-
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
What would you do to KTVK?
- Thread starter MarquisP4
- Start date
MarquisP4 said:
I mentioned some of this in another thread, but what I'd do is the following:
1. Sell KASW (I'm sure Daystar would be interested) and move the CW programming to 3. I'm pretty sure that Wonderful Russ could sell Channel 61 in only 44 days. ;D
Are there any companies that can support a duopoly of one female-oriented VHF independent and a high-UHF minor network affiliate? Or, for that matter, any duopoly at all in this economy (Why is KUTP on the air other than to carry Suns games)?
2. I'd sharply reduce the number of newscasts - GMAZ and a 9 PM newscast should be it. KTVK doesn't have the personnel anymore, and most of who they have shouldn't be working in a market any larger than Syracuse.
Broadcasting and journalism school grads belong in small markets, not Market #12. Even as an indie, their "news" personnel are wanting for the most part. There are exceptions (Patti Kirkpatrick is good, as are Frank Camacho & Tess Rafols, and Brittney Shipp is a rising star), but too many of them are in over their heads. The talent is there but the experience is not.
Not that they don't try their best, mind you. But they still need experience in smaller markets.
3. Dr. Phil's 15 minutes of fame ended 3 years ago. Why is he still on the air? Is his contract tied to Oprah's? :
4. In the hours without CW programming (if they follow suggestion #1), compete with AZ-TV and bring in a few reruns in the late-afternoon/early-evening hours. How about a Dialing For Dollars movie? Dewey Hopper needs a job now than Nova-M bit the dust. ;D
5. BRING BACK THE DIAMONDBACKS!!!!!!!!
3
3fan4eva
Guest
I may not know much about this kind of stuff.......but heres what Id do
1. Bring Back the Diamondbacks.....I love that Idea
2. Keep the older and more well known personalities....I know it may cost more, but I personally like a veteran news team.....its why I watch 10 at 9 and 12 at 10
3. Shorten The Evening News from 5-6.....I dont really like all that fluff crap and shorten the 9pm news to 9-9:30
4. Have Oprah only at 3........hey bring Wheel Of Fortune and Jeporady I miss watching them back to back, even thou I was little
5. Watch KTVK in the 90's to get more ideas
6. Fire myself and bring back Phil Alveraz
Thats all I can think of for now
1. Bring Back the Diamondbacks.....I love that Idea
2. Keep the older and more well known personalities....I know it may cost more, but I personally like a veteran news team.....its why I watch 10 at 9 and 12 at 10
3. Shorten The Evening News from 5-6.....I dont really like all that fluff crap and shorten the 9pm news to 9-9:30
4. Have Oprah only at 3........hey bring Wheel Of Fortune and Jeporady I miss watching them back to back, even thou I was little
5. Watch KTVK in the 90's to get more ideas
6. Fire myself and bring back Phil Alveraz
Thats all I can think of for now
MarquisP4 said:
1. Emphasize KTVK as a NEWS station. I know it's expensive to produce, and they can probably make more money with infomercials, but news also brings in more ad revenue than most syndication.
2. Move the weaker syndicated product on KTVK to KASW, then move the weakest syndication on KASW (Jury Duty, anyone?) to 3am.
3. Tell the Program Director not to play favorites with syndicators. Sure, that lady selling low-end shows may be nice and (maybe) a personal friend, but there's better product out there.
4. Refuse to sell ANY 30-minute blocks to Kevin Trudeau.
KeithE4 said:
Legit question (s).
Any idea why KTVK didn't claim the CW moniker or original WB (granted, it's not ABC) and stay as an indy, but let KASW get the credit?
Maybe some contract issues with O/Phil (major cash flow there)?
I have Dish Net and subscribe to KTLA (can't miss them police chases).
They're CW and seem to be fine in news presentation and programming.
Perhaps a suit at Belo missed the call?
As for the Snakes back on 3, that's between MLB and Fox Sports Az for now.
At this point, we're ASSUMING that CW's product outranks Dr Phil/Oprah in the ratings. Are we sure that the Dr Phil/Oprah block isn't higher than the CW's current weak programming? Just thought I would raise the question.
If KTVK wants to do 2 hours of news in the evening, I'm surprised that they don't do 4pm-5pm and, then, 6pm-7pm. You would think that they would want their female-skewed news to lead in to the Dr. Phil/Oprah block. In any case, KTVK needs desperately to decide what they want to be when they grow up.
Honestly, you would think that we would have better news products with 5 stations competing for viewers.
If KTVK wants to do 2 hours of news in the evening, I'm surprised that they don't do 4pm-5pm and, then, 6pm-7pm. You would think that they would want their female-skewed news to lead in to the Dr. Phil/Oprah block. In any case, KTVK needs desperately to decide what they want to be when they grow up.
Honestly, you would think that we would have better news products with 5 stations competing for viewers.
I fail to understand the continual emphasis upon news coverage as a means for radio/TV stations to prosper for lack of a "better" format.
As it is, we have a multitude of news sources chasing the same stories. This leads to "news" coverage of stories like child kidnappings going on for literally months after the event. Clearly there is way too much bandwidth already.
What would a KTVK hope to accomplish with yet another "news" program in a market crowded with coverage?
If previous posters are correct, that news is costly to produce (and I don't know why reading stories off the wire services would be costly), then KTVK needs to differentiate itself from the existing news clones:
Bring back a decent kids program.
Show movies ala TCM (with intelligent intros/backgrounds/items of interest).
Show classic TV shows not currently being seen elsewhere (at least on OTA TV).
Show educational documentaries.
In short, concentrate on the entertainment/educational categories and forget about duplicating/competing with the other Valley stations.
Failing that, KTVK will simply become another 7, 45, 51 and 61 waste of time. (I would add 10 to that list but realize that low-brow shoot-em-ups and psycho-drama's do have an audience - at least 10 doesn't do much brokered time - not that those colon-cleaning products would be less entertaining than current Fox offerings.)
As it is, we have a multitude of news sources chasing the same stories. This leads to "news" coverage of stories like child kidnappings going on for literally months after the event. Clearly there is way too much bandwidth already.
What would a KTVK hope to accomplish with yet another "news" program in a market crowded with coverage?
If previous posters are correct, that news is costly to produce (and I don't know why reading stories off the wire services would be costly), then KTVK needs to differentiate itself from the existing news clones:
Bring back a decent kids program.
Show movies ala TCM (with intelligent intros/backgrounds/items of interest).
Show classic TV shows not currently being seen elsewhere (at least on OTA TV).
Show educational documentaries.
In short, concentrate on the entertainment/educational categories and forget about duplicating/competing with the other Valley stations.
Failing that, KTVK will simply become another 7, 45, 51 and 61 waste of time. (I would add 10 to that list but realize that low-brow shoot-em-ups and psycho-drama's do have an audience - at least 10 doesn't do much brokered time - not that those colon-cleaning products would be less entertaining than current Fox offerings.)
If the consensus is that there are too many news stations in Phoenix, especially with this tough economy, why doesn't KTVK merge their newsroom with one of the also-rans like KPHO? It would be a win-win situation for both stations - KTVK's news team gets exposure with the strength of CBS programming as a lead-in, therefore remaining a player, and KPHO finally gets the respect it deserves in the news game.
Where does one start? Get rid of the higher priced talent? Tara Hitchcock, Scott Pasmore. Replace with Beverly Kidd, and make April a hybrid Co-host / Weather woman, or get rid of Patti Kirkpatrick, and replace with Beverly Kidd, Beverly can read much better. I'm not at all sold on Britney Shipp doing the weather, or doing remotes, Royal Norman can also leave. It doesn't take much weather knowledge to tell folks here that it's going to be clear and hot, or warm almost 300 days a year. Ah heck, Just sell the station. ;D
I would:
1. Move The CW Daytime to 1:00pm then add kids shows at 3:00pm - 5:00pm then move the 1:00pm - 3:00pm sitcoms to 11:00am on KASW and then move the 11:00am - 1:00pm sitcoms on KASW to 7:00pm - 9:00pm on KTVK.
2. Move the 9:00pm news to KASW and move the 9:00pm - 10:00pm sitcoms from KASW to KTVK.
3. Get rid of Good Day Arizona then move Matlock to 11:00am.
1. Move The CW Daytime to 1:00pm then add kids shows at 3:00pm - 5:00pm then move the 1:00pm - 3:00pm sitcoms to 11:00am on KASW and then move the 11:00am - 1:00pm sitcoms on KASW to 7:00pm - 9:00pm on KTVK.
2. Move the 9:00pm news to KASW and move the 9:00pm - 10:00pm sitcoms from KASW to KTVK.
3. Get rid of Good Day Arizona then move Matlock to 11:00am.
powergate92 said:
4. add This TV to 61.2 and add Arizona News Channel to 3.2.
1. Hand the keys to AZNC to Cox and wish them luck finding a partner.
Why? Because I'd then...
2. Cancel all self-produced news programs. Too expensive in an environment where traditional ad dollars are increasingly tougher to come by.
3. Broker 6-9a to independent production companies to air "A to Z"-style infomercial/magazine hybrids. (And hope the FCC accepts these as public-interest programs.)
4. Broker midday 9-3 and overnights 12-6 (and as much of the weekends as possible) for pure infomercials. (Have Matlock and the like available to fill unsold blocks.)
5. Run CW programming from 6-8p. (Let 61 run currently-homeless barter sitcoms in the 7-9p slot.)
6. Run double strips of Oprah, Phil and The Doctors from 3-6p and again from 8-11p.
7. Run SatC from 11-12p.
This all keeps the channel female focused but eliminates the need for employing any local on-air talent of its own. Also, ditching the local focus enables the station to ditch that albatross of a website to whatever sucker can be convinced to pony up for it.
Why? Because I'd then...
2. Cancel all self-produced news programs. Too expensive in an environment where traditional ad dollars are increasingly tougher to come by.
3. Broker 6-9a to independent production companies to air "A to Z"-style infomercial/magazine hybrids. (And hope the FCC accepts these as public-interest programs.)
4. Broker midday 9-3 and overnights 12-6 (and as much of the weekends as possible) for pure infomercials. (Have Matlock and the like available to fill unsold blocks.)
5. Run CW programming from 6-8p. (Let 61 run currently-homeless barter sitcoms in the 7-9p slot.)
6. Run double strips of Oprah, Phil and The Doctors from 3-6p and again from 8-11p.
7. Run SatC from 11-12p.
This all keeps the channel female focused but eliminates the need for employing any local on-air talent of its own. Also, ditching the local focus enables the station to ditch that albatross of a website to whatever sucker can be convinced to pony up for it.
I, again, ask if CW programming gets better ratings than Dr Phil and Oprah. I think that it is a HUGE assumption to say that CW should move to KTVK prime. Honestly, since they cancelled Everwood, I've watched very little of their programming. I'm more likely to watch Dr Phil or Oprah (which doesn't happen often).
Does GMAZ still do #1 or 2 in the am ratings? If so, it's probably at least a breakeven proposition -- particularly with highly-paid Brad and Dan gone.
As for the rest of the newscasts, they may need to go. The two-hour block from 4:30pm to 6:30pm is very expensive to produce and, as of a year ago, was not doing very well in the ratings. I'm sure that Fox 10 is killing the 9pm newscast. Frankly, Beverly looks uptight all the time. Tess Rafols would make a much better anchor.
Does GMAZ still do #1 or 2 in the am ratings? If so, it's probably at least a breakeven proposition -- particularly with highly-paid Brad and Dan gone.
As for the rest of the newscasts, they may need to go. The two-hour block from 4:30pm to 6:30pm is very expensive to produce and, as of a year ago, was not doing very well in the ratings. I'm sure that Fox 10 is killing the 9pm newscast. Frankly, Beverly looks uptight all the time. Tess Rafols would make a much better anchor.
- Status