Howling at TV station claims

We need a local newscast about every third day.

I can't decide on what's worse, the stupid banter back and forth between the anchors, or the way they fill in extra time with "fluff" instead of just reporting.

I just love how I live 20 second over the state line which is like 10 miles from downtown, but they choose more local stories from Finley or Sandusky lol.

I caught about 5 minutes of a local news broadcast just across the Indiana state line (while waiting for SNL) two months ago. The anchor lady and a scientist guest were blowing something through paper straws and laughing -- for a full 3 minutes. It was kind of depressing. No, VERY depressing. When it comes to TV news, I have voted with my feet.

I need to see a stand-up report from in front of a gas station every day. On the odd days they can report that it has gone up, and on the even days they can report that it has gone down. All last week WTVG reported gas prices rising. Reality: it went down 6 cents.

I can't stand the incessant commercials touting their superiority. I usually watch 13abc, just because their anchors tend to speak in normal tones, at least in the evenings. But their self-promotion is annoying.

"All last week WTVG reported gas prices rising. Reality: it went down 6 cents."

Last week was very strange with gas prices. On Weds. or Thurs. in Point Place, gas shot from 3.73 to 3.99. By Friday afternoon, it was back down to 3.73.

???????

Holiday week gas prices?

I refuse to listen to the Henny-Penny gas price reports. Since Katrina, we've been seeing up and down, up and down. In the end of 2008 it was nearly 4 bucks. By Christmas 2009, 2.60. Now it's 3.79. Next week it will be 3.89. The week after that it will be 3.69. Then 3.79. The last 5 years have averaged around 3.25. This morning I paid 3.65. This is daily news.

My Favorite from Ch11: Have the anchors deliver news standing and holding ipads as props.

Useless props since they never look at them and use the teleprompter for the text.

Oh man, does this topic hit a raw nerve!...

Agree with most of these comments re: the local news. I also find Channel 13 to be the least "offensive" as to sensationalism (with the exception of Blizzard Bill - he's knowledgeable but too prone to sensationalism). But it's even worse on the morning network shows like Today or GMA. I remember when they used to just give you THE NEWS. I guess that is asking too much in this day and age, eh?

Swampprof - did you happen to catch the Spoof of the news channel promo on saturday night live this week?

I remember when they used to just give you THE NEWS. I guess that is asking too much in this day and age, eh?

Yes.

The short version: Television ratings measure behavior, not attitude nor any societal need. Stations use ratings to sell advertisements. The higher the ratings, the higher the price sponsors pay.

Unfortunately, fewer people watch newscasts with serious news than with fluffy news. It's a fact. Relatively few people in the general population know a great deal about things in the news (and fewer care); however, everyone knows about the weather. Everyone can relate to a struggling family and get all emotional. Everyone wants to hear the latest on the Klueless Kardashians (apparently). Everyone can relate to gas prices being higher. Everyone...even the incredibly stupid...can now watch the news and feel "smart" or "in the know".

I'm not even half-joking.

Again, this is totally based on behavior. Nielsen provides ratings data based on both local and national survey samples and all they or stations care about is number of viewers--not whether there is valuable information passed. "News" shows with those fluffy topics get more viewers than shows that talk about the crisis in the Mideast, currency devaluation, Obamacare, or whatever it is you can name.

News is not a "public service". It is a money-maker (why do you think we have morning news 6-10, a noon news, a 4PM, 5PM, 6PM news, and an 11PM news? It makes money!) and as long as it is included as a regular rated program by Nielsen, it will be focused on the lowest common denominator to get more eyeballs watching to sell to more advertisers.

This has been your daily blunt pipe wrench to the side of the face. Now back to regular programming...

...barf...

Yeah, oht, it was pretty much a rhetorical question :-)

You'd hope that there MIGHT be some money in "counter-programming" some local hard news, thus attracting hard-news viewers, and leaving the other 2 or 3 channels to fight over the "casual" viewers. But the hard-news types have probably already turned to other sources for their news...

I was thinking about this today and I do not choose a channel's news because they are the best, I choose a news show because they are the least irritating.

Exactly, hockeyfan. When the "news" is dominated by the personalities of the talking heads, you are virtually forced into making your decision on this basis.

When I was in town I got a chuckle out of the most accurate forecast junk from WTOL. They pay a licensing fee from a company which apparently does some forecast checking and then dons one station as the best. Pretty pointless. I do find it funny how a lot of the bigger markets don't bother with this petty stuff, and toledo isn't that small of a market. More so the media powerheads wanting to keep the small town mentality in play so they retain power.

I'm assuming that stations do some kind of marketing research and therefore our ideas are the minority? I truly thought that since 24 was in last place for news, they would try something new and fresh for news broadcasting, but they didn't. They built a new set, brought in a black woman, some white guy who seems to be clueless on most subjects but gossip, and that hilariously looking spray tanned weatherman. He looks like he's doing a bad ad for sunny Florida or something.
And yes, they all have the corny ipads with them at all times like they're from the future and they are some electronic wizardry to give them information no one else has. Sad, really.

Personally I like the anchors on ch 11 the best.

Actually, I don't think those are iPads they're holding.

They're tri-corders...

hockeyfan:

The Ipads are some consultant's wet dream. I would have loved to be in the meeting when they announced "we're using IPads on camera"...well, maybe not because I would have let out an audible, choking chortle. It's beyond sad. Hell, I get pissed when people are always reading crap on their smartphones all the time...I don't need to watch a station where the TV people are doing essentially the same thing. Guess what guys--I can read it just as well as you...without watching you!

As we've talked about in another thread, Channel 24 is a rag-tag, penny-pinching operation that can't stick to a programming philosophy long enough to retain an audience. They are always changing something...anything...including sets, personnel (the big killer), graphics, website name (toledoonthemove.com? Who thought that shit up?), etc. to "get" an audience. They are completely schizo...

lol, from 24 to "toledo on the move", that decision had me scratching my head also.

Toledo 11 certified most arrogant.

oht & hockeyfan:

Agree about 24. NOW they change their logo to a blue square, with a tiny "WNWO" that you can barely read? They don't even include the channel number? And their website URL is "northwestohio.com"????

I'm sorry, but none of those decisions makes ANY sense to even a casual observer. They project the image of an organization desperatley flailing about/

Compare that to Fox Toledo: A consistent brand, they had Laura Emerson as their anchor for 16 years, a fairly stable brand that slowly grew.

When will 24 learn that there is no quick fix?

If they're always anxious to change, they should try crowdsourcing some solutions. We could all come up with something, anything, better than what they've settled on.

I tell you what enrages me about 24: when their 11:00 newscast includes a chat piece about upcoming bits on Saturday Night Live, instead of real news from anywhere. I only watch their news to kill time before SNL comes on ... I do NOT need them to read a few lame remarks about it, and then cut into the airtime of the LIVE show that follows it! Grrr.

Is SNL still live?

It may be live, but it died many, many years ago.

I love one station's "weather quiz," especially when it teaches important weather facts like information about the Mud Hens menu and which vegetables have the most fat. Mmmm, weather!

@Billy - yes, I did catch it! I was thinking of this thread when I saw it.

This topic also reminds me of the Family Guy bit that pokes at a different medium, similar annoyance -

I bring you "Weenie and the Butt" and "Dingo and the Baby":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws58s9wzYsA&feature=related

Thanks for the laughs, swampie. What a hoot! It made my morning -- my "weekend in the morning on the radio all weekend long!"

Radio guy here.

Sadly, "Family Guy" is painfully accurate, especially for CHR (Top 40), Hot Adult Contemporary (Top 40 for Caucasians), and other current formats, in addition to "morning zoo"-type morning shows. In fact, that whole episode when Stewie and Brian become "Dingo & the Baby" is also painfully accurate.

I did morning radio for 7 years (not in Toledo). Fortunately, I was also program director and I assure you we did not run "production run amok" IDs like that. As my station was a classic hits/oldies outlet, the audience would have thought they were having a collective acid flashback...

Heh, oht, you hit another raw nerve :-)

The first time I ever heard the "Two for Tuesday" crap was around 1979 on a hard rock station. (Have all of them become "classic" rock now? LOL).

Then, a year or so later, somebody was doing "Three for Thursdays".

Do these program directors ever realize what a self-parody some of them have become (present company excluded)??

Breaking News: This just in, gas heading back down before it goes back up.