1 of 1- laffin
- Member
Offline
Was It Really Necessary?
The recent expansion by Global News of its evening report from 5:00 pm to 6:30 pm is a disaster. It is difficult to determine the reason. The expansion includes unnecessary repetition of similar news stories, and devotes extension time to "soft' or human interest material which consumes valuable reporting time. Antony Robarts reads well but should be a reporter not an anchor. The original news hour suffered under some of the same issues but at least was diverted by weather information. Unless there is a major on-going news event of some severity, it is a chore to maintain viewer interest. With the time extension, you will lose some original viewers because of repetition and perhaps affecting sponsorships. It is a challenge to fill one hour of a news program with original material in order to retain the viewer. Any extension of time is superfluous which really questions the recent Global News staff changes.
- mace
- Member
Offline
Re: Was It Really Necessary?
Why would anyone want to watch 90 minutes of news? If I watch CTV News at 5, very little will change in one hour other than the anchors, basically reporting the same stories I have already seen. Yes the 6pm newscast is 60 minutes but the final 30 minutes is filled with entertainment fluff I have no interest in.
- AspectRatio
- Member
Offline
Re: Was It Really Necessary?
mace wrote:
Why would anyone want to watch 90 minutes of news?
I don't believe the intention is someone watching it front-to-back through the total timeslot in one sitting. It's probably a lengthy block to allow people to come in and out as they come home partway through, or flip it on before dinner, flip it on during/after dinner, channel surf through it, etc. Grabbing any audience share they can by having people tune in whenever they want during that slot if only for half an hour or even 15 minutes. No different than maybe a morning or afternoon drivetime radio show where people aren't listening to the whole thing but only bits as it suits them.
- ED1
- Member
Offline
Re: Was It Really Necessary?
The new 5 PM half hour is also seen on CHEX and CKWS, so it feels like that half hour is more provincial in story lineup. Once Kingston and Peterborough split off to do their own news at 5:30, then more Toronto-centric stories are aired.
What I don’t really understand is why the entire 5 PM hour is an MMC show, while the 6 PM is live. Why not be live for the whole 90 minutes?
- Binson Echorec
- Member
Offline
Re: Was It Really Necessary?
I was expecting much more of a furor over moving Y&R ahead a half hour.
- paterson1
- Member
Offline
Re: Was It Really Necessary?
AspectRadio got it right in my opinion. The station or network are not expecting people to watch 2 hours or 90 minutes of news. Some people who work from home or get back from work earlier in the afternoon might watch the 5pm cast or part of it.
Others, may arrive at 6:00 or later and will catch the second hour which will have many of the same stories as the first.
CP24 is often repetitive, unless something has happened. They work on a cycle of repeats and then update. Their audience drops in and out, and the station is sort of like background music. In the thousands of bars and waiting rooms in Southern Ontario that carry CP24 the station is always on and customers or patients can watch or read it as they wait or enjoy a libation or a bite.
CP24 is about the only station today that can still say that they are EVERYWHERE.. Even here in Waterloo Region, go into any waiting room or restaurant/bar and 9 times out of 10 CP24 will be on at least a few of the televisions.
- chrishch
- Member
Offline
Re: Was It Really Necessary?
Maybe it's just me, but Global News at 5 seems to be a little bit off. Maybe it's because they pretend to be live when they actually aren't. I now start watching Global News at 6 starting at 6:20 so I can finish when Global National finishes at 7 PM, give or take a few minutes.