Typically a pool video crew is provided by one of the major networks, with costs distributed among those who want access to the feed. Exceptions include the White House which has its own crew. The different nets decide among themselves who will be the pool crew, and that decision can be some form of lottery, or seniority, or the preference of those behind whatever is being recorded/televised. Sometimes a group hosting the event (i.e. the DNC) will insist on using its own people, but that is rare.
More and more common in political events is C-Span providing isolated feeds of each camera to the networks, who can then use their own director to select which shot they want. It doesn't sound like that was offered here, most likely due to the added expense for an event with -- at best -- average ratings. Back when I watched the news with greater regularity, I noticed ABC tended to delay the feed an extra few seconds, and I used to wonder if they did so to give their commentators a chance to seem more "in the know" as they were reporting events just after they happened as opposed to as they happened. My fondness for the late Peter Jennings makes me want to believe it wasn't needed, but these days I'm not so sure. I should dig up the video I recorded of the OJ verdict, where I kept flipping through all the channels that were live, noting who had it on delay and who did not. But my VCR is busy as I'm converting my collection of Spenser For Hire episodes to digital, since they refuse to release them on DVD. On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:23 PM, David Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5 September 2012 18:33, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> Wait - are you saying that the Party Conventions control the video feeds >> used by the television news organizations? That seems very back assward, but >> that does not mean it is impossible. But I would be surprised to learn that. >> >> Even so though, I think the reaction shot promiscuity is counterproductive - >> it interferes with the communication. > > I would say that there's a decent chance that the parties are > providing the video from the main stage, or at least coordinating a > pool among the major news networks. What I don't know is how involved > the party is in the moment-to-moment directorial choices beyond the > canned videos, if they are playing a part at all. > > At the bare minimum of what I've seen, there seems to be a single > source of video: MSNBC and Fox were matching C-SPAN shot for > (reaction) shot in the speeches a few minutes ago. (CNN has always > been on a talking head when I've flipped to them.) > > -- > David J. Lynch > [email protected] > > -- > 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 -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- 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
