Please help us by making a tax-deductible donation
Please support us by donating to our Founders campaign today! We are a 501(c)3 so your donation can be tax-deductible. Here's a list of current Founders.
Viewers have the POWER!
Viewers have the Power! We've always known viewers cast a vote simply by pressing a button on the remote control. TV shows live, and die by the choices viewers make. This time I'm asking for opinions, or a show of hands. It relates to news out of Chicago, but impacts San Diego.
Starting soon four news operations in Chicago will start sharing video. It works like this. TV stations will start pooling resources to cover press conferences, and scheduled news events. In news lingo it's called "a pool feed." One photographer will shoot an event, and share it with the NBC, CBS, Fox, and CW stations in the market. That's right the very same pictures on all four stations.
The move is meant to save money by reducing staff. It maybe unrelated, but the Fox station in Chicago just laid off some employees. The argument from the four stations is, "one for all, all for one." Why should four different cameras show up for a scheduled event? (they say breaking news, and major stories would not be affected by this agreement, and would remain independent)
This was un-thinkable years ago. Every outlet in a city wanted to put thier mark, or voice on each news event. Blame it on the recession, and weak ad sales. These Chicago stations, or "The Four Musketeers," are going ahead with the project. However we have one dissenter.
WLS, the ABC affiliate in Chicago doesn't want to enter into the partnership. That station's management wants to remain a solid independent voice in that market. The news director at WLS says "individual photography is essential for telling a complete story." My question is, "are we headed into an era of pre-fab cookie-cutter news?" Many folks say we are already there.
San Diego stations are sharing helicopter video. Sure, why do we need five choppers up in the sky taking the same traffic shot. Channel 10 and 6 in town are already working on a video sharing agreement much like the one in Chicago. Its not uncommon for stations to share some pictures, but they're actually coordinating pool coverage on press conferences, and scheduled events.
All of this raises some big questions for viewers. Are citizens best served by this agreement? How can we guarantee an independent voice in news coverage? Many vieweers say all local newscasts look-a-like. Now the video sharing idea proves it, and makes sure you'll see the exact same video on every station. I believe viewers want stories that stand apart. They want news that is different in content, and scope from other local channels, news that's customized for them.
Some says that unless viewers care the practice will grow. I believe that viewers still hold the power, and can vote by simply selecting the news they want to watch. They can also voice an opinion on this blog.
Filed UnderTopics: Business Models -
Type of Content: Blog -
Post to Twitter
Hacked Budgets
Where is the "power" in using a remote when your only choices are limited to the same stuff in a different colored bag?
We really don't have the power to vote with our remotes, because we don't have a meaningful choice when every stations broadcasts the identical story.
The only real option on the remote becomes the "off" button.
I also have the option of NOT using a bank. But the price is very high. The price of a media oligarchy is that diversity of opinion is crushed and democracy threatened.
Charles Langley
Hacked budgets
That is our ultimate decision to turn it off or leave the tube on. You're right, at this time there is no choice, all the local stations are doing the same cookie cutter news. Sadly there is no choice now, but we want to create a choice or different choices in the future. Perhaps this economy will drive the to try something else out of desperation. I feel we deserve a choice, and perhaps a brave station in our market will lead the way to better coverage, and content in local news.
Hacked budgets = Hack Journalism
When News Bureaus start hacking their budgets, the hacking of news has just begun ...
Sharing resources such as news choppers and cameras may save money, but it is a TERRIBLE model for journalism in the long-term. In the case of cameras the lack of diversity means that press conferences are easier to manipulate. In the case of less choppers, and fewer reporters, it means that consumers will be forced to choose between bad news gathering in the media, or worse news gathering online by partisan hacks.
This issue turns the myth of a monolithic "mainstream media" into an absolute reality. "Sharing" cameras, choppers, and reporters is just a step or two away from "sharing" each others' broadcasts.
The problem with the Web is that news tends to be reported from the mainstream media and then regurgitated as "fact" by other reporters and bloggers without verification.
THE DEATH OF ORIGINAL RESEARCH
The "facts" aren't verified because there are budget cuts, too few resources, etc. The result is that one potentially questionable observation looks as though it has been vetted and verified by hundreds of credible observers.
One "fact" is planted by a deceitful corporation or government. Then the maintream media digests it and regurgitates it to the bloggers. The bloggers turn it into pablum and spoon feed it to consumers who accept it as the truth because it has been "verified" by hundreds of sources on the Internet.
The facts are, we need journalists. Until we find a new model that values original research and is willing to pay for it, our democracy will suffer. In the meantime, let the hack reporting begin.
Charles Langley
Gasoline Analyst UCAN's www.fueltracker.com
Hacked budgets
Thanks Charles, Media websites have been buzzing on this very issue. We all know what's going on, and you made some great points. I know from talking to friends that the coordination between member stations is un-coordinated. There is much confusion when 4 stations divide personel among themselves, just think of the confusion when they deliver the product back to each member station. The sharing of video is growing to many markets. Just this morning I was reading that WWOR, WNYW, and WNBC will be entering into an agreement. That is the number one market! The trickle down effect is expected to reach all the way to smaller markets.
All the comments from other websites tend to suggest one common theme. People have the power to support such practices, or watch something else. Citizens can vote with their remote.
Post new comment