Tom Terry's Matthew Coverage

[DOGDOG]

Tom Terry's coverage of hurricanes needs to be the textbook of how this should be done. Covered in a prior post by me, WDBO's coverage should also be a textbook for hurricane coverage. In that case, that textbook would be entitled, "The Three Big Things About Hurricane Coverage-Hype, Sensationalism and Exaggeration!" If you paid close attention to his on-air coverage, you will see REPORTING. Tom talks about the facts based on the evidence. There is NO SENSE of exaggeration or sensationalism. It is interesting to note, Tom works with WDBO and can be heard, at times, there. However, that's where it ends! The ONLY criticism of Matthew I have from WFTV is this STUPID idea of interrupting coverage with this ridiculous synthesized voice with the latest warning. They didn't do that before. There's NO reason to do that now. Since you have the broadcast originating at the studio, that warning can be relayed to the talent and they can interrupt their coverage and read it. (Certainly they will get the pronunciation correct!) Coming away from listening to BOTH stations during this hurricane, there's no doubt in my mind, Terry's coverage is trustable while WDBO is nothing more than hype, sensationalism and exaggeration...the three big things about WDBO's coverage!!!

 

[davideduardo]

The ONLY criticism of Matthew I have from WFTV is this STUPID idea of interrupting coverage with this ridiculous synthesized voice with the latest warning. They didn't do that before. There's NO reason to do that now.

Was that a station-originated synthesized voice or an official EAS activation?

 

[byron]

Was that a station-originated synthesized voice or an official EAS activation?

Not sure what the OP is referring to, but it wasn't making it over the WFTV web stream, which I had on constantly. It was likely an EAS interruption that WFTV had no direct control or involvement in. WFTV's overall coverage and field reporting were both excellent.

Byron