 |
A Guidebook for News Babe Appreciation
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
A few weeks ago when I wrote about the absurd Paula Zahn flap, a friend humorously suggested that I should piss off women readers and follow up with a piece on News Babes.
Who's laughing now, sparky!
In an effort to expand the readership of this web site, I had been toying with the idea of creating a "Chicago News Babe" companion web site similar to the former www.redblazer.com. My thinking is that by running a web site that would appeal to LOTS of men in Chicago, I could promote this site and siphon some new readers. Unfortunately, the biggest hurdle against this plan is that whole copyright issue in regards to pictures on the web. A News Babe site without pictures is about as exciting as a Chicago newscast presented by people from Kansas City. So, the News Babe web site is still shelved, but that isn't going to stop me from talking about News Babes.
The term "News Babe" has been tossed around in a cavalier fashion. Not every woman on a news program can be a news babe. It shouldn't refer to every female in journalism, instead referring to those women who are proven professionals, highly intelligent, more substance than style AND attractive. The TOTAL package. Former Beauty queens (like a certain ex-channel 5 anchor now working in Atlanta) cannot be elevated to news babes status in my book.
The three questions about the "News Babes" concept:
- How does one qualify to be a "News Babe"?
- Why must there be "News Babes"?
- I'm just an average guy...is there any chance I could date a "News Babe"?
The answers:
- She must be female, intelligent, attractive and a respected pro as a reporter/journalist.
- Men are visual in their nature and are easily distracted by attractive women, shiny objects and monster trucks. It's our nature.
- No, not at all. News Babes are on a plane of existence far above the normal mortal plane. This is why News Babes should only be appreciated from afar, and never unduly bothered. There's nothing wrong with the fantasy but in real life, we must settle for the autographed 8 x 10 and the occasional auto show special.
I just think it's silly to deny that some guys DO watch some newscasts because an attractive woman is on the air. Considering the following Brian Williams & Matt Lauer have as well as former scud stud Arthur Kent, I don't doubt the same is true for some women. You cannot lump all attractive women on news programs as News Babes. First thing you do is exclude all beauty pageant winners since the one and only reason they got their start in TV journalism was their perceived good looks. These people do not belong in serious journalism and are generally relegated to being Anchor Meat. As an example: former WMAQ anchor/Miss Ohio 1993 Robin Meade is, in my opinion, Meat.
Apparently CNN is re-fashioning Headline News into Hottie News. Whatever. It could be argued that former pageant winners and other unqualified journalists such as Andrea Thompson work hard to learn their craft and become fine journalists. While that is true in some cases, unqualified yet easy-on-the-eyes women are starting from a knowledge base close to zero compared to the intelligent, hard working & respectable journalists already paying their dues in small markets with substantial knowledge & experience bases. Andrea Thompson got her start in the 48th largest TV market out of 200+. Would any of the 5 stations in Albuquerque hire a journalism major right out of college? Not!
A TV News Babe is smart, sexy and does more than just read from a TelePrompter. She can write her own copy, do her own research and hold her own in a debate aside from being tremendously attractive. It is important to note that there are most definitely News Babes in print and in radio; unfortunately, the non-visual nature of those mediums makes it harder for News Babe fans to experience the full impact of their News Babe-ishness.
I don't think there's anything wrong with appreciating News Babes. What could possibly be wrong with admiring someone who is intelligent, hard working, respectable and attractive to boot? Nothing...as long as that's where it ends. News babes are to be respected and admired but never bothered or disrespected. So, when I talk about News Babes, know that I talk of women who I highly respect and admire. They earned their place through hard work and persistence and as a bonus--through some freak of nature--they just happen to be quite fetching.
Where Are The News Studs?
By MARCIA WEISZMANN
Based on your criteria for what qualifies as a "news babe", when applying those standards to "news studs", the studs come up woefully short (in numbers, not in stature, and how tall is Vince Gerasole anyway??) As for what makes someone a babe or a stud is highly subjective, it seems that while there are many qualified male journalists who fit most of your criteria, i.e. "proven professionals, highly intelligent, more substance than style", unfortunately, in my opinion anyway, there are very few who are all that AND attractive, at least to my very picky and, at times, highly superficial opinion. However, a couple of men do come to mind almost immediately, John Miller of ABC, newly appointed hunk to "20/20", and, locally, Mark Suppelsa of channel 5. Until Sept.11 Miller wasn't very well known, although I did have a vague awareness of him. Beyond his just below the surface sexuality (or perhaps projection on my part?) much of his appeal is his self-effacing sense of humor. Women love that.
Suppelsa exudes self-confidence, and appears equally comfortable reporting or anchoring. And he is very easy on the eyes with a smile to swoon over. His appearance on "Chicago Week in Review" (I think, but am not totally sure, it was on channel 11 a couple of months ago) was quite impressive, as he actually has professional standards!!!!
But try as I might, I really can't come up with anyone else, which leads me to conclude that there is a huge, and I mean huge, difference between the sexes and what determines success in television journalism. You mentioned Matt Lauer (yes) and Brian Williams, who, incidentally, does nothing for me. Face it, there is a double standard. For every John Miller there is an Ashleigh Banfield, a Paula Zahn, a Deborah Norville, an Andrea Thompson, to name a few. On the local level, for every Mark Suppelsa there is a Tamron Hall, a Cheryl Burton, a Robin Meade, a Marion Brooks, a Nancy Pender, again, to name a few. While some of these women are talented, who but the truly naive think that these women would have been as successful if they weren't attractive? The reality is that men don't have to be attractive in order to succeed, whereas the women, if not considered "hot", well then, they sure as hell better be terrifically talented, and probably have to work harder to prove themselves. In other words, the bar is lowered for the those who are "babes". It is encouraging, however, that the networks still employ some of the greats that are past menopause but still deliver, such as Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer, Connie Chung, Leslie Stahl, Jane Pauley...regardless of what you might think of them, at least they haven't been put to pasture. But the mere thought that I should be grateful for the fact that these talented women are still employed disturbs me, for age should not be a factor. The three major network news shows are anchored by men over 60, and throw in Ted Koppel for measure. I have no problem with this, as quirky as Dan Rather may be, ya gotta love him. But are there any women who will be a serious candidate to take over for any of the "Big Three" when they retire? I sincerely doubt if any woman of any age could be as successful as any of these men are, and if they wouldn't be run out of town, ala Carol Marin. And, despite what anyone who tries to convince me otherwise, I will always believe that part of the reason she didn't succeed was because she had a handicap...she's female. Although I suspect Ms. Marin and channel 2 were just a year or so off...my gut opinion is that if she were on the air Sept. 11, the ratings would have soared and stayed there, at least for a while.
Oops. You wanted a light-hearted approach to babes and studs, and I managed to make it sociological and political. Racism and sexism continue to be rampant in our society, but the bias now is becoming more and more subtle, making it all that more dangerous. Hell, I don't even see it, but occasionally my wall of denial will collapse and the prejudice will be glaringly obvious. It is so ingrained within us that even those of us who consider ourselves to be evolved and above all forms of racism and/or sexism tolerate it because we don't even notice that it's there. That is, until we take a really good look at it.
Race And More
By BOB SKILNIK
Per *Mr. Sam Johnson's observations...if the metro-area black population is 20%, well, this guy must live in Hinsdale. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but as I recall, blacks are darn near the majorative population in Chicago. Now what ever *Mr. Sam Johnson considers the "metro-area" might dilute these numbers, but 20% is not even near the correct percentage.
As for Carol Marin (and to a large part, Bob Sirott), non-media types DON'T CARE about them. We really don't. As a matter of fact, we're tired of this "noble struggle" by Marin (who?). Years after the fracas, isn't Jerry Springer STILL on T.V.? Marin's been a local media bust-out. The media can throw all the accolades they want towards Marin, but have you ever read of a ground swell petition drive from Chicagoland viewers for Marin's return? Rob Feder probably gets more letters for the return of Dark Shadows than Marin's return.
I've talked socially to a couple of local NBC executive production people who laugh at the Marin nobility stance and privately admit that the average viewer doesn't care about her. They know it's a joke and that the average viewer couldn't give two sh*ts.
As for Sirott...the late 60s and early 70s as great A-M radio eras are gone; get over it, Bob. The dump trunk backed up for WLS-AM long ago. Sirott's schtick has always been A.M radio-based. Who cares anymore? You might want to, however, want to ask Sirott if he'd like to donate his collection of "Spoolies" to the Chicago broadcast museum. Pushing 50 and he still looks like the blond-haired Chicago version of Mr. Kotter.
Credit Where Credit Is Due
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
The top story on the late newscasts Sunday was the $55 million judgment a family won against Illinois Central railroad. Well, that was the top story on almost every newscast. Channel 32 lead with the story of the former "Girl X" who was interviewed & profiled in the Sunday Sun-Times. I think it was Craig Wall who did the story, which relied almost totally on the Sun-Times story and pictures. The only added flavor was analysis by a psychologist who may or may not have dealt with the girl (I couldn't figure that out). I think 32 did a great job of reporting a story that was an exclusive for the Sun-Times. They did the right thing by tagging all the photos as Sun-Times photos and mentioning the Sun-Times several times. The kind of thinking that went into Channel 32's story and the balls it took to have it lead off the newscast is just what I have been saying news organizations should do. The Sun-Times has an exclusive agreement with Channel 2, and I'm shocked that they didn't use that agreement and REALLY cover the story. Instead, Channel 32 swoops in and steals their thunder. I am even more impressed with the amount of credit Channel 32 gave the Sun-Times-they deserve ALL the credit and Channel 32 gave it to them. I just wonder if the other stations shied away from anything but a mere mention just because the Sun-Times scooped them. I'm also stunned that Channel 2 couldn't use the story to their advantage any more than they did. Kudos to Channel 32 for swallowing their pride and acknowledging the good work of another media outlet.
Time For Medical Reporters to Step Up
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
I'm waiting to see if any of our local medical reporters are going to step up and give some perspective on the elimination of inpatient services at Lakeside Medical Center that will take place over the next 10 years. Watching the news, I get the impression that there's a big protest about this decision but I also get the impression that the people protesting don't have much of a clue about what they are talking about.
The fact is, outpatient care is the focus of most hospitals these days. The era of staying in a hospital for a week after surgery is long gone. Nowadays, doctors let patients recuperate at home following minor procedures. As Luis Gutierrez and a bunch of ornery veterans bitched and moaned about the decision, I had to wonder why we weren't presented with some hard evidence. I'm sure hospitals keep track of the number of patients admitted as outpatients as well as inpatients. The stats will show the trend. Unless those vets are all forecasting long hospital stays, they really have nothing to complain about. The consolidation is both financially and logistically reasonable.
She Had Her Fingers Where?
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
As a man, I have to say that I REALLY enjoyed it.
As a bowler, I'd have to say that I REALLY enjoyed it.
As a Sun-Times reader, I'd have to say that I REALLY enjoyed it.
As a news junkie, I'd have to say that I REALLY question it.
I'm talking about the picture on the "Beat the Champions" page in today's Sun-Times. Sure, the sports section is read mostly by men but I have to think that their decision to run the shot might...might make some women groan.
Covering Sunday's results from the annual Sun-Times bowling competition, the paper ran two photos-one of a man and one of a woman.
The man in the photo was the top male bowler among the men who competed in "Section 1". The woman in the photo was the 28th place female bowler in "Section 1". The photo of the man was from the front as he released the ball.
The photo from the woman was a profile shot of her measuring the lane. The woman's photo was twice the size of the man's photo.
He's got the look of a bowler. She's got the look of Anna Kournikova with a breast augmentation.
Yep, the Sun-Times ran a shot of a busty, blonde hottie wearing tight jeans and a tighter top. Not that surprising though, is it? Oh, and only the top 3 women in that section advance to the next level so the hottie missed the cut by a mere 121 pins. But, hey...anything to help stimulate interest in bowling, huh?
I've been away from the lanes for way too long...
I have two questions:
- When do we get daily Page 3 girls?
- Where the hell did I put my bowling ball?
Quick Hits
By JOHN F. KUCZAJ
Just a few thoughts after catching a lot of newscasts the past few days...
Byron Harlan rules, though I have to wonder if he ever gets REALLY excitable. Truth be told, I watched the Thursday night Auto Show special on Channel 32 and I'm pretty sure Byron was co-hosting it with Danielle Serino, I just don't remember what he did. That's NOT a knock on him, I was just a little distracted.
I've said it before, I'll say it again-Charles Thomas rules. I'm getting used to the "evil" look with the goatee.
Thumbs up to Channel 2 for hiring Cynthia Santana. I like her! Though I'll reserve any final judgment and see what she can do out in the field before I count her among MY favorite news babes.
While surfing around today, I noticed the Channel 9 morning crew were all wearing Mardi Gras beads. I'm sure they followed New Orleans tradition in obtaining those beads, which makes me sorry to have missed Roseanne & Robin showing off the wares. Oh, well...
What the hell was Sammy Sosa doing with $20,000 in a plastic bag wrapped in a towel at the Caracas Hilton? Proving that there are few journalists covering sports these days, EVERYONE missed this big question. The only time I hear about money carried around like that is when drugs or gambling is involved. WHY isn't anyone investigating this? Is Sammy in trouble? Is Sammy's brother in trouble? Hey, it sounds like a funny story because that kind of money is small change to Sammy, but really--where's the journalism here?
Chicago Media Examiner e-mail delivery
Send a blank e-mail message to chicagomuse@hotmail.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.
Take a look at the previous issue: Friday, February 1
Take a look at the issue before that: Tuesday, January 22
* Pseudonym
Published weekly...or so--usually on Friday.
If you'd like to contribute, e-mail your article to the editor
|
|
|
|
