I just watched the 1980s episode of CNN's new series on sports through the decades. The sports fan in me will likely watch the other episodes, this series looks far less interesting than the previous series produced by Tom Hanks and partners. While the series on music, TV, politics and other topics were interesting largely because there were clips of the songs, programs and events the talking heads were talking about. But not so with this series, it appears. The 1980s show had talking heads and still photos of that decade's major events and trends in the major US sports -- even a minute or two on the Gretzky trade to LA. But there was previous little footage of actual action. Either the producers could not buy most of the rights, or were too cheap to. In any event, a pretty dull hour of TV.

   As a (mostly) proud alumnus of CP and BN, it was painful to hear a voicer on Sunday morning from David Augustine. Talking about the upcoming federal byelections, he mentioned that the BC vote will be in a riding called North Vancouver - kah-PIL'-ah-no.  OUCH!

  I highly recommend the Doc Pomus doc. Very interesting.

At the end of the 1pm Wednesday newscast on CFRB, the reader Sara Carrioni (?) intro'd a clip from the Montreal Canadiens coach and called him Martin St. Louis -- as in the name of the city in Missouri, or the chicken wing restaurant chain.
Obviously, not a sports expert.

Jerry.agar@bellmedia.ca

I'm with Radioactive on this. That's got to be the top story. Forget about leading local.  For the 6 pm newscast, CFTO led with Tumbler Ridge with 2 reporters on the scene.

Is two years a long time?

mace wrote:

I prefer Dan and Buck's commentary and I also like Sportsnet's use of the strike zone box. Viewers have become spoiled with all the multiple camera angles and slow motion instant replays. While the World Series was televised as early as 1947, it wasn't available nationally until 1951. NBC had only three camera angles. The primary one was behind home plate with two others showing the dugouts plus first and third base. At the end of each inning there were no graphics to show the score. A camera zoomed in on the stadium scoreboard. Extremely primitive but viewers could watch the game now instead of listening to it on the radio. As for the centre field camera, which is the primary one used today, it was first used by WGN in 1951 during a little legue game. NBC introduced this camera angle during the 1957 World Series. A few other World Series firsts. 1955: in Colour. 1957: First use of Analyst with the broadcaster. 1961: 30 second replay regular speed available in certain situations. Audio improved so audiences can hear the crack of the bat. 1969: Commentators can now stand in front of a greenscreen composite of the stadium crowd. Replays now longer than 30 seconds and electronic graphics are introduced. 1974: Slow motion replay arrives. Cameras now at  first and third base, home, centre field, left field and each dugout. Probably the piece of technology we take for granted is the FoxBox Graphic which contained the score, inning, balls strikes and runners on base. It was introduced to MLB IN 1996, although FOX had been using it on their NFL broadcasts since 1994.

Game 6 of the Boston-Cincinnati World Series in 1975 introduced the camera in the Fenway Park scoreboard. It was apparently suggested by Tony Kubek. When the camera operator wasn't distracted by a rat, he caught the famous image of Carlton Fisk waving at his winning home run to stay fair, and then jumping when it hit the left field foul pole. It's become standard since for a camera to show

A question for the esteemed panel:

    You've likely seen a Skechers ad with the ubiquitous Howie Mandel. His shtick is that he asked staff at a Skechers store if he could have a free pair because he's a Skechers brand ambassador.  Howie adds that wasn't actually true, but the company did sign him up a short time later.
     I suppose the ad's premise is funny -- though not after 20 views.  But I'm guessing it's not true because Howie would look bad if he really did try to freeload, like one of those social media influencers.
      Should we believe the ad, or take it as a joke?

betaylored wrote:

Anybody know who came up with the idea to have Vassy on Corus?

Could it have been Mike Bendixen?

Maybe this is what Toronto hockey fans felt like when the Leafs traded their star player Frank Mahovlich to Montreal to play for their biggest rival the Habs, like the universe is out of kilter. 😏

The Leafs traded Frank to Detroit. The Wings sent him to Montreal a couple of years later.

All of us newscasters have had bad days. But on her 4pm newscast, it sounded very much like Patricia said the Blue Jays are playing the Baltimore OILERS.

Stefanie wrote:

Hi, I sent Richard Southern at 680 news any email about more of his bias reporting today. Here's what he said and how I responded.
Stefanie, 
 
I appreciate your feedback, but it's my job, and the job of every reporter covering Queen's Park, to hold the government to account, not to simply be a stenographer and read press releases. It's important that reports include both sides of an issue, and yes to cast a critical eye on what your government is doing. If you're able to point to anything I said that was incorrect I would gladly offer up correction, otherwise I think you may be confusing balance, and my job of holding a government to account, for bias. 
 
My response....

Richard, you are confusing reporting the facts and holding the government to account. 
 
I believe your job is a reporter not an interpreter.
 
I just need the media to report the facts and, with my voting, I'm able to interpret the facts and be in a position to hold any government to account. When I vote, if I disagree, I will hold them to account.
 
I have a graduate degree so I consider myself relatively smart. I don't need the media and you giving me your personal 'interpretation' of a situation in the government. I never read the editorial page of any newspaper...Why??.... Because if I know the facts from a story, I can make my own decision. Just give me the facts.

Your tonality in 98.7% of your reports on the Ontario government, obviously indicate your bias. I never hear anything against other parties.
 
You should be ashamed of yourself as a reporter........ Just give the facts and leave it to the listeners to make their own decision. 
 
Maybe Rogers/your superiors have told you to constantly criticize Ford's government. If that is so, and if you're that fragile,  Richard, quit the business or go to CBC.
 
Some of our greatest News reporters over the years just gave the facts.... Lloyd Robertson, Harvey Kirk, and even Peter Mansbridge at CBC.
 
Facts, facts,

…