We're all in the dark, but I know everyone where I work reads this blog, even management. It's major water-cooler talk, especially the recent follow-the-money posts. The current money solutions of a central Graphics and Master Control seem to be hurried and full of bugs. I know that our particular station makes money, that is until Gannett takes our profit and demands more. Why should we suffer and lose money to the competition? We've already lost some of our best employees (including sales staff and management) to the competition for higher pay and job security.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Reader: What about TV central control bugs?
A broadcasting division employee joins me in asking co-workers to give us more TV news. Anonymous@6:24 p.m. writes:
We're all in the dark, but I know everyone where I work reads this blog, even management. It's major water-cooler talk, especially the recent follow-the-money posts. The current money solutions of a central Graphics and Master Control seem to be hurried and full of bugs. I know that our particular station makes money, that is until Gannett takes our profit and demands more. Why should we suffer and lose money to the competition? We've already lost some of our best employees (including sales staff and management) to the competition for higher pay and job security.
We're all in the dark, but I know everyone where I work reads this blog, even management. It's major water-cooler talk, especially the recent follow-the-money posts. The current money solutions of a central Graphics and Master Control seem to be hurried and full of bugs. I know that our particular station makes money, that is until Gannett takes our profit and demands more. Why should we suffer and lose money to the competition? We've already lost some of our best employees (including sales staff and management) to the competition for higher pay and job security.
5 comments:
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have written time and time again. The tactics to cut expenses at the papers will not work in Broadcast. Most of the print division are essentially monopolistic models. Yes. Certainly there is competition for the readers' eye. The Internet other media perhaps a local weekly. But really the papers are one-of-a-kind.
ReplyDeleteBroadcast properties have direct competitors with an identical reach (coverage) in each market. In Atlanta and DC there are 4 stations with full local news operations. In Phoenix there are 5.
The most successful stations have been those that the company "left alone." Denver and Minneapolis come to mind.
The greater involvement by corporate...the less success. Atlanta and DC. are good examples.
Does it look OK? That is not the bar in these markets. OK does not cut it when the viewer can press the remote to tune in a direct competitor.
Many stations hub graphics and Master Control functions during certain dayparts with limited success.
You need to look at the emasculation of the news budgets. Rumors are that the WUSA news budget was cut by 23%. Several anchors, veteran reporters and technical staff have been let go or taken early retirement. Lay-offs have further diminished the staff.
In other markets such as Cleveland and St. Louis stations are sharing video and facilities with their direct competitor.
Broadcast employees: Give us examples. SPEAK UP!
Thanks again Jim for offering this forum.
We are looking at this from the wrong perspective--from the bottom up. We need to look at this from the perspective of Corporate--from the top down. Corporate is looking at the decline in revenue, and making adjustments from those figures. So we have a 23 percent cut at the flagship WUSA in Washington. Those of us on the bottom rungs need to come up with a viable alternative solution, or there will be even more mindless cuts coming. We are part of the problem because any plan we can devise at the lower levels will inevitably tread on someone's big toe, and result in screaming and associated turf wars. But if we go the way we are going now, they will just pick us off one by one.
ReplyDeleteWUSA is not the flagship. FAIL.
ReplyDeleteSince WUSA is the station Corporate execs in McLean have on their TV sets, it is the flagship. It certainly has lost its market share.
ReplyDeleteWUSA never had any market share. It's been the runt of the litter for as long as there's been Nielsen ratings.
ReplyDeleteI also disagree with the corporate homer that said all us TV people need to do is worker harder for less, so the company can take a bigger profit. Bullshit - if someone picks up another edit shift, or posts slideshows to the web, or edits a movie, all we do is create the perception that we can do even more with the same people AND pay them less.
A old-hand TV guy I worked with in LA had a great saying - "MInute Rice takes a minute, if you follow the directions. You can use less rice, less water and not boil it a minute and call it Minute Rice, but it tastes like crap and people know the difference."
The more you cut back at TV stations, the more typos get on air, the graphics look like shit and the news product starts to look like a college TV station. And since there's competition, the audience will go there...