 |
Published weekly...or so--usually on Friday.
To contribute, e-mail your article to the editor
I'm Not A Reporter, But I Play One on TV
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
I think Channel 32 puts on an excellent newscast, and they've got a lot of talented journalists. It is my belief that they should focus promotion efforts on those talented people, just as the NBA promotes their stars. The fact is, channel 32 does not have as many loyal viewers that turn to them on a regular basis as channel 9 has. In fact, the Fox network programming leading into their newscast affects the ratings more than it comfortably should - numbers are high on Sundays following a highly-rated new X-Files episode, but low on Fridays following the Fox Friday Crap-tacular. In telling viewers that they are there at 9pm, channel 32 has taken swipes at channel 9 when their newscast is bumped later for a Cubs game. "The Only News at Nine" sounds petty and infantile because it is...especially when the game and channel 9's later newscast does better ratings-wise than channel 32's 9pm newscast.
Since channel 32 has a roster of strong reporters and anchors, I've felt for a long time that they should be promoting that talent in their promo spots. It seems like the promo guys at 32 are doing that, but the execution is way off. The Channel 32 promotion squad that brought us Michelle Leigh ("Who's that Lady...Beautiful Lady...Lovely Lady...") now brings us a weak spot highlighting Walter Jacobson. I have to wonder just how much the promo guys know about news.
In the spot, Walter is reading a voice-over that basically covers his reputation in town, how he's ruffled feathers and the such. One line in the copy makes me laugh out loud each time I hear it: "...I'm, still a reporter, working the streets..."
Please!
Even if you stretch the definition of "reporter" to mean "someone who reports the news to you," that line is still erroneous because Walter doesn't work the streets. I can't recall the last live remote, or ENG package he did. Wasn't it his report on the homeless? Walter's one of Chicago's top anchors and commentators, but to suggest he's a reporter working the streets is ludicrous! I certainly hope Walter didn't write that copy. Perhaps the reason that goofy line was included was so the video wouldn't look so silly.
Nope, didn't work - the video is hilarious.
We see a slow motion shot of Walter walking down the street while carrying a microphone. He must be pursuing a hot news story because his jacket's off and his cameraman is jogging behind him trying to catch up! Meanwhile, Walter's greeting his fans off to the side that are saying "hello" as he walks by. Walter has a determined look on his face as he works the streets for the story.
Bwaa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Why do news crews have such a fascination with shooting at the Michigan avenue bridge? Is it just aesthetically pleasing? Few news stories ever happen there, but news crews love to set up their remote trucks there. Walter is walking in front of the Wrigley Building--what hard-hitting story could he be reporting? Is the Billy Goat thinking about serving fries? What's the deal with the cameraman? Why is he so far behind Walter? More importantly-if the cameraman is behind Walter, who's shooting the footage of them walking to a story? Does channel 32 regularly employ "behind the scenes" videographers to run ahead of the reporters and catch them in action? Does Walter always have time to say hello and shake hands with people as he is on the way to a story? Of course, that might explain why they parked the ENG truck so far away...so Walter could greet the people of the streets before the works those streets.
Hey, I applaud channel 32 for trying to promote Walter--he's their top draw and they've been sitting on their hands for too long--but this promo spot is so lame and unintentionally funny that it must be pulled. A promo spot for Walter should focus on his "Perspective" rather than making crap up about him pounding the streets. Maybe a dated snippet from one "Perspective" followed by another dated snipped from a news story showing that Walter's commentary got things done. Maybe a spot of him on the phone, angrily confronting a future "Perspective" target. Walter's not a "walk-the-streets" reporter but he does dig to get the facts so show him at his desk: tie off, sleeves rolled up, suspenders loosened, concentrating hard on his next story. Don't insult me by saying he's walking down the magnificent mile in search of a story. The channel 32 promo guys need to watch channel 7 and dissect the Chuck Goudie / I-Team spot to learn how to show a reporter in action.
Since nobody asked me, here's who I think the channel 32 promo team should be promoting--heavily:
- Walter (see above).
- Larry Yellen & the I-team.
- Bruce Wolf on the morning news. Dave & Tamron do not draw viewers, but Bruce Wolf is 300 times more entertaining than anyone else in the 7-9am time period.
- Channel 32 reporters. A very solid group, you could easily show how they blanket the city and return with comprehensive coverage.
- Danielle Serino & the Bottom Line. They've done it before and the fact is, you can't go wrong in telling viewers that your news staff is working to solve viewer problems.
This Star-Spangled Banner For Rent
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
The Chicago Sun-Times did a very smart thing Friday September 14th - they printed a 2-page color American flag for readers to hang in their windows.
As American flags disappeared from stores in the aftermath of the attack on America, The Sun-Times printed the flags-along with their logo underneath them-for everyone who wanted to show their patriotism. I don't know about anyone else, but I saw a lot of those flags hanging in windows everywhere. It was a win-win situation for the paper. For the cost of 2 pages of newsprint, they provided something that many readers wanted, and they get valuable promotion. Can you imagine being the media buyer from a business that advertises in the Tribune but not the Sun-Times, and everywhere you look is evidence of the Sun-Times mass-appeal?
I have only two complaints about the whole thing:
1. They should have printed flags every day, so they could get a maximum number out there.
2. They shouldn't have become stupid, greedy bastards and sold an ad on the page when they again printed a flag in Friday's paper.
I put the first flag on my window, and I was looking forward to getting another. Then I saw the glaring logo on the bottom of the page and my heart sank. Rather than look at it as free promotion, the ex-hosers at the paper sold the space to a retail store. No big deal - I cut the bottom of the page off and hung the flag-but it's the principal of the thing.
In a related issue, I'd like to acknowledge how cool it is to see those flags in almost all of the windows at the Sun-Times building. In fact, it seems like they're all hung to the same height-love that symmetry!
Anyone know whose face stares out of one of the top floor offices? I keep saying it's a poster of Phil Collins-from the "Face Value" album, but I can't identify who it really is.
David Radler?
ABC Drops Ball
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
No sooner do I declare that ABC's news coverage of the attack on America was exemplary, then I hear some news about Peter Jennings that causes me to totally lose respect for the man.
Last Monday, Washington Post TV columnist Tom Shales slammed Jennings (http://WWW.EMONLINE.COM/shales/091701shales.html)for an odd pro-Palestinian discussion with controversial "Arab League" spokesperson (not to be confused with the movie "Major League" or the "Justice League" cartoon) Hanan Ashrawi. Apparently, Jennings allowed her to drone on for 23 minutes about how the US brought the attacks on with their foreign policy mistakes (yeah, that whole "Democracy" thing is a real bitch-what the hell are we thinking about?). Rather than practice the goofy "balanced/unbiased coverage" mantra that TV news likes to throw around, Jennings allowed the bizarre propaganda to go unchallenged. Shales boldly--and correctly--said that ABC News President David Westin should have fired him on the spot.
Two days later, the New York Post's "Page six" exposed Jennings (http://www.pagesix.com/seven/09192001/pagesix/pagesix.htm) or (http://www.tvspy.com/shoptalk_archive.cfm?t_shoptalk_id=1861&page=1). Apparently, he and Ashrawi have an interesting past...she used to be his girlfriend.
Ah!
Jennings' ex goes on the air with him to spout her obtuse views, eating up almost a half-hour. He doesn't bother to recuse himself from talking with her or even disclosing that he's had a past relationship with her. He doesn't even offer any kind of opposing viewpoint or rebuttal to her skewed worldview.
Even Jerry Springer has more integrity than that.
Spot the Looney
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
My mind has been blown. Until last week, I thought Larry King was just a goofy suck-up interviewer with a deteriorating mind. I also regarded Studs Terkel as a knowledgeable, clear-thinking orator.
Wrong on both accounts.
First, King in his USA Today column: "...One of the silliest exercises after the tragedy was the use by newspapers of TV critics analyzing how the reporting went on TV and radio the day before...These people are judging the actions of people under fire with hindsight, and then they leisurely sit back and offer the pluses and minuses, which don't matter one iota. They have never faced the situation themselves, and criticizing something that the reader has already seen is an irrelevancy."
I agree. Plus I note that Larry wrote that before Shales and Page Six exposed Peter Jennings' horrendous transgressions.
Second, Studs on the radio. Steve Neal was right on in his commentary in Friday's Sun-Times (http://www.suntimes.com/output/neal/cst-edt-neal21.html) "Falwell, Terkel fill air with nonsense." While driving around last week, I accidentally tuned to Steve Dahl's radio show. Dahl had Turkel on, talking about the World War II or the U.S. or fighting terrorists or something. I'm not sure because Terkel talks in a stream-of-consciousness manner where he takes a tangent every 30 seconds and a breath every 4 minutes. Whatever his point was, he was unable to communicate it as he launched into a myriad of loosely connected thoughts. I know he doesn't think a war will solve the whole terrorism issue, but he offered no wisdom as to what will. Maybe the way to kill the terrorists off is to send them tapes of Studs talking and wait for their brains to liquefy. I couldn't tell if Dahl was intensely listening with muted reverence or if he was silently keeping his brain from seizing up in an act of self-preservation. Turkel reminds me of that near-senile family member who always has an opinion on everything, but never says anything that closely resembles logic.
Chicago Media Examiner e-mail delivery
Send a blank e-mail message to ChicagoMediaExaminer-subscribe@topica.com from the e-mail address you want the Chicago Media Examiner delivered to. Whenever a new issue of the Chicago Media Examiner comes out, it will be e-mailed to you automatically. It's that simple. NOTE: Some e-mail filters may interpret the e-mailed Examiner as junk mail due to the addressing.
Take a look at the previous issue: Friday, September 14
Take a look at the issue before that: Friday, September 7
* Pseudonym
Published weekly...or so--usually on Friday.
If you'd like to contribute, e-mail your article to the editor
| | | |
