• 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

WROC-TV 8 General Manager Leaves

Stop flushing money down the toilet on fox, and concentrate what little funds they have on 6 and 11. Then, you'll HAVE THE MONEY to hire and retain the talent they so desperately need.
Click to expand...

The thing is, Nexstar is not flushing money down the toilet on FOX. As I mentioned before, FOX is a revenue stream. Even if there were no 10 O'clock News, it would still make money. Fox's programming suits a certain niche audience. In a past posting, I didn't publish all of the ratings numbers, but in the November book, FOX tied 8 at 5pm with a 3 rating 9 share! At 6pm, the numbers weren't that far off either. Fox is nothing more than a cash stream, of which, I'm afraid to say will never be passed on to hiring seasoned talent. It's unfortunate, but true.

10 and 13 are both in the biz to make money, the only difference there is that they actually use that money to hire good talent.
 
Fox is the only newscast on at 10 PM--all over the country 10 o'clock newscasts are flourishing....fewer and fewer people want to stay up until 11 to get their news. The point is that a 3 rating/9 share is pretty poor for that time slot and the fact they have no competition doesn't speak well for the product. If those numbers are accurate, it doesn't speak very well for 8's early news (5 and 6) product either--knowing that a Fox 10pm show is the equivalent.
 
Rochwatcher said:
Fox is the only newscast on at 10 PM--all over the country 10 o'clock newscasts are flourishing....fewer and fewer people want to stay up until 11 to get their news. The point is that a 3 rating/9 share is pretty poor for that time slot and the fact they have no competition doesn't speak well for the product. If those numbers are accurate, it doesn't speak very well for 8's early news (5 and 6) product either--knowing that a Fox 10pm show is the equivalent.
Click to expand...

That's not true. R-News has had a 10 pm newscast since 1990. Also R-News has the ability to go live if need be, while FOX doesn't.

I know that there are some critics who say R-News just repeats the same newscast every hour and half hour, but thier format is designed that way. But when a major story breaks, they are there.

As for on-air talent, I will take R-News anyday over FOX 31.
 
Mark--With all due respect, you just can't compare an over-the-air network affiliated newscast like Fox to one that is cable/subscription based like R-News. Apples to oranges. The fact is a 10 o'clock newscast should be dominant in a town like Rochester--and by the sounds of it Fox hardly is.


[/quote]

That's not true. R-News has had a 10 pm newscast since 1990. Also R-News has the ability to go live if need be, while FOX doesn't.

I know that there are some critics who say R-News just repeats the same newscast every hour and half hour, but thier format is designed that way. But when a major story breaks, they are there.

As for on-air talent, I will take R-News anyday over FOX 31.
[/quote]
 
[[/quote]

That's not true. R-News has had a 10 pm newscast since 1990. Also R-News has the ability to go live if need be, while FOX doesn't.

[/quote]

Excuse me,...Mark?... Just WERE the hell do you GET your information ??????

FOX most certainly has the capability to go live if need be -- and they have!

For goodness sakes they have 3 live trucks at thier disposal, including the one THEY BROUGHT WITH THEM from East Avenue when they arrived like refugees on Humboldt Street a year and a half ago!

This is among the most nonsensical of the many misinformed statements you've posted here.

My God Man!...During those "30 years you spent doing news" in this town,.....did you just make crap up then too ????

I mean....Holy Sh*t, dude!
 
Kohoutek said:
Excuse me,...Mark?... Just WERE the hell do you GET your information ??????

FOX most certainly has the capability to go live if need be -- and they have!

For goodness sakes they have 3 live trucks at thier disposal, including the one THEY BROUGHT WITH THEM from East Avenue when they arrived like refugees on Humboldt Street a year and a half ago!

This is among the most nonsensical of the many misinformed statements you've posted here.

My God Man!...During those "30 years you spent doing news" in this town,.....did you just make crap up then too ????

I mean....Holy Sh*t, dude!
Click to expand...

Tell me the last time that FOX news went live with something at 10:00? Or if they did their reporters (except McKinley) knew what they were talking about.

As for your last sentence, I am very proud of my 30 years of doing news in this town, and would be happy to compare that record to anyone at 31 anytime, including you, Dude.
 
Rochwatcher said:
With all due respect, you just can't compare an over-the-air network affiliated newscast like Fox to one that is cable/subscription based like R-News. Apples to oranges.
Click to expand...

Why not?

I know that there are some critics who say R-News just repeats the same newscast every hour and half hour, but thier format is designed that way.
Click to expand...

It is, although we try to change up each half hour if we have enough content.
 
tvnewswatcher...you sorta proved my point with the ratings. If fox tied 8 with non news programming (re-runs? simpsons?) then why bother spending money on staff and a new set when you could take what little money they have and sink it into making a quality newscast at 6 and 11...and still make money off the re-runs. The point I'm trying to get across is in my opinion, they are stretched too thin and could better use their resources.
 
Mark--
-Agreed live shots on FOX First at Ten are few and far between (I believe the last one was the recent East Rochester train de-rail)
-I'm quite certain Mr. McKinley appreciates your compliment.

Rochester MediaMoniter--
While it was true that the Simpsons USED TO beat ch. 8 at 6pm, I think if you checked it out you'd find that it's actually been several years since that happened.
(You might also note during your research that when Ch. 8 had "Entertainment Tonight" running at 5:30 there were books where ET beat CH 13 & 10 from 5:30 to 6,...but nobody ever talks about that)
 
Scott--Viewership numbers vary widely, that is why. It would be like comparing ESPN to Ch. 10's Sports.....one is cable, the other isn't. Two very different mediums.



Sxottlan said:
Rochwatcher said:
With all due respect, you just can't compare an over-the-air network affiliated newscast like Fox to one that is cable/subscription based like R-News. Apples to oranges.
Click to expand...

Why not?
Click to expand...
 
Rochwatcher said:
Scott--Viewership numbers vary widely, that is why. It would be like comparing ESPN to Ch. 10's Sports.....one is cable, the other isn't. Two very different mediums.
Click to expand...

It's the same medium: television. Different delivery systems sure, but the same medium. I don't pretend to know ratings, exact number of people with cable versus antenna or satellite etc., but I'd say it's fair to compare the products.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom