithered over to Channel 13 with his tail between his legs;

4) let the network's Entertainment Division more or less take over the News Dept. and use the newscast to promote and be PR shills for ABC programs. Virtually every KABC-TV newscast winds up being a promo for Oprah or "Lost", or some prime-time programming.

The Sandra Bullock story just adds to the rich history of Eyewitness News doing things like this.

I wondered when someone would have the first post in the month of March in this category.

Why is it that KABC and WABC are more tabloidal in their newscasts while KGO seems to be more into hard news out of the ABC O&O's. I noticed that KGO seems to keep the hard news as the top story like local Bay Area Politics and a shooting in Oakland, Richmond and San Francisco. Here's why KGO is less tabloidal than other ABC O&O's. One the Bay area viewers are more likeley to criticize the media than other markets. 2 Roger Grimsby make KGO the number 1 station in the Bay area in the 1960's for putting hard news in the station before Roger was moved to WABC. 3 Fluff tends to be put in the end on Bay Area newscasts after sports. VanAmburg and Jerry Jensen kept parts of Grimsby's legacy alive in the Bay Area leading them to be the number1 station in the Bay Area. KGO tends to follow the World News Format while WABC and KABC follows the GMA format. KGO tends to also fill in some science segments in its newscasts compared to the other O&O's. finally KGO tends to put its most fluff segments to another show called "The View from the Bay"

 

[dgendvil]

What about KGTV (San Diego), KEYT (Santa Barbara), KERO (Bakersfield) & KFSN (Fresno)? These stations don't seem to get the fluff as ABC 7 is doing now.

 

[searadiofreak]

This is the same station that:

1) pioneered "happy talk" news in Los Angeles ("It's not like watching news, it's like watching family.");

2) in 1977 made a week-long series, dramatic music and undertones and all, on their own anchor Christina Lund having a baby;

3) created regional hysteria and a lynch mob mentality due to the sleazy reporting of Wayne Satz on the McMartin Pre-School arrests and trials. Even in the station's advertising on their McMartin coverage, they declared the family guilty. They were ultimately cleared after seven years, 209 counts, God-Knows how many millions in wasted tax dollars, and not one single conviction. Satz quietly slithered over to Channel 13 with his tail between his legs;

4) let the network's Entertainment Division more or less take over the News Dept. and use the newscast to promote and be PR shills for ABC programs. Virtually every KABC-TV newscast winds up being a promo for Oprah or "Lost", or some prime-time programming.

The Sandra Bullock story just adds to the rich history of Eyewitness News doing things like this.

I wondered when someone would have the first post in the month of March in this category.

Why is it that KABC and WABC are more tabloidal in their newscasts while KGO seems to be more into hard news out of the ABC O&O's. I noticed that KGO seems to keep the hard news as the top story like local Bay Area Politics and a shooting in Oakland, Richmond and San Francisco. Here's why KGO is less tabloidal than other ABC O&O's. One the Bay area viewers are more likeley to criticize the media than other markets. 2 Roger Grimsby make KGO the number 1 station in the Bay area in the 1960's for putting hard news in the station before Roger was moved to WABC. 3 Fluff tends to be put in the end on Bay Area newscasts after sports. VanAmburg and Jerry Jensen kept parts of Grimsby's legacy alive in the Bay Area leading them to be the number1 station in the Bay Area. KGO tends to follow the World News Format while WABC and KABC follows the GMA format. KGO tends to also fill in some science segments in its newscasts compared to the other O&O's. finally KGO tends to put its most fluff segments to another show called "The View from the Bay"

Good post, and you answered your own question. I will add that the psychographics are quite different in the Bay Area. The populace there is less interested in show biz and sensationalism, and more interested in real news. Pure and simple. And the hard news gets even harder beyond KGO, as evidenced by the other network affiliates in the market over the years.

 

[recto101]

What about KGTV (San Diego), KEYT (Santa Barbara), KERO (Bakersfield) & KFSN (Fresno)? These stations don't seem to get the fluff as ABC 7 is doing now.

I'll need to see the webcasts of KGTV (San Diego), KEYT (Santa Barbara), KERO (Bakersfield) & KFSN (Fresno). Compared to LA, NY and SF.

 

[recto101]

...not to mention the less-than-classic teaming of those two inflated egos that couldn't stand one another, Paul Moyer and Ann Martin ;-) ...

This internal rivalry did not just happen at KABC alone this happened on the other ABC O&O's as well.
You got to look at KGO in the 1960's It was Roger Grimsby vs. the General manager of KGO in the 1960's those two inflated egos blasted each other for causing KGO to become tabloidal and thats how ABC moved Roger to WABC in NYC. Also KGO in the 1990's when WBBM's Joe Ahern was the GM at KGO fired Pete Giddings for Spencer Christian. and in 1986 at WABC when Roger Grimsby and News Director Bill Applegate (incidentally later to WBBM) blasted each other for making WABC's news ratings look bad later resulting with Roger removed from ABC after 26 years. and Also at KGO in 1986 Roger Grimsby SF replacement Van Amburg was removed based on age bias from KGO management.

 

[Carmine5]

Today's lead-in headline on KABC-TV at 4:00!

Marriage troubles for Sandra Bullock.....

This is being said while the screen shot of coverage of a kidnapping attempt at a Ranch Palos Verdes elementary school from earlier today. They then went live to the chopper report from above Ranch Palos Verdes.

I'm thinking, too, that since we live in the entertainment capitol of the US, it's not at all unusual for entertainment industry news to lead a newscast. After all when someone like Tom Hanks expresses affection for the late Hal Fishman, you know industry insiders are watching.

c5

 

[recto101]

KGO rarely slip into fluff news unless its a death of a celebrity like Michael Jackson. Thats when KGO does slip into fluff. Or when a local broadcasting legend retires or dies thats when KGO slip into fluff but not on the same level that the NYC Media and LA media does it. Sometimes Chicago and Washington DC would do that.

 

[recto101]

Look at youtube clips of LA tv stations in the early 1980's like KTLA 10pm News in this time frame. KTLA, KTTV and KHJ-KCAL once formatted their News like KTVU here in the Bay Area before they followed the News format like HLN, Fox News and CNN of today.

 

[Carmine5]

A trend I find disturbing is that all too often TV journalists are forgetting to use the most basic of journalistic rules: the inverted pyramid to tell a news story. KTLA's Dave Mecham is probably the worst offender but they all stray from this rule from time-to-time. It may be that field reporters are relying too much on the story set-up and throw to provide the most important facts. But I'm finding that the newsroom writers themselves are failing to consistently use the pyramid. Couple that with a reporter who doesn't use it and you have a story package that is confusing and uninformative.

As much as I dislike his style, Jaime Chambers does a good job of using the inverted pyramid followed by Cher Calvin. Rachel Kim is also very good employing the inverted pyramid in her reports. But as professional journalists they should all be doing it.

c5

 

[LKellerIII]

...not to mention the less-than-classic teaming of those two inflated egos that couldn't stand one another, Paul Moyer and Ann Martin ;-) ...

This internal rivalry did not just happen at KABC alone this happened on the other ABC O&O's as well.
You got to look at KGO in the 1960's It was Roger Grimsby vs. the General manager of KGO in the 1960's those two inflated egos blasted each other for causing KGO to become tabloidal and thats how ABC moved Roger to WABC in NYC. Also KGO in the 1990's when WBBM's Joe Ahern was the GM at KGO fired Pete Giddings for Spencer Christian. and in 1986 at WABC when Roger Grimsby and News Director Bill Applegate (incidentally later to WBBM) blasted each other for making WABC's news ratings look bad later resulting with Roger removed from ABC after 26 years. and Also at KGO in 1986 Roger Grimsby SF replacement Van Amburg was removed based on age bias from KGO management.

I'll have to disagree with that one. Van Amburg was removed because he was a temperamental dilletante who had convinced himself that he was the greatest anchor in the world, and because he was making way too much money.

When his co-anchor (Jerry Jensen) died, he anchored solo for awhile, then had a temper tantrum with management when they brought in Suzanne Saunders (Shaw) to co-anchor.

Van's salary was based on the fact that Channel 7 News Scene was the highest rated local news broadcast in all time slots by far, and this held for the entire decade of the 70s. But by the 1983 or so, the party was over, and the other stations were making big inroads in the ratings, particularly KPIX with Dave McElhatton.

ABC had been purchased by Capital Cities - they were penny pinchers, and were loathe to pay "Van" a reported $600,000 per year when he was no longer delivering the goods. They hired Pete Wilson (RIP) for less than half; reportedly $250,000.

The fact that Van was older (probably in his late 50s) was irrelevant. Perhaps ironically, he's outlived the much younger Pete Wilson.

 

[michael hagerty]

...not to mention the less-than-classic teaming of those two inflated egos that couldn't stand one another, Paul Moyer and Ann Martin ;-) ...

This internal rivalry did not just happen at KABC alone this happened on the other ABC O&O's as well.
You got to look at KGO in the 1960's It was Roger Grimsby vs. the General manager of KGO in the 1960's those two inflated egos blasted each other for causing KGO to become tabloidal and thats how ABC moved Roger to WABC in NYC. Also KGO in the 1990's when WBBM's Joe Ahern was the GM at KGO fired Pete Giddings for Spencer Christian. and in 1986 at WABC when Roger Grimsby and News Director Bill Applegate (incidentally later to WBBM) blasted each other for making WABC's news ratings look bad later resulting with Roger removed from ABC after 26 years. and Also at KGO in 1986 Roger Grimsby SF replacement Van Amburg was removed based on age bias from KGO management.

I'll have to disagree with that one. Van Amburg was removed because he was a temperamental dilletante who had convinced himself that he was the greatest anchor in the world, and because he was making way too much money.

When his co-anchor (Jerry Jensen) died, he anchored solo for awhile, then had a temper tantrum with management when they brought in Suzanne Saunders (Shaw) to co-anchor.

Van's salary was based on the fact that Channel 7 News Scene was the highest rated local news broadcast in all time slots by far, and this held for the entire decade of the 70s. But by the 1983 or so, the party was over, and the other stations were making big inroads in the ratings, particularly KPIX with Dave McElhatton.

ABC had been purchased by Capital Cities - they were penny pinchers, and were loathe to pay "Van" a reported $600,000 per year when he was no longer delivering the goods. They hired Pete Wilson (RIP) for less than half; reportedly $250,000.

The fact that Van was older (probably in his late 50s) was irrelevant. Perhaps ironically, he's outlived the much younger Pete Wilson.

Llew:
I'll agree that Van wasn't a victim of age discrimination, and that his paycheck (huge by the standards of any other anchor in San Francisco at the time...although KGO's weather anchor Pete Giddings was raking it in big-time, too) was a major factor.

Heck, I'll even go with "tempermental" (we baby anchors marveled at the story....true or not, we never knew...than Van allegedly had the clout to have Valerie Coleman...or was it Marcia Brandwynne?...banned from the set when he was on through a clause in his contract that made KGO pay a penalty every time Van had to co-anchor with her).

But "dilletante"?

Main Entry: dil·et·tante
Pronunciation: \ˈdi-lə-ˌtänt, -ˌtant; ˌdi-lə-ˈ\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural dil·et·tantes or dil·et·tan·ti \-ˈtän-tē, -ˈtan-tē\
Etymology: Italian, from present participle of dilettare to delight, from Latin dilectare — more at delight
Date: 1748
1 : an admirer or lover of the arts
2 : a person having a superficial interest in an art or a branch of knowledge : dabbler


I'll assume #2 is closes to what you mean. And I gotta disagree. Van had chops, he knew news, he knew what he was doing. And at a time when CapCities/ABC was paying both Jerry Dunphy and Paul Moyer $1 million apiece in L.A. $600,000 for Van in San Francisco wasn't all that out of line.

 

[LKellerIII]

...not to mention the less-than-classic teaming of those two inflated egos that couldn't stand one another, Paul Moyer and Ann Martin ;-) ...

Llew:
I'll agree that Van wasn't a victim of age discrimination, and that his paycheck (huge by the standards of any other anchor in San Francisco at the time...although KGO's weather anchor Pete Giddings was raking it in big-time, too) was a major factor.

Heck, I'll even go with "tempermental" (we baby anchors marveled at the story....true or not, we never knew...than Van allegedly had the clout to have Valerie Coleman...or was it Marcia Brandwynne?...banned from the set when he was on through a clause in his contract that made KGO pay a penalty every time Van had to co-anchor with her).

But "dilletante"?

Main Entry: dil·et·tante
Pronunciation: \ˈdi-lə-ˌtänt, -ˌtant; ˌdi-lə-ˈ\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural dil·et·tantes or dil·et·tan·ti \-ˈtän-tē, -ˈtan-tē\
Etymology: Italian, from present participle of dilettare to delight, from Latin dilectare — more at delight
Date: 1748
1 : an admirer or lover of the arts
2 : a person having a superficial interest in an art or a branch of knowledge : dabbler


I'll assume #2 is closes to what you mean. And I gotta disagree. Van had chops, he knew news, he knew what he was doing. And at a time when CapCities/ABC was paying both Jerry Dunphy and Paul Moyer $1 million apiece in L.A. $600,000 for Van in San Francisco wasn't all that out of line.

Jeez...picky, picky, picky, Michael You're right - I misused the word, so I can't falsely claim I was thinking of definition #2, so I'll just concede defeat. I also misspelled it. Let's just settle on 'egotistical' and 'temperamental.' The point is - $600K may not have been out of line when News Scene was top rated, but Van was losing ground by the early 80s. None of the other 3 stations (KRON, KPIX, or KTVU) could even come close during the 70s...the Channel 7 late news was frequently rated among the Top 10 shows of the week in the local Nielsons.

But then KTVU dropped the Action News crap and started building up an excellent and highly respected news team, and KPIX hired the beloved Dave McElhatton away from KCBS radio. "Mac" was cleverly marketed as the antidote to the "Ron Burgundy" style anchorman...partially just by his looks - he was balding and overweight - but it worked. And both KPIX and KTVU stopped catering to the lowest common denominator of happy talk and sensationalism, and that worked too.

Suddenly Van wasn't the only game in town. Then you add in his high salary, ego, and the well publicized tantrums, and you had the makings of a downfall.

Shortly after Van was fired, Ronn Owens interviewed him on his KGO radio show...which may have taken a bit of courage on Ronn's part. I remember Van saying that Cap Cities wouldn't negotiate with him at all...implying that he would have taken a pay cut. I guess they just wanted him out. The closest LA analogy to Van's story is probably George Putnam - who was reportedly the highest paid anchorman in America during the 60s. But by the 1973 or so - the game was over. His style seemed old fashioned, and people were sick of his pomposity and on-air ego, so Gene Autry decided to save a huge pot of money, and gave George the hook. The difference - Putnam was supposedly a great guy in person, but I never heard that said about Van Amburg.

I wouldn't agree that Van had "chops" - I'd just say that he recognized a good news hook, and knew how to use sensationalism to keep people tuned in. Add in those KGO-TV comic book graphics and the short, fast moving stories, and the recipe worked...for awhile.

 

[michael hagerty]

I wouldn't agree that Van had "chops" - I'd just say that he recognized a good news hook, and knew how to use sensationalism to keep people tuned in. Add in those KGO-TV comic book graphics and the short, fast moving stories, and the recipe worked...for awhile.

Well, let's remember that the hook and sensationalism were usually the domain of the producer, not the anchor.

I always laugh when the "Severed penis found on railroad tracks in the East Bay...film at 11" tease is attributed to Van. I was watching that night. It was Valerie who delivered the line.

Van, however, did have his share of great ones. My fave: "He drove up to the tollbooth with a dollar in his hand...and left with a bullet in his gut. Film at 11."

But Jerry Dunphy gets the all-time award: "Hollywod vice squad cops bust kiddie porn bookstore and our cameras follow 'em in! Film at 11!"

 

[LKellerIII]

Van presumably wrote some of his own copy, so I think you have to give him some credit for those great teasers.

Not to be picky, Michael...but you do it to me, so what the heck - that oft-satirized teaser line "...Film at 11:00" was rarely uttered in the Bay Area that I can remember. Generally, the tag was "Details at 11:00." The reason was simple - most of those sensationalized items rarely had anything to back them up...nobody actually went out to the tracks to film the severed penis, in other words. In fact, in those days before all the silly "live" coverage they do these days - the violent and gory stories were often just read by the anchor with no field reporter at all.

Which leads to a question for you, since you work in the business...and this will be more relevant to the LA TV board than Van Amburg: What is the point of all the "live" coverage, anyway...especiallly on the late news? Ninety percent of the time, the station is just sending the poor field reporter out to some dark location to introduce the video s/he shot at 3:00. It makes sense to go live if the story is still happening at 11:00..you know, the fire still burning, or whatever. But otherwise, it seems useless, especially if there are no updates to the story. It must cost the station extra money in this bad economy, and it keeps the field reporters away from their families until midnight. In the last decade or so in the Bay Area, I've noticed that these reporters often make career changes and go into other lines of work. It's no wonder.

 

[michael hagerty]

Van presumably wrote some of his own copy, so I think you have to give him some credit for those great teasers.

Not to be picky, Michael...but you do it to me, so what the heck - that oft-satirized teaser line "...Film at 11:00" was rarely uttered in the Bay Area that I can remember. Generally, the tag was "Details at 11:00." The reason was simple - most of those sensationalized items rarely had anything to back them up...nobody actually went out to the tracks to film the severed penis, in other words. In fact, in those days before all the silly "live" coverage they do these days - the violent and gory stories were often just read by the anchor with no field reporter at all.

Which leads to a question for you, since you work in the business...and this will be more relevant to the LA TV board than Van Amburg: What is the point of all the "live" coverage, anyway...especiallly on the late news? Ninety percent of the time, the station is just sending the poor field reporter out to some dark location to introduce the video s/he shot at 3:00. It makes sense to go live if the story is still happening at 11:00..you know, the fire still burning, or whatever. But otherwise, it seems useless, especially if there are no updates to the story. It must cost the station extra money in this bad economy, and it keeps the field reporters away from their families until midnight. In the last decade or so in the Bay Area, I've noticed that these reporters often make career changes and go into other lines of work. It's no wonder.

Ah, but Llew...in the case of the penis tease...they did. We were treated to shots of a handkerchief lying on the tracks, a pair of tweezers and a baggie.

Actually, that day, they could have stayed home and it would have been fine with me.

As for live shots on the late news...you're saying what the people who have had to do them have been saying since the minicam and the live truck were invented. The good news is that the station I work for believes in more news, which translates to story count...which means if you can tell the story in 30 seconds instead of 60, great. And live shots chew up time like crazy...anchor lead-in, reporter live, taped package in between, reporter live tag, anchor question to reporter, reporter answer, anchor thank you, anchor and co-anchor reacting briefly....hard to get that done in under 1:40.

 

[recto101]

Now i understand why KABC and WABC are more Tabloidal than KGO. one WABC and KABC have to compete against Local Fox O&O's like WNYW and KTTV where they have to bow down to tabloidalism while KGO competes with a local fox affilliate that is not a Fox O&O like KTVU where that station is the most respected Fox station in the country.

 

[recto101]

...not to mention the less-than-classic teaming of those two inflated egos that couldn't stand one another, Paul Moyer and Ann Martin ;-) ...

Llew:
I'll agree that Van wasn't a victim of age discrimination, and that his paycheck (huge by the standards of any other anchor in San Francisco at the time...although KGO's weather anchor Pete Giddings was raking it in big-time, too) was a major factor.

Heck, I'll even go with "tempermental" (we baby anchors marveled at the story....true or not, we never knew...than Van allegedly had the clout to have Valerie Coleman...or was it Marcia Brandwynne?...banned from the set when he was on through a clause in his contract that made KGO pay a penalty every time Van had to co-anchor with her).

But "dilletante"?

Main Entry: dil·et·tante
Pronunciation: \ˈdi-lə-ˌtänt, -ˌtant; ˌdi-lə-ˈ\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural dil·et·tantes or dil·et·tan·ti \-ˈtän-tē, -ˈtan-tē\
Etymology: Italian, from present participle of dilettare to delight, from Latin dilectare — more at delight
Date: 1748
1 : an admirer or lover of the arts
2 : a person having a superficial interest in an art or a branch of knowledge : dabbler


I'll assume #2 is closes to what you mean. And I gotta disagree. Van had chops, he knew news, he knew what he was doing. And at a time when CapCities/ABC was paying both Jerry Dunphy and Paul Moyer $1 million apiece in L.A. $600,000 for Van in San Francisco wasn't all that out of line.

Jeez...picky, picky, picky, Michael You're right - I misused the word, so I can't falsely claim I was thinking of definition #2, so I'll just concede defeat. I also misspelled it. Let's just settle on 'egotistical' and 'temperamental.' The point is - $600K may not have been out of line when News Scene was top rated, but Van was losing ground by the early 80s. None of the other 3 stations (KRON, KPIX, or KTVU) could even come close during the 70s...the Channel 7 late news was frequently rated among the Top 10 shows of the week in the local Nielsons.

But then KTVU dropped the Action News crap and started building up an excellent and highly respected news team, and KPIX hired the beloved Dave McElhatton away from KCBS radio. "Mac" was cleverly marketed as the antidote to the "Ron Burgundy" style anchorman...partially just by his looks - he was balding and overweight - but it worked. And both KPIX and KTVU stopped catering to the lowest common denominator of happy talk and sensationalism, and that worked too.

Suddenly Van wasn't the only game in town. Then you add in his high salary, ego, and the well publicized tantrums, and you had the makings of a downfall.

Shortly after Van was fired, Ronn Owens interviewed him on his KGO radio show...which may have taken a bit of courage on Ronn's part. I remember Van saying that Cap Cities wouldn't negotiate with him at all...implying that he would have taken a pay cut. I guess they just wanted him out. The closest LA analogy to Van's story is probably George Putnam - who was reportedly the highest paid anchorman in America during the 60s. But by the 1973 or so - the game was over. His style seemed old fashioned, and people were sick of his pomposity and on-air ego, so Gene Autry decided to save a huge pot of money, and gave George the hook. The difference - Putnam was supposedly a great guy in person, but I never heard that said about Van Amburg.

I wouldn't agree that Van had "chops" - I'd just say that he recognized a good news hook, and knew how to use sensationalism to keep people tuned in. Add in those KGO-TV comic book graphics and the short, fast moving stories, and the recipe worked...for awhile.

Was WABC and ex KGO-anchor Roger Grimsby ever like this in or fired 1986 besides tirades at Management. I noticed that the personas of Roger Grimsby and VanAmburg are very similar. in how they tend to have tirades at management while KGO's Jerry Jensen and WABC's Bill Beutel tended to be the calmer anchors in the News scene mix.