Tag: the CBS Evening News

I Work In The Ego Business

It’s possible there’s a business where the employees have larger egos than we do in TV, but I haven’t found it. By the way, I’m not excluding myself. I have a room sized ego – and a large room at that.

That’s one reason why Roger Friedman’s revelation (and Gail Shister’s this past weekend) of trouble in Katie Couric’s paradise is not a big surprise to me.

Katie Couric’s barrage of bad publicity is coming not from the outside, but from the inside of CBS, sources tell me.

Indeed, one of Couric’s frequently mentioned enemies is Bob Schieffer, the lovable, durable veteran journalist who filled in as anchor of the “CBS Evening News” between Dan Rather’s departure and Couric’s arrival.

But sources say that Schieffer has been unhappy lately, mainly because his airtime, which was prominent when Couric first started, has dwindled in recent weeks.

Avuncular Bob Schieffer – really? Again, no surprise.

Once you’ve make the decision to be ‘on’ TV, you really should give up all pretenses of not being interested in the superficial aspects broadcasting brings. They are intoxicating. They can be kept under control… no, they should be kept under control, though that’s more difficult done than said.

I’ve heard stories of news anchors who had their spouses time the ‘reads’ each anchor had! Don’t shortchange my hubby, you hussy!

Even people I’ve sat next to on the news set have looked at me as if I’d dropped in from another planet. They were poised to blame me personally for any lack of success that might follow.

The truth is, any time there’s any ratings falloff people go searching for a scapegoat. If you work at a car dealership, people might not like your cars. If you work on TV, the product is often you!

I once worked with an anchor team that couldn’t stand each other. He was quiet and studious. She was brash and abrasive. One night she let him have it with a horrific tongue lashing, which she ended by telling him he was a “no talent.”

She timed her diatribe to finish just as the theme ended and the mikes went live. He was left without the ability to respond. I can’t imagine how that must have felt.

The CBS Evening News ratings are off. But, what you mainly hear is, Katie’s ratings are off. It’s tough when so much of the product is considered to be you. It’s also an insult to the other people reporting, producing and executing the show… but they’re not the ‘face.’

When you make $15,000,000 per year there’s a huge bullseye on your back. Lots of people are anxious to point out, they told you so.

I’m not sure if Katie will make it through her contract, but if she doesn’t, I’d bet the pressure will come from inside, not outside.

Less Of Katie On CBS

This is a news story that has to be ‘delicious’ to any editor or producer. Katie Couric’s photo has been published as part of the publicity campaign to launch her reign as anchor of the CBS Evening News. TVNewser&#185 discovered the photo had been doctored.

The photo on the right is a slimmer Katie!

Colors were adjusted too, but I see that as much less troublesome. Often photos need to be properly white balanced after the fact. I can’t tell you which, left or right, is closer to the ‘real’ color look. Does it matter?

On retouching in general – mea culpa. Helaine has complained when I’ve doctored vacation shots to remove power lines or other schmutz. The temptation to improve on reality is great, especially when it’s so easily done.

I’ve also removed dozens of pounds in photos of friends and relatives. Not one has ever seen the finished product, realized I’d slimmed them, and complained!

Professional photogs like Greg Apodaca do this all the time, and even brag about it by showing examples on their website.

I shouldn’t have any problem ‘glamming’ Katie in publicity shots. Can a guy who wears makeup every night really complain about the vanity of others?

However, since Katie represents the entire CBS news organization, maybe this would have been better left undone. This photo might be OK for publicity, but has to violate the news policies of CBS. That’s a standard even more important to keep after the revelation of doctored and staged photos from the Israeli/Lebanese conflict.

The need for a doctored photo implies our hearts may be in the wrong place, valuing physicality above content. That’s a message I don’t want to send.

&#185 – I am a daily reader of Brian Stelter’s blog, and once had a comment published. After watching Fox News follow a particularly heart pounding car chase for much of the afternoon, coverage stopped at 8:00 PM. That’s when O’Reilly (pre-taped, I believe) goes on. Here’s what I wrote at the time:

If they continued the chase, it would have been an acknowledgment it was news. By stopping at 8 p.m., they instead signaled it was news porn.

Unfortunately, news coverage based on the compelling nature of video, as opposed to the story’s impact or content, is a constant worry – and it’s certainly not limited to FNC, who happened to be the guilty party this particular time.

Politics About To Get Even Dirtier

During every recent election cycle there has been kvetching about how dirty politics has become. This, by the way, is a non-partisan dig. Both of our major political parties have been willing participants in mud related activities.

Sadly, negative advertising works in politics. It might work elsewhere, but we consider ourselves too sophisticated a society to put up with “Toyota sucks” commercials, paid for by GM.

As bad as it’s been, there’s been some restraint, mainly because those in charge have been ‘organizational’ people. You don’t get anywhere in any organization by being snippy and anti-social 100% of the time. People who fit in rise in organizations.

Now, the voice of politics might be the voice of bloggers&#185 – people who can stay home, by themselves, with none of the interpersonal requirements an office brings. Bring on the vitriol.

Here in Connecticut, Ned Lamont’s campaign for US Senate would be nowhere without the support of political bloggers. Howard Dean’s ill fated run for president was mounted on the backs of the blogging community. Dan Rather might still be anchoring the CBS Evening News, but for bloggers.

Adam Cohen, on this morning’s New York Times editorial page, talked about how computers and the Internet are making it possible for 15 year olds to swing elections. He was referring to this video, which has been viewed 30,000 times already (there are at least two versions on youtube.com). When was the last time you expressed your views to 30,000 strangers (and growing)?

Ava Lowery’s video was originally shown at the “YearlyKos,” the ‘political convention’ of liberal bloggers held last week in Las Vegas.

The cutting-edge discussions at YearlyKos were about the intersection of technology and politics. Bloggers sketched out their plans for shaping news in upcoming elections. The liberal political-action group Democracy for America gave a primer on turning online activism into offline activism, by developing networks of supporters and sending out “action alerts” to get them to contribute money and volunteer for campaigns and causes. The Participatory Culture Foundation, a nonprofit group, led a workshop on how ordinary people can make political videos and distribute them over the Internet.

We enter an era where partisans, with little restraint and powerful tools, will control the noise – if not the conversation. The technology seems to be an equal opportunity enabler (though Cohen felt the progressive wing of the Democratic Party would benefit most).

It would be a shame to think, as 2006 and then 2008’s political ads get going, what we’ve just been through were the good old days.

&#185 – Geoff, are you talking about yourself? To a certain extent, as this blog is primarily done while I’m by myself, with no outside consultation. There is no safety on my trigger, other than me.

Often I censor myself. That’s probably because of 35+ years of broadcasting live. Which bloggers have that experience?

Advice To Newcomers (Looking For My Job)

A weather newbie posted a request on a bulletin board I frequent. He wanted advice on putting together a tape for a first job.

Historically, applicants for on-the-air broadcasting jobs have sent audition tapes, usally containing some short snippets of ‘outstanding’ performance followed by full length reports (whether that be reporting, weathercasting or anchoring).

Though I think the concept of audition tape is outmoded, and random access digital media should rule the day, I thought I’d answer anyway.

Your weathercast should be a meaningful story with beginning, middle and end. Tell them what you are going to tell them. Tell it to them. Tell it to them again.

Honest.

Be confident. Be composed. You are on-the-air because you are an expert. I don’t want to learn anything from you but how to be prepared for the weather.

Don’t use jargon. I’m not impressed. If you use any term you had to identify on a meteo test or quiz, I will get a gun and shoot you.

Don’t let your appearance or actions distract the viewer from your presentation. You don’t have to be pretty, handsome, slim or have all your hair. If that’s what counted, we’d have the CBS Evening News with Daisy Fuentes. Just be neat and business-like.

Among the tidbits Don Fitzpatrick&#185 had in his classic audition tape advice was, do not confuse a good situation with a good presentation. His example had to do with reporters showing the President coming to town. It’s a big deal and might show the pecking order at your shop, but local reporters never get anything meaningful in these brief controlled events. Seen one, seen them all.

For weather the analogy is: does your tornado coverage showcase you as well as airchecks from more normal days might?

There is an apocryphal story… though I believe it is true. Three decades ago, Mark Howard, trying to leave Hartford and go to Philadelphia, sent a tape of the show from hell! Everything went wrong. He told the potential news director, anyone can send a perfect tape, here’s what I do when skills are really needed!&#178

After you make your third, fourth, fifth dub of the tape, you will see every imperfection. You will anticipate that millisecond pause or glitch. Your tape hasn’t gotten worse. Trust me, no one else will watch it five times, even your folks.

In fact, the sad truth is, your tape is made or lost in the first few seconds. Put your best stuff first – right at the top. No one is getting to minute eight.

Finally, when you send your tape, don’t go after my job. The world is lousy with meteorologists who are younger, smarter, better looking and will work for less. I hate you all.

Of course I haven’t gotten a new fulltime job in over 20 years. What do I know?

I expect most of you aren’t in the ‘biz’ and will never put together a tape. For you, the sobering point to bring home is how little of a tape is watched before an initial go/no go decision is made.

Obviously, the final hiring decision takes a lot of time (because everyone is scared to make a wrong decision). Most people don’t get that far. I’ve seen tapes watched less than ten seconds before they were ejected.

Actually, I think solid negative decisions can often be made that quickly. Tough business.

&#185 – There was an earlier reference on the bulletin board to Don Fitzpatrick, who ran an amazing talent search business in San Fransisco. Don was a trailblazer. He published advice for TV news applicants seeking a job, from the perspective of someone who truly had seen everything.

&#178 – If someone knows Mark, will you ask him if this story is real? I’ve been telling it forever, but I just don’t know.