On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Jon Delfin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Woke up at 7 and watched a half-hour of WCBS's "news." In quotes, > because for the entire 30 minutes, it was nothing but live location > shots, reporters saying the same thing over and over, and no actual > information about the storm's progress. (The meteorologist was taking > a nap?) > > Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "saturation coverage." > I have been up all night watching the coverage on CNN (which also showed local NY CBS and ABC coverage) and the local NYC ABC coverage on my computer. It was odd how little actual information they had about the progress of the storm - I got the impression that the official agency only put out updates every hour or so, and they were not sure what to say in between. The CNN meteorologist (a woman) was pretty much low balling the impact on Manhattan for several hours, and kept saying it was probably no longer a hurricane, then the rain intensified, and the 8:00 (ET) report said it was still a hurricane (the CNN meteorologist was still very skeptical about that). As far as the pictures and live shots go, the ABC affiliate by far seemed to be doing the best job, better than the CBS people, and much better than John King with CNN. The best action shots were from Long Beach (which I now know is on the southern coast of Long Island) - the ABC people got a nice live shot of a pretty large life guard structure moving off its foundation and floating into the boardwalk. For some reason the ABC people had nice, clear video and good audio, while King on CNN could hardly be understood most of the time, and his video kept going in and out. Another problem with ÇNN's coverage is that Anderson Cooper is anchoring it from a street corner in what looks like Greenwich Village; the location is an interesting choice - it is not very dramatic or visual, but I am willing to give them credit for giving us a sense of what maybe the experience of most people in Manhattan would be, as opposed to the experience of relatively few people within a block or two of the rivers. But the problem is Cooper does not have a monitor, and so can not see what his reporters are showing the audience. In general, there seems to be a strange disconnection between the reporters in Manhattan, who so far seem a little disappointed that the storm has not been as severe as promised, and the reporters in places like the coast of New Jersey and Long Island, who are getting a few of those more typical hurricane hero shots (as I type this I see CNN showing footage of a local CBS reporter getting blown pretty good on one of the boardwalks, and yelling "lets get out of here)". I think CNN needs to have an anchor in the studio who can integrate the live reports with information about the nature and progress of the storm, and give more of an overview of what is happening. In general the story seems to be that it is not as bad as the worst estimates (and the constant hype), but that it is not over yet, and could still get worse. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
