…“unnecessary” is subjective. That reporter standing in front of a closed courthouse at 11:00 pm had probably spent the better part of the day digging up stories while the courtroom was open, doing interviews, finding out stuff. You can’t have the studio anchors “reading off the script” if you don’t have reporters out there gathering information for those scripts. You might only see them for a minute onscreen but that doesn’t mean they haven’t been working there arses off.
Acey is talking about the main weather reporter. We’re fixin to be in tornado season. Our weather guy is important.
I can see the fluff pieces and the sports reporting not being SO important.
I want my weatherman front and center.
I noticed Anderson Cooper was broadcasting from home then at a ‘remote’ studio on CNN.
If I lived in NY I don’t think I would go outside at all. Just my opinion.
That word doesn’t mean what you think it means:
Our meteorologists are broadcasting from home also.They mostly display the maps and forecasts, which can be done as well from home. The sound quality is not great, and there are dropouts, so I suspect it isn’t done to get ratings. Which I think the local news stations are getting anyway. Ads, maybe not so much.
The anchors on all the news shows I watched have moved apart, which wouldn’t leave space for the sports guy or the weather guy. The morning traffic reports are gone - no traffic to speak of.
The on location reporters are far from anyone, and the production people can keep their distances.
I agree that live reports from places where nothing is happening are dumb, but they predate the virus.
Our ‘couch’ shows have gone ‘skype’. It does make the participants interact less, and make the moderator more scripted and controlling. Which is not a good thing. But in some of those shows, the participants are from interstate, and normally spend their day talking to people. So it seems like a good idea, not something that is going to improve ratings.
But these are also media individuals, who look for and implicitly believe the most dramatic and conflicting stories. Of course they are working from home.
Inconceivable!
Spell check strikes again. Thank you for the correction.
Our local Sports anchor doesn’t have much to report. But he’s managed to scrape up a few stories. The poor guy has to fill his allocated air time some way.
I’m fairly well informed, yet I haven’t watched local television news since the last time I was in a bar on a slow sports night (aka the before-times).
I think there are two possible bullshit questions here:
The first is whether a reporter working from home is reasonable. I think it’s very reasonable, at least because running around talking to a big variety of people face to face is quite a good transmission vector. It might also be the reporter has specific reasons to isolate, either on account of their own status or just on account of others close to them.
The second is how they present the fact of their working from home. It might not need to be said at all. If they are breathless and sensational about it, then there could be a bullshit element to it, yes. But this is just changing what has always been a bullshit element. If last month the same reporter was standing in front of the courthouse, for example, why isn’t that bullshit? Sure, they were in there digging up stories, but now that they’re reporting same, why is it best to be on the street while doing so? Get in your damn car, so I can hear you, not out here with the honking horns and people dancing behind you. It has always bugged me that they actually make it hard to hear the content, just so they can add a dramatic element of being outside physically close to the scene of the story, without actually showing anything relevant to the content in that outdoor shoot.
I agree that the huge reason to do it is to set an example for viewers … They can’t just carry on, business as usual, while telling viewers to uproot their lives. It looks hypocritical to report that people should be self-isolating while newscasters are sitting side-by-side at a desk. People will just not take it seriously. This is not time for business as usual, and what we see should absolutely reflect that.
It’s the same reason all the late-night programs are broadcasting from home instead of carrying on as usual or just airing reruns. It’s the same reason all the celebrities are posting their quarantine selfies and singing terrible songs. They want people to realize this is a real problem to be taken seriously. The more people see that others are cooperating with the stay at home orders, the more likely they are to do it themselves. Especially if they are seeing people they look up to and trust.
This.
One of the local newscasters is reporting from home because she tested positive. They specifically said the weather forecaster (maybe sports, too) is broadcasting from home to keep the studio more empty.
Two nights ago, I took part in a Skyped bar trivia game. Fun!
I know it isn’t the same thing, but I like that my favorite late night talk show hosts have been shooting their programs from home. It makes me feel like I’m not alone in this surreal mode of shut-in-ness.
It also reminds me that we are somehow managing to pull through this. And thus, we can keep on managing. It doesn’t have to be a miserable horrible thing to shelter at home.
Maybe it is some kind of stunt, but who says stunts are inherently bad?
One of my favorite podcasts, The Complete Guide To Everything, has done their last couple episodes with Tim and Tom each working from home. They live in NYC and usually record podcasts together, but shit has gotten real. I wish it were a stunt.
They’ve also been drinking more before and during the podcast, and sometimes you can hear them struggling to keep things positive and lite.
Another good podcast, /filmcast (slash filmcast) has been sobering. David Chen,
Devindra Hardawar, and Jeff Cannata are dealing with the loss of their industry.
Frankly I dont trust any news outlet wont try this or that for ratings.
Why would this increase ratings? Who’s going to tune in just to get a glimpse of somebody’s living room?
And the news doesn’t need any phony stunts to boost ratings. Viewership is way up because people are vitally concerned and are grasping for every scrap of news.
That seems like much more work than broadcasting from home, and for what?
Increased risk of transmission vs. the stinkeye from the aceplace57’s of the world. I know what my choice would be.
You know masks are in short supply for essential medical personnel, yes? That even the precautions taken by medical personnel isn’t a guarantee against contagion? That pre-symptomatic individuals can spread the disease? That we don’t really know what is required to be perfectly safe?
A couple of mine were discussing touching up their roots live. Boring if Mom did it but when a couple of your funny breakfast pals do it? … Okay, still boring, but more fun than watching the toaster.
We have a toaster oven, and after a few hits on the vape pen, the red glow is freaky!
TV station reporters broadcasting from home? Is it a ratings stunt?
No.