So maybe you've already heard of Boomer the Dog....
His story was the number one most viral video on MSNBC last week. Long story very short - a man named Gary Matthews is a furry. And a long time fan of a little known show called 'Boomer the Dog'. Gary is SUCH a fan, that he not only dresses like the main character, but asks people to call him Boomer as well. He wanted to make it legal. A judge denied his request as Gary is "not a dog".
So why is this story SO popular? Personally I think it is due to people's fascination of what furries do in their non-anthrocon fest time. And now that we know.....are we better off? I'm thinking...no.
One man bands are now ruling news control rooms. Ignite. This is the future of news control rooms. Gold help us. In a traditional news control room, you would have an audio person, a director, and a technical director. If you were super spoiled you would also have a CG operator that advanced your lower third graphics.
With Ignite -- there is just one person doing it all. Some stations are even trying to do away with robotic camera operators and truly have one man bands controlling the newscasts.
But Ignite is a Windows based application....and while newer versions have worked a lot of the kinks out....the older versions were teeming with issues..In the video above is a newscast that was broadcast from the parking lot due to a virus....and don’t even get me started on the blue screen of death!
Learning Ignite is a challenge for people used to pushing buttons. Where once you routed all of the sources by choosing each specific source button, Now everything is programmed, and Ignite Directors have to learn literally thousands of codes. A one character typo can lead to infamous errors on air like the one in the video of the anchor being caught sleeping ..which I did while in training. Do you think that because this was broadcast on Dateline is why he won’t friend me on facebook?
So back to Ignite.....You now have a timeline (similar to ones you see in programs like Final Cut or Avid) where all of these TME’s - or Timed Macro Effects - reside. As you step though the timeline, the audio and picture change based on what has been programmed. But here’s where you STILL have to manually punch things -
You may need to manually adjust an audio fader. You need to insert and take out lower thirds. You need to manually advance the lower thirds if you have more than one per story...as you do in MOST packages.
So...are you really saving steps? Nope. And some stations, like mine, have so many shows that they have to keep several Ignite Directors staffed at a time (since it is STILL illegal to not give bathroom breaks....here’s hoping that rule sticks around!). So why move your news on to a system that seems to have more issues than not? You got me! Your thoughts?
In the changing face of digital technology comes a new enemy to the quality of your news: the audio condenser. What this evil little box does is open any mic that is routed into it every time it hears a sound. Why does that matter? Oh....yea of little inside news information!
Your news anchors have little side conversations during main weather (and commercial breaks and packages as well...but those won't make it to air). They also cough, sneeze, clear their throats incessantly, and type like mad on the computer responding to the latest Facebook post. All of that will be added to your soundtrack of what you hear during the local news. Why are news stations going this route? Well...about 40% of local stations decided to go with an automation system in the past few years. And computers do EXACTLY what they are told (and we just LOVE that about machines...here's a wonderful example of that LOVE...but I digress)! So...computers...doing exactly what they are told to do..clip mics. Because the mic has to "ramp up" - which means the little slider (like you see in the above pic) has to go from 0 to whatever level you need it at to hear the anchor clearly - and the anchors try to keep a newscast as tight as possible - you have a clip of their mic at the beginning of every story. In comes the audio condenser to save the day!
So while news stations try to fix a computer with another computer (because humans cost too much...although they do the job correctly)...you get to hear all of the background noise that was previously reserved for just the studio crew. Lucky you! *cough*
Several years ago news viewers started hearing about their local stations newspaper exchange partners. Some people wondered why certain stations chose certain newspapers to align themselves, and why ALL local stations now seem to have one partner or several. Newspapers are hurting terribly in recent years. Weekly circulation is down almost 5 %. While the number or web viewers is on the rise, making money off of those viewers is proving difficult for newspapers and news stations alike. So why join forces in what seems to be a more competitive market for your viewership? The reason is quite simple: money.
The majority of news is originated and gathered by newspaper reporters. That fact hasn't changed much over the years. Add to that fact that newspapers and news stations alike are cutting staff to save money.....and partnerships (where a tv station pays a local paper for their information) makes sense.
Every market has a dominating tv station and a dominating newspaper. When the two align forces to bring you your news, it can be devastating to the other competitors. Don't be surprised in the next decade or two if you see these types of partnerships pushing the rest of competition out of the market completely, leaving just one set of news gatherers to bring you the news. Do you run the risk of news bias that way? ABSOLUTELY! But when the bottom line is staring them in the face do you really think the bosses care about something as small as fairness in news? Come on....be honest now!
In the center of every newsroom across the country lies a large desk, riddled with scanner chatter from the many speakers the lie on it. This is the assignment desk, where the majority of news gathering takes place. The assignment desk can make or break a station. If you have a successful one, where the workers, or assignment editors, are smooth at getting details out of local police stations, are adept in getting all of the details down from a viewers tip, or they catch every important thing that comes across the scanners, your local news station will be top notch at bringing you all of the breaking news of the day.
If the assignment editors are slow, or distracted -even for a moment- your newscast suffers. Take , for example, a recent story where someone jumped from a tall office building in Pittsburgh. While it came across the scanners, it was not an assignment editor who heard it, but rather a reporter sitting next to the assignment desk. Had he not been sitting there to bring that blip to someones attention, the station would have been scooped, and while they would have had the story later, later is the kiss of death in local news.
So the next time you call in a news tip and wonder why the person on the other end of the line sounds like they have a touch of ADD...just understand that that means they are good at running the assignment desk!
When I hear young people say they want to work in news.....my reaction is typically...shall we say...less than enthusiastic. It's not that the job market is lacking for them. On the contrary, for fresh young people right out of college willing to work long hours for little pay and no benefits the sky is the limit. It's just that - where do you go from there? The trend I see is these young people (replacing people with decades of experience due to retirements or the company pushing people out to save money) end up burning out on jobs that offer little job security. A few lucky ones do end up getting full time positions, but the majority of them change careers.
And why should any of this matter to you - the news viewer? Because as stations across the country lose experience to make way for these low paid workers, the quality of your newscast goes down as well. In the past 12 months I have literally had 5 people train on a newscast....and I say train figuratively. There is little actual training. It's more of a 'let's push you out of this boat and see if you can swim' approach. So the next time you are watching the news and see a typo, or hear a story that just doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense....you now know the reason why. And get used to youtube quality video. With the invention of the portable live shot , where quality takes a back seat to convenience, and the influx of viewer shot video, it seems this trend is here to stay.
One of the worst things that plagues newsrooms across the country is that seasoned writers either move up the chain by becoming producers, or move on to new careers. The majority of writers, or AP's, in newsrooms are fresh out of college, who spend more time posting about their new career on Twitter or Facebook then they do learning how to use the spellcheck.
Now, one would think that if you went to school as a communication or journalism major, than English would be one of your strong points. WRONG! And here's what absolutely drives me up a friggin wall -- not only do the majority of these writers have difficulty spelling, they fail to rely on spellcheck, relying on their own ego instead. Due to that we get gems like the one posted here - Child bit by car!?!?!?! While that would make for a *FABULOUS* story..I somehow doubt that was the intended text.
The station I work at has a wall of shame covered with screen captures of some of these gems. Entire websites are dedicated to calling out bad spellers. My take on the whole thing? If you are WRITING for a living...then you either: a) Need to learn how to spell or b) Need to make friends with spell check or dictionary.com .
So there's been this recent trend among interviewees in news where they have no problem TALKING to the the reporters, but they really don't want their face shown. Now - I can understand if they fear retaliation , like when talking about a neighbor suspected in a murder or gang crime, but when talking about a fire? Or car accident? Come on people!
There is a lack of credibility among people who have something to say, but don't want acknowledged as being the person who said it. Stand behind your words! Perhaps if neighbors were more willing to take a stand and face whatever comes their way due to their statement we wouldn't have some of the neighborhood issues we have. I'm willing to bet these same people who refuse to show their face on camera are among the same group of people who witness a crime, but refuse to call police and report it.
If you don't want to be on the news, then don't talk to reporters! Today we literally had 5 people in the 5pm-6:30pm newscast who were talking shadows and were supered as "Voice of: Concerned Neighbor". Come out of the shadows and talk to reporters if you really want to put your 2 cents in. Otherwise stay home.
So a few weeks ago there was a deer found to be swimming in a local reservoir. Apparently some people frightened it and it jumped over the fence and into the reservoir, where it was unable to escape as the reservoir is surrounded by sloped walls. Concerned witnesses called animal control, and ultimately a nearby crew with a small boat was able to lead the deer out of the water. http://www.wpxi.com/video/23511356/index.html This was a nice, cute story with a happy ending. Something you might expect to see as a short story...or even as a newscast "kicker"...right? WRONG. This was big time breaking news! All of the local stations cut into local programming to alert everyone to the deer's predicament. Then they led the evening newscasts with the story of the deer. (It must have been a VERY slow news day!). Local tv critics had a field day commenting on the placement of the story: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10134/1058008-67.stm So what do you think? Was this really a story worthy of leading a newscast? Or are we really that dumbed down as an audience that we will take interesting video over a good story anyday? I really hope that isn't the case...but with reality programs being as popular as they are..... *sigh*
With most of the Western PA area covered by wooded areas, you would think spotting a bear now and then wouldn't be a big deal. Well..you've got that one wrong! Instead, local media has gone cukoo for bear stories, adding them to the newscasts whenever we can get video and/or pictures of the dastardly fellows. Why bears enthrall the newsroom and viewers alike is beyond me. Could you imagine the hype over, say, a deer? Oh wait..there was...more on that later.
So bears are coming into people's yeards looking for food. According to the Pennsylvania Game Commission, the problem is not the bears...it's the humans.
They put out bird feeders in the summer, which game officials call "bear lollipops." They leave garbage or pet food outside, then panic when they see a furry intruder roaming through their yards, making their dogs bark.
So if the people who live near wooded areas would only follow simple tips, and remove all bear accesible food from their yards...the problem would cease. I guess Western PA is full of the same silly people who go to Yellowstone every year and can't understand why bears come up to their campsites looking for food. Every year, Yellowstone park officials remind visitors to:
..and yet we ultimately hear the stories of how yet another bear had to be captured and relocated. So people...let this be your lesson. Stop putting food out for woodland creatures...and the woodland creatures will stop being news.
Ahhh sweeps. Those four lovely times of year that the newsroom loses its mind in order to garner another viewer. Every station across the country pulls out every stop -- from saving their best investigative pieces for ratings, to staffing as many reporters as humanly possible, to pushing the weather staff to warn of upcoming storms. As Lewis Black would say -
" It's the worst storm ever, it's the worst! Don't go out, don't go out, don't go out! There's gonna be an inch of snow, it's the WORST inch of snow! "
Camera shots and mini opens that have never been seen before rear their ugly head. Promos for the news run every 5 minutes on TV ...and you are even bombarded on the drive to work with radio ads. Billboards around town flash the ultra white smiles of your anchors, pleading for you to tune in at 5. And if you do happen to tune in, and if you see a news format that you like, don't get used to it. You won't see it again until the next book. The newsroom only brings its A game during sweeps.
Oh...we've all heard the speech that ever since Neilsen has changed its system and can bring you detailed ratings minute by minute that it will be like we are ALWAYS in a rating period. But alas, that is just a speech. The staff is cut back to bare bones, the interns are allowed to write stories again, and the newsroom hum grows quiet. But don't worry...your next ratings period is only a few months away!
So I happen to work at a station that has branded the weather area the "Severe Weather Center 11" . We are always promoting the severe weather, whether we have inclement weather or not. I have come to realize that stations only have so many "catch phrases" ..i.e. 'News Coverage You Can Count On' (which we use), 'Live , Local Late Breaking' (which we also use) or 'Action News: We Take Action For YOU!'. I can understand trying to promote severe weather when there actually IS weather....but if it's 80 degrees and sunny....with a few days of the same in a row..isn't it just overdoing it a bit? I see from letter to the editors in our local paper that viewers are getting tired of the constant scare tactics....and the cut-ins that happen at a single drop of rain....so why do stations continue to do it? I have been told by one of my news directors that the point is to inform the viewers, but more often than not the viewers are annoyed that we are covering up their favorite program. I've only worked at one station where they actually listened to viewers...if you were doing more than running a crawl it better be armageddon outside otherwise the assignment desk would be FLOODED with complaint crawls. Maybe that's what needs to happen. Maybe viewers need to be vocal enough to exact change. Maybe I'll try to anonymously call the assignment desk next time the station is crying havoc over a 5 minute rainstorm......
It used to be there was an art to switching the news...almost a rhythmic grace to pushing the buttons and taking or dissolving as needed...being able to manually change the pace of the transition on the fly. Those that were good switchers were able to make a rapid newscast look like a graceful waltz on a switcher...those that were bad....more like a tap dancer who's had too much Red Bull. Computerized news systems such as Ignite or Pakervision have stripped the control room of all its grace. They have reduced the once magnanimous TD's to lowly introductory computer programmers...and have taken all of the flexibility and grace out of a fluctuating rundown.
While news stations are clamoring to get the new systems in order to cut staff and payroll, they forget to take into account the loss of talent....of reducing a once well executed newscast to a quality level that you would expect from Youtube. Unfortunately, ratings seem to be on the stations side....and someday in the near future all newscasts will be executed via computer, rather than having a graceful director take the show home. How sad.
What, exactly, is breaking news? If you ask Dictionary.com, it defines breaking news as :
Main Entry: breaking news Part of Speech: n Definition: news that is happening and being reported or revealed at this moment
However, if you judge this phrase by local news standards, it almost seems as if breaking news is anything that has happened in the last two hours that we can slap a mini open on in order to grab the attention of our viewers. Working in a control room, I have found that the news department seems to classify a LOT of things as breaking news, whether we actually have new details to bring to the viewers or not. I can't see how this would draw in viewers as time and time again we rehash the same few details we have, and keep saying we'll bring the viewers new details as we get them. Shouldn't an update to breaking news actually include the update? Or are viewers truly satisfied with a second :30 look at a car crash, or fire, or crime scene with no new details?
Breaking news is 9/11...Breaking news is a car crash or crime scene that is unfolding before our very eyes. Once that event is put to "tape" and re-aired as there are no new things to show the viewer, that event should be classified as just plain old news, and the scare tactics should take a breather. At least, that's my opinion.
Welcome all to the musings of a TV News Ninja. In the past 12 years I have watched the broadcast news industry undergo a variety of changes...to the point where it is almost unrecognizable to when I first began. In just the past decade we have transitioned from 3/4" tape, to a tape less digital format. Control rooms have now become one man computerized bands, instead of teams of people that specialize in one area. We are on a new threshold, where people either fail to keep up with new technology, or are able to adapt and advance DESPITE technology tying their hands. I am one such person, and have managed to adapt to the point where I have mastered the new control room technology, and have been dubbed an Ignite Ninja (that being a Grass Valley Ignite switching system) by my co-workers.
In this blog I will discuss the pros and cons of news technology, as well as some news practices that seem redundant to me, and where I think the industry is headed. I am one of the few who are "riding the dinosaur into the tar pit" as I wish to continue my career in broadcast news, but I do wish to learn the web side of things, and to that point am working on a Masters in Multimedia Communicatiosn from the Academy of Art University.
