In every newscast this week, channel 8 has seemingly started its hurricane coverage by tossing to meteorologist Pete Delkus in Baton Rouge. His insight was okay on the first day or so when this was primarily a weather story. However, as the story has turned to a recovery effort, it has seemed very odd for him to be the lead reporter on this story. He more or less winds up repeating what we already know and tossing to other reporters who have more insight. It seems like a waste to have him there now.
-
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
WFAA using Delkus as lead "reporter" on storm?
- Thread starter arnoldevns
- Start date
E
edwardrmurrow
Guest
> In every newscast this week, channel 8 has seemingly started
> its hurricane coverage by tossing to meteorologist Pete
> Delkus in Baton Rouge. His insight was okay on the first
> day or so when this was primarily a weather story. However,
> as the story has turned to a recovery effort, it has seemed
> very odd for him to be the lead reporter on this story. He
> more or less winds up repeating what we already know and
> tossing to other reporters who have more insight. It seems
> like a waste to have him there now.
>
Yes and no. WFAA already has him there so use him in any capacity and since the story is weather related, go for it.
On the other side of the coin however, I still question the need for every station to send their own reporters, when there are plenty of network reporters,and company affiliate reporters already on the scene. There is really no need for a "local angle" except for the evacuation centers set up away from New Orleans. If the "local" affiliate asks its sister affiliates for help, then by all means go. If not stay put. The abundance of out of state and out of town reporters appears to put a strain on the system as far as the local resources are concern. The rush for ratings needs to take a back seat on stories of this type.
> its hurricane coverage by tossing to meteorologist Pete
> Delkus in Baton Rouge. His insight was okay on the first
> day or so when this was primarily a weather story. However,
> as the story has turned to a recovery effort, it has seemed
> very odd for him to be the lead reporter on this story. He
> more or less winds up repeating what we already know and
> tossing to other reporters who have more insight. It seems
> like a waste to have him there now.
>
Yes and no. WFAA already has him there so use him in any capacity and since the story is weather related, go for it.
On the other side of the coin however, I still question the need for every station to send their own reporters, when there are plenty of network reporters,and company affiliate reporters already on the scene. There is really no need for a "local angle" except for the evacuation centers set up away from New Orleans. If the "local" affiliate asks its sister affiliates for help, then by all means go. If not stay put. The abundance of out of state and out of town reporters appears to put a strain on the system as far as the local resources are concern. The rush for ratings needs to take a back seat on stories of this type.
> > In every newscast this week, channel 8 has seemingly
> started
> > its hurricane coverage by tossing to meteorologist Pete
> > Delkus in Baton Rouge. His insight was okay on the first
> > day or so when this was primarily a weather story.
> However,
> > as the story has turned to a recovery effort, it has
> seemed
> > very odd for him to be the lead reporter on this story.
> He
> > more or less winds up repeating what we already know and
> > tossing to other reporters who have more insight. It
> seems
> > like a waste to have him there now.
> >
> Yes and no. WFAA already has him there so use him in any
> capacity and since the story is weather related, go for it.
>
> On the other side of the coin however, I still question the
> need for every station to send their own reporters, when
> there are plenty of network reporters,and company affiliate
> reporters already on the scene. There is really no need for
> a "local angle" except for the evacuation centers set up
> away from New Orleans. If the "local" affiliate asks its
> sister affiliates for help, then by all means go. If not
> stay put. The abundance of out of state and out of town
> reporters appears to put a strain on the system as far as
> the local resources are concern. The rush for ratings needs
> to take a back seat on stories of this type.
>
That last sentence cuts to the center of what's behinf distant stations putting crews into the storm area--news departments establishing a presence even when there's no local tie in. Stations are overly concerned that their viewers will think less of them for not being on the scene and allowing networks and sister stations to get the job done. It's unfortunate, and expensive, that this attitude prevails, in light of the fact that the audience just wants competent coverage. Every local station within 500 miles need not maintain a foothold on the event by originating its own coverage. So it is indeed the ratings game they play, but where's the payoff by spending money on putting non-local crews on stories, even as devastating as New Orleans. Viewers still will stay tuned and ratings won't be significantly impacted one way or the other. It's just the way local television is done these days. But, again, such is the drive for each station to establish its own identity with an eye toward getting a step ahead of the competition. After all, it's their money.
> started
> > its hurricane coverage by tossing to meteorologist Pete
> > Delkus in Baton Rouge. His insight was okay on the first
> > day or so when this was primarily a weather story.
> However,
> > as the story has turned to a recovery effort, it has
> seemed
> > very odd for him to be the lead reporter on this story.
> He
> > more or less winds up repeating what we already know and
> > tossing to other reporters who have more insight. It
> seems
> > like a waste to have him there now.
> >
> Yes and no. WFAA already has him there so use him in any
> capacity and since the story is weather related, go for it.
>
> On the other side of the coin however, I still question the
> need for every station to send their own reporters, when
> there are plenty of network reporters,and company affiliate
> reporters already on the scene. There is really no need for
> a "local angle" except for the evacuation centers set up
> away from New Orleans. If the "local" affiliate asks its
> sister affiliates for help, then by all means go. If not
> stay put. The abundance of out of state and out of town
> reporters appears to put a strain on the system as far as
> the local resources are concern. The rush for ratings needs
> to take a back seat on stories of this type.
>
That last sentence cuts to the center of what's behinf distant stations putting crews into the storm area--news departments establishing a presence even when there's no local tie in. Stations are overly concerned that their viewers will think less of them for not being on the scene and allowing networks and sister stations to get the job done. It's unfortunate, and expensive, that this attitude prevails, in light of the fact that the audience just wants competent coverage. Every local station within 500 miles need not maintain a foothold on the event by originating its own coverage. So it is indeed the ratings game they play, but where's the payoff by spending money on putting non-local crews on stories, even as devastating as New Orleans. Viewers still will stay tuned and ratings won't be significantly impacted one way or the other. It's just the way local television is done these days. But, again, such is the drive for each station to establish its own identity with an eye toward getting a step ahead of the competition. After all, it's their money.
The rush for ratings
> needs
> > to take a back seat on stories of this type.
> >
> That last sentence cuts to the center of what's behinf
> distant stations putting crews into the storm area--news
> departments establishing a presence even when there's no
> local tie in. Stations are overly concerned that their
> viewers will think less of them for not being on the scene
> and allowing networks and sister stations to get the job
> done. It's unfortunate, and expensive, that this attitude
> prevails, in light of the fact that the audience just wants
> competent coverage. Every local station within 500 miles
> need not maintain a foothold on the event by originating its
> own coverage. So it is indeed the ratings game they play,
> but where's the payoff by spending money on putting
> non-local crews on stories, even as devastating as New
> Orleans. Viewers still will stay tuned and ratings won't be
> significantly impacted one way or the other. It's just the
> way local television is done these days. But, again, such
> is the drive for each station to establish its own identity
> with an eye toward getting a step ahead of the competition.
> After all, it's their money.
>
It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are straining resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are staying at hotels far away from where the story is and driving in each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping in the news van and eating food they brought along.
Many of the reports I've seen this week from local reporters have a far better and broader perspective of the story than what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore, they have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the story by talking with local folks who have gone into the area to help.
Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or not, stations that commit the resources to a story like this usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes sending local people there a good idea.
> needs
> > to take a back seat on stories of this type.
> >
> That last sentence cuts to the center of what's behinf
> distant stations putting crews into the storm area--news
> departments establishing a presence even when there's no
> local tie in. Stations are overly concerned that their
> viewers will think less of them for not being on the scene
> and allowing networks and sister stations to get the job
> done. It's unfortunate, and expensive, that this attitude
> prevails, in light of the fact that the audience just wants
> competent coverage. Every local station within 500 miles
> need not maintain a foothold on the event by originating its
> own coverage. So it is indeed the ratings game they play,
> but where's the payoff by spending money on putting
> non-local crews on stories, even as devastating as New
> Orleans. Viewers still will stay tuned and ratings won't be
> significantly impacted one way or the other. It's just the
> way local television is done these days. But, again, such
> is the drive for each station to establish its own identity
> with an eye toward getting a step ahead of the competition.
> After all, it's their money.
>
It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are straining resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are staying at hotels far away from where the story is and driving in each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping in the news van and eating food they brought along.
Many of the reports I've seen this week from local reporters have a far better and broader perspective of the story than what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore, they have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the story by talking with local folks who have gone into the area to help.
Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or not, stations that commit the resources to a story like this usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes sending local people there a good idea.
> It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are straining
> resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are staying
> at hotels far away from where the story is and driving in
> each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping in
> the news van and eating food they brought along.
>
> Many of the reports I've seen this week from local reporters
> have a far better and broader perspective of the story than
> what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore, they
> have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the story
> by talking with local folks who have gone into the area to
> help.
>
> Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest
> ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or not,
> stations that commit the resources to a story like this
> usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes sending
> local people there a good idea.
>
They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census Estimate) and they are all displaced and most not working. <P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
> resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are staying
> at hotels far away from where the story is and driving in
> each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping in
> the news van and eating food they brought along.
>
> Many of the reports I've seen this week from local reporters
> have a far better and broader perspective of the story than
> what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore, they
> have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the story
> by talking with local folks who have gone into the area to
> help.
>
> Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest
> ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or not,
> stations that commit the resources to a story like this
> usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes sending
> local people there a good idea.
>
They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census Estimate) and they are all displaced and most not working. <P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
E
edwardrmurrow
Guest
> > It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are
> straining
> > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are staying
>
> > at hotels far away from where the story is and driving in
> > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping in
>
> > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> >
> > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> reporters
> > have a far better and broader perspective of the story
> than
> > what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore, they
>
> > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the
> story
> > by talking with local folks who have gone into the area to
>
> > help.
> >
> > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest
> > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or not,
>
> > stations that commit the resources to a story like this
> > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes sending
>
> > local people there a good idea.
> >
> They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the
> area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census Estimate)
> and they are all displaced and most not working.
>
They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and its sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked for) is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny line "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise why do they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2? Reason; WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters are only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a break at least once in times like this. As so far as to spending money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves and sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending money there.
> straining
> > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are staying
>
> > at hotels far away from where the story is and driving in
> > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping in
>
> > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> >
> > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> reporters
> > have a far better and broader perspective of the story
> than
> > what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore, they
>
> > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the
> story
> > by talking with local folks who have gone into the area to
>
> > help.
> >
> > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest
> > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or not,
>
> > stations that commit the resources to a story like this
> > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes sending
>
> > local people there a good idea.
> >
> They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the
> area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census Estimate)
> and they are all displaced and most not working.
>
They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and its sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked for) is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny line "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise why do they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2? Reason; WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters are only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a break at least once in times like this. As so far as to spending money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves and sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending money there.
> > > It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are
> > straining
> > > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are
> staying
> >
> > > at hotels far away from where the story is and driving
> in
> > > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping
> in
> >
> > > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> > >
> > > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> > reporters
> > > have a far better and broader perspective of the story
> > than
> > > what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore,
> they
> >
> > > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the
> > story
> > > by talking with local folks who have gone into the area
> to
> >
> > > help.
> > >
> > > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest
>
> > > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or
> not,
> >
> > > stations that commit the resources to a story like this
> > > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes
> sending
> >
> > > local people there a good idea.
> > >
> > They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> > economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the
> > area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census
> Estimate)
> > and they are all displaced and most not working.
> >
> They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and its
> sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is
> sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's
> fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked for)
> is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny line
> "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise why do
> they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2? Reason;
> WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters are
> only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a break at
> least once in times like this. As so far as to spending
> money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves and
> sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending money
> there.
>
Now the only "local" exception to the rule thats made any sense has been Jay Gray. Thats because he's been filing reports with both local(KXAS) and network(NBC), I wonder if jay will get the bigger network correspondant shot he deserves after this is all said and done.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Slambang on 09/05/05 02:07 AM.</FONT></P>
> > straining
> > > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are
> staying
> >
> > > at hotels far away from where the story is and driving
> in
> > > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're sleeping
> in
> >
> > > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> > >
> > > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> > reporters
> > > have a far better and broader perspective of the story
> > than
> > > what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore,
> they
> >
> > > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the
> > story
> > > by talking with local folks who have gone into the area
> to
> >
> > > help.
> > >
> > > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the highest
>
> > > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or
> not,
> >
> > > stations that commit the resources to a story like this
> > > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes
> sending
> >
> > > local people there a good idea.
> > >
> > They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> > economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the
> > area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census
> Estimate)
> > and they are all displaced and most not working.
> >
> They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and its
> sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is
> sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's
> fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked for)
> is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny line
> "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise why do
> they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2? Reason;
> WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters are
> only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a break at
> least once in times like this. As so far as to spending
> money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves and
> sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending money
> there.
>
Now the only "local" exception to the rule thats made any sense has been Jay Gray. Thats because he's been filing reports with both local(KXAS) and network(NBC), I wonder if jay will get the bigger network correspondant shot he deserves after this is all said and done.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Slambang on 09/05/05 02:07 AM.</FONT></P>
E
edwardrmurrow
Guest
> > > > It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are
> > > straining
> > > > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are
> > staying
> > >
> > > > at hotels far away from where the story is and driving
>
> > in
> > > > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're
> sleeping
> > in
> > >
> > > > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> > > >
> > > > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> > > reporters
> > > > have a far better and broader perspective of the story
>
> > > than
> > > > what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore,
> > they
> > >
> > > > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the
>
> > > story
> > > > by talking with local folks who have gone into the
> area
> > to
> > >
> > > > help.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the
> highest
> >
> > > > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or
> > not,
> > >
> > > > stations that commit the resources to a story like
> this
> > > > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes
> > sending
> > >
> > > > local people there a good idea.
> > > >
> > > They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> > > economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the
>
> > > area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census
> > Estimate)
> > > and they are all displaced and most not working.
> > >
> > They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and its
>
> > sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is
> > sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's
> > fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked for)
>
> > is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny line
>
> > "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise why
> do
> > they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2?
> Reason;
> > WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters
> are
> > only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a break
> at
> > least once in times like this. As so far as to spending
> > money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves and
>
> > sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending
> money
> > there.
> >
> Now the only "local" exception to the rule thats made any
> sense has been Jay Gray. Thats because he's been filing
> reports with both local(KXAS) and network(NBC), I wonder if
> jay will get the bigger network correspondant shot he
> deserves after this is all said and done.
>
Now that is the proper way to do it. If you are serving the Network AND a local affiliate or company affiliates it's proper. Just to be there to PROMO you are there for ratings on a tragedy of this magnitude is insensitive.
> > > straining
> > > > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are
> > staying
> > >
> > > > at hotels far away from where the story is and driving
>
> > in
> > > > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're
> sleeping
> > in
> > >
> > > > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> > > >
> > > > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> > > reporters
> > > > have a far better and broader perspective of the story
>
> > > than
> > > > what I've seen on the national networks. Furthermore,
> > they
> > >
> > > > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on the
>
> > > story
> > > > by talking with local folks who have gone into the
> area
> > to
> > >
> > > > help.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the
> highest
> >
> > > > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it or
> > not,
> > >
> > > > stations that commit the resources to a story like
> this
> > > > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes
> > sending
> > >
> > > > local people there a good idea.
> > > >
> > > They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> > > economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into the
>
> > > area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census
> > Estimate)
> > > and they are all displaced and most not working.
> > >
> > They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and its
>
> > sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is
> > sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's
> > fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked for)
>
> > is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny line
>
> > "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise why
> do
> > they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2?
> Reason;
> > WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters
> are
> > only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a break
> at
> > least once in times like this. As so far as to spending
> > money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves and
>
> > sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending
> money
> > there.
> >
> Now the only "local" exception to the rule thats made any
> sense has been Jay Gray. Thats because he's been filing
> reports with both local(KXAS) and network(NBC), I wonder if
> jay will get the bigger network correspondant shot he
> deserves after this is all said and done.
>
Now that is the proper way to do it. If you are serving the Network AND a local affiliate or company affiliates it's proper. Just to be there to PROMO you are there for ratings on a tragedy of this magnitude is insensitive.
> > > > > It's wrong to assume that the local reporters are
> > > > straining
> > > > > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are
> > > staying
> > > >
> > > > > at hotels far away from where the story is and
> driving
> >
> > > in
> > > > > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're
> > sleeping
> > > in
> > > >
> > > > > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> > > > >
> > > > > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> > > > reporters
> > > > > have a far better and broader perspective of the
> story
> >
> > > > than
> > > > > what I've seen on the national networks.
> Furthermore,
> > > they
> > > >
> > > > > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on
> the
> >
> > > > story
> > > > > by talking with local folks who have gone into the
> > area
> > > to
> > > >
> > > > > help.
> > > > >
>
> > > > > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the
> > highest
> > >
> > > > > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it
> or
> > > not,
> > > >
> > > > > stations that commit the resources to a story like
> > this
> > > > > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes
> > > sending
> > > >
> > > > > local people there a good idea.
> > > > >
> > > > They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> > > > economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into
> the
> >
> > > > area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census
> > > Estimate)
> > > > and they are all displaced and most not working.
> > > >
> > > They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and
> its
> >
> > > sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is
> > > sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's
> > > fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked
> for)
> >
> > > is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny
> line
> >
> > > "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise
> why
> > do
> > > they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2?
> > Reason;
> > > WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters
> > are
> > > only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a
> break
> > at
> > > least once in times like this. As so far as to spending
> > > money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves
> and
> >
> > > sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending
> > money
> > > there.
> > >
> > Now the only "local" exception to the rule thats made any
> > sense has been Jay Gray. Thats because he's been filing
> > reports with both local(KXAS) and network(NBC), I wonder
> if
> > jay will get the bigger network correspondant shot he
> > deserves after this is all said and done.
> >
> Now that is the proper way to do it. If you are serving the
> Network AND a local affiliate or company affiliates it's
> proper. Just to be there to PROMO you are there for ratings
> on a tragedy of this magnitude is insensitive.
>
One other note about Jay: It seemes every piece he takes on is both professional and on-target. He to me seems like possible network anchor material, unlike brian williams, who doesnt really seem to care either way.
> > > > straining
> > > > > resources in the hurricane zone. Usually they are
> > > staying
> > > >
> > > > > at hotels far away from where the story is and
> driving
> >
> > > in
> > > > > each day to cover it. Either that, or they're
> > sleeping
> > > in
> > > >
> > > > > the news van and eating food they brought along.
> > > > >
> > > > > Many of the reports I've seen this week from local
> > > > reporters
> > > > > have a far better and broader perspective of the
> story
> >
> > > > than
> > > > > what I've seen on the national networks.
> Furthermore,
> > > they
> > > >
> > > > > have done a good job of finding a "local" angle on
> the
> >
> > > > story
> > > > > by talking with local folks who have gone into the
> > area
> > > to
> > > >
> > > > > help.
> > > > >
>
> > > > > Finally, the goal of the stations is to draw the
> > highest
> > >
> > > > > ratings for their news shows. Whether you like it
> or
> > > not,
> > > >
> > > > > stations that commit the resources to a story like
> > this
> > > > > usually have higher ratings. That fact alone makes
> > > sending
> > > >
> > > > > local people there a good idea.
> > > > >
> > > > They are also SPENDING money in an area that has it's
> > > > economy ruined. SOMEONE has to bring some money into
> the
> >
> > > > area. New Orleans proper had 462,269 (2004 Census
> > > Estimate)
> > > > and they are all displaced and most not working.
> > > >
> > > They still are basically "getting in the way". WWL and
> its
> >
> > > sister stations are doing a damn fine job, If Belo is
> > > sending techs, and equipment to keep them going, that's
> > > fine,but sending reporters( unless specifically asked
> for)
> >
> > > is mainly for ratings not a desire to help. The corny
> line
> >
> > > "too many cooks spoiling the soup" applies. Otherwise
> why
> > do
> > > they have a feed from WWL running on TXCN, and 8.2?
> > Reason;
> > > WWL is doing excellent reporting and outside reporters
> > are
> > > only dramatic actors. A Rush for Ratings can take a
> break
> > at
> > > least once in times like this. As so far as to spending
> > > money, if they are bringing in supplies for themselves
> and
> >
> > > sleeping in their trucks they are not really spending
> > money
> > > there.
> > >
> > Now the only "local" exception to the rule thats made any
> > sense has been Jay Gray. Thats because he's been filing
> > reports with both local(KXAS) and network(NBC), I wonder
> if
> > jay will get the bigger network correspondant shot he
> > deserves after this is all said and done.
> >
> Now that is the proper way to do it. If you are serving the
> Network AND a local affiliate or company affiliates it's
> proper. Just to be there to PROMO you are there for ratings
> on a tragedy of this magnitude is insensitive.
>
One other note about Jay: It seemes every piece he takes on is both professional and on-target. He to me seems like possible network anchor material, unlike brian williams, who doesnt really seem to care either way.
- Status