RadioActive wrote:

What I don't understand is why they just don't make a blanket policy for all their live hits and interviews. The anchor gets to say "thank you" and then they immediately cut off the other person's mic, get them off camera and move on. It is an incredible waste of valuable air time and when it doesn't work - which it doesn't most of the time - it's so awkward it makes the viewer literally squirm. (I also notice CBC TV does this a lot, as well.)

We constantly see this all over. It's just sloppy broadcasting.

I miss the days of analog / digital ENG and SNG links...

When the station / network is using bonded cellular technology, the problem is very evident...  loose tosses to the reporter before they start talking, and loose throw backs to the desk...  not much that can be done about...  1.5 to 2 sec delay for the typical bonded cell type system... 

Easier / cheaper for the photog to carry the small bonded cell kit with their news vehicle, than having an ENG/SNG truck roll to the scene with a separate operator...  Understanding that some areas / situations will always warrant one of the larger SNG trucks, but those days are getting less and less....

Bean counters rule....

 

The problem isn't saying thank you in my mind. It's when there's no hard and fast rule about it and so sometimes, the interviewee says you're welcome and sometimes they don't. The issue is when they hang onto dead air and leave both anchor and subject hung out to dry waiting for an answer to the "Thanks" that never comes. 

It looks awkward and stilted. And I know you've spent enough time in radio stations to know that two seconds of awkward silence on air can feel like an hour. And it's 20X worse on TV, when you can see them patiently waiting, with one expecting an answer and the other just sitting there padding out the end of the report, thinking they're done.

What I'm saying in essence is make up your mind and tell your people which way you want to do it. If you want the "you're welcomes" and the rest, then tell them to do it. Every time. If you don't, cut it completely. (It IS a waste of airtime which just adds clutter and contributes nothing to the broadcast, so I'm more for the latter.) But decide you're going to do it one way or the other. And stick to it.  

In the end, it's not about manners. It's about pacing. So I suppose in my mind, this should really be a "thankless" job!

Frankly, I'm not entirely sure why I watch CTV's Toronto newscast since they keep doing things that really bug me as a viewer. The latest instance actually happens all the time and it's tremendously annoying. 

I happen to be one of those people who like to see a TV weather forecast, even though, yes, I can look it up on the web. I just prefer the way it's presented on the tube. CTV has an irritating habit of doing a promo for their weather, then throwing to break with a key that says "Weather is next." Or sometimes, "Weather is next in 2 minutes."

OK, I'll sit through those spots but you then have to deliver. Instead - and they do this 99% of the time - they return and instead of the weather, I get an endless stream of other stories, sometimes financial, sometimes community-based, and too often an interview or debrief about a topic I could care less about. 

I don't know about you, but if I were standing in line in, say, a restaurant and the maitre d' told me, "you're next," I would expect to get the first free table. It seems that if CTV were running the place, I'd be waiting another hour while 17 people were let in in front of me. Apparently they don't know that the word "next" implies it immediately follows. 

Sure enough, on Tuesday's noon news, they did the promo, threw to break and then came back with 4 minutes(!) of a live chat with their financial expert Pattie Lovett-Reid before the forecast they'd promised me almost 10 minutes earlier was coming up "next." 

It's just another little irritant in a newscast that often seems to display too many of them. I can't wait to see what they do "next." Which will probably be half an hour later.