The Southern Ontario/WNY Radio-TV Forum » Dick Smyth Hates Anchorless Newscasts

RadioActive · August 28, 2017 11:25 am

David Farrell's FYIMusicnews.ca's Media Beat column, which is a must read for me, has re-posted a mini-diatribe from no less than ex-CHUM news god Dick Smyth on a growing trend he finds worrisome: anchorless TV newscasts.

It was originally published on Warren's Network, a regular industry mailing issued by the equally illustrious Warren Cosford.

Here's how things look to Dick Smyth on this subject:

-----------------------
The bean counters besieging broadcasters have struck again.

They’ve found yet another way to cut costs.

Get rid of the news anchors!

Why pay big bucks to somebody like Peter Mansbridge or Gord Martineau.

They’ve started already at CITY-TV in Toronto. There is no anchor, just an endless stream of less costly and less experienced reporters, one after another.

Sort of like a baseball game without innings or an umpire!

Only slightly less short sighted is Global TV’s approach. Local newscasts in Halifax or Winnipeg are anchored in Toronto, with deceptive graphics to create the impression otherwise. Local weather is done from Toronto.

There is a fundamental issue here. How can a news organization be credible if it lies and misleads about its own basics?

The news anchor --- whether national or local --- is an important figure. They become the face of the news. They often are involved in the community. They are mentors to young journalists. And they serve to organize, sort out and explain the often-confusing torrent of news items.

Eliminating the anchor from a newscast….

It’s like eliminating the chef from the kitchen. — First published in WarrensNetwork

cGrant · August 28, 2017 12:28 pm

If you can't embrace change in the business, get out of the game.

August 28, 2017 4:59 pm

Where the hell did all these flies come from...It's a veritable swarm. Oh...

cGrant wrote:
If you can't embrace change in the business, get out of the game.

...there's the fly attractant. Wow!!!! What a pile of bull shit.

cGrant · August 28, 2017 5:11 pm

Old Codger wrote:
Wow!!!! What a pile of bull shit.

Thank you for your insightful counterargument. 🤔

So your solution is to go back to the heyday of radio and television and use those methods? Before computers and automation? Because everything was perfect then? Name me an industry that hasn't changed and forced its workforce to change with it.

August 28, 2017 5:53 pm

Don't put your words in my mouth...I don't feel like washing it out with soap.

ig · August 28, 2017 6:05 pm

With CGrant on this one. Dick kind of set up my argument for me.

If I can't have a really good anchor I'd rather have none at all and let the reporters tell their story. There's little worse than a bad anchor and there are unfortunately quite a few.

I can think of one specific anchor who I'd hold my breath each night as the cast started hoping to hear the words "Sitting in for..." as part of the intro.

Ig

August 28, 2017 6:15 pm

ig wrote:
hoping to hear the words "Sitting on for . . ." Ig

Probably a typo but that one might work

ig · August 28, 2017 6:30 pm

geo wrote:
ig wrote:
hoping to hear the words "Sitting on for . . ." Ig
Probably a typo but that one might work

Dow!

Radiowiz · August 28, 2017 9:43 pm

cGrant wrote:
If you can't embrace change in the business, get out of the game.

Toronto 1.

August 29, 2017 10:11 pm

cGrant wrote:
If you can't embrace change in the business, get out of the game.

I embrace change. I don't embrace stupid ideas. There's an important difference between the two. This fad will go away when ratings drop and the accountants realize that a recognizable, trustworthy anchor is an important part of building a news brand.

splunge · August 29, 2017 11:23 pm

i embrace prod guy's initial statement about change and stupid ideas. i would argue, however, that the "fad" won't go away, because accountants care less about ratings than they do about shareholder return on investment.

Radiowiz · August 29, 2017 11:30 pm

splunge wrote:
i embrace prod guy's initial statement about change and stupid ideas. i would argue, however, that the "fad" won't go away, because accountants care less about ratings than they do about shareholder return on investment.

There is no return on no investment.

betaylored · August 30, 2017 6:28 am

Years ago the viewing public started to realize that the prettier, younger, write the words for me faces yapping at them were an unreasonable facsimile of the trusted, experienced anchors that they'd grown up watching. Result? They pretty much stopped watching.

Anchorless newscasts are like a bag of unpacked groceries. Without someone to provide context, and meaning, all that footage is unsatisfying.

Radiowiz · August 30, 2017 5:22 pm

cGrant wrote:
If you can't embrace change in the business, get out of the game.

I'm a viewer. I don't like the changes.

Last edited by Radiowiz (August 30, 2017 11:27 pm)

August 30, 2017 7:37 pm

Radiowiz wrote:
splunge wrote:
i embrace prod guy's initial statement about change and stupid ideas. i would argue, however, that the "fad" won't go away, because accountants care less about ratings than they do about shareholder return on investment.
There is no return on no investment.

Other than the biggest ratings increase they've seen in quite some time. It doesn't mean everyone should follow, but it works for them.