It’s not good for business or morale when the late newscast rehashes the earlier program. Stations use a variety of tactics to give each a distinct flavor. Yet, efforts to distinguish between the two sometimes cause more harm than good. It’s time again to question certain news conventions.
“New” is a Double Edged Sword
Some stations flag stories in their late newscast with the tag, “New at 11″ or “New at 10″. I don’t get it. What does that say about the other stories? Are they “old?”
The solution? Tag stories from to convey a “bonus” orientation rather than setting up an old vs. new comparison. You still get credit for updated late news material without diminishing the value of other stories.
The purpose in tagging such material is to demonstrate that the late news is not a repeat of the earlier edition. Alert viewers to new material and you convince them of that fact.
Yet the terminology seems contradictory. It emphasizes the problem rather than correcting it. Stations don’t flag any stories in their earlier newscast with tags like “New at 6″ or “New at 5.”
How about “11:00 Extra” or “More at 11″ or “11:00 Bonus”? All suggest that you’ve added these stories to the late program. You also avoid hinting that the other news is a carryover from earlier in the day.
Whatever you call it, make sure the news is truly fresh for the late broadcast. I’m writing this post after watching a local station introduce video shot during the afternoon as a “New Development.” in their late news. No updated copy or reporter tag. It’s not a “New Development” at 11pm if your video was shot at 12 noon and not updated.
Live Reports Leave Reporters Stranded
What’s wrong with the following technique used to make the late news appear more updated? A reporter does a live shot at the scene of a story that ran earlier in the day. The reporter stands in front of a darkened building that viewers are unable to see. The reporter makes reference to the building by pointing over his or her shoulder as if to convince viewers of its location.
The reporter intros the package which features daytime footage. The package often runs without re-editing from its earlier version. The reporter signs off and the anchor moves on to another story.
The live component looks forced as viewers wonders why the reporter is placed in front of a location they can’t see. Little is added in the way of new information. Truth is, the story could easily have been delivered in-studio or even by an anchor leadin.
Wouldn’t it validate the live component if the anchor asked the reporter a question that updated developments? Why send a reporter live offsite and then not interact with him or her?
You need to use live trucks to justify their purchase. You also need to use them in a fashion that better showcases their value to viewers.
Weather Recap Woes
Someone once said that weathercasts aren’t history lessons. Nowhere is that truer than in the late evening. Viewers are focused on tomorrow – especially parents and commuters looking for early morning conditions. Focus your weathercast on giving viewers a look ahead. That’s where their attention lies.
Recaps of highs/lows around the viewing area come across as old news. So does an almanac of the day’s conditions. This issue is even more pertinent when weather conditions fall within the norms. You’re giving viewers even less valuable information when taking this approach.
A day featuring extraordinary conditions doesn’t change the orientation of late evening weather. Such conditions warrant coverage earlier in the newscast.
Make sure the weathercast focuses on the future. That’s true for every weathercast, but especially so late night. It’s not the time of day for a look back.
{ Comments on this entry are closed }
