Jeffhs
Super Member
I've noticed in the last ten-fifteen years or so that local television newscasts, at least here in northeastern Ohio (Cleveland area), have become quite informal. Case in point: The local weather forecast on the ABC affiliate in Cleveland has a meteorologist who waves his hands around quite a bit (and uses other mannerisms as well) when in front of the local and national weather maps, and doesn't really sound as if he belongs anywhere in broadcasting; the CBS affiliate has the same kind of weather forecaster. Channel 3, the NBC affiliate for northeast Ohio, has one of the better weather forecasters (at six and eleven p.m., although the people who do the weather on the station's other newscasts in the early morning, and at four thirty, five and six a.m. before the Today Show, are worse, IMHO), although I think channel 8 (FOX, was CBS until the mid-'90s) may have a better team of meteorologists than any of the so-called "Big Three" network affiliates (here, channels 3, 5 and 19).
Also, I have noticed that two local newscasts in this area, on channels 3 (NBC) and 19 (CBS), use very large letters on the captions on the news photos behind the anchor, to describe the story being reported. Both stations also have these letters on a slant. What are they trying to prove, by having the captions on these news photos in such large letters (about three inches high or more), not to mention the large, animated signage that promotes the station's next news story after a commercial break? And that constant reminder that the stations' newscasts are presented in HD (high definition)--come on, already! Channel 3 trumpets this by way of a logo at the lower right corner of the screen that states "HD 3" with the NBC peacock to the right of the 3. The logo is transparent, so it isn't too noticeable. However, on channel 5 there is a blue logo that states "News Channel 5", with the 5 in a circle (I think they may have gotten the idea for that from the ABC-operated stations in Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, et al. on channel 7, which put the number in a circle as well). That doesn't bother me but what does, is that on the video screen in front of the anchor desk, the phrase "News Channel 5" and the letters "HD" appear, one logo after the other (the HD is shown as two letters; the station's news branding is shown all together as one slogan). These logos are shown, yup, you guessed it (!), in large letters that are impossible to miss.
My question is, why in the world are Cleveland's television newscasts so radically different (using gimmicks, newscasters who have terrible voices, etc.) from newscasts in other cities? I watch the noon news on WGN in Chicago (on cable), and I feel their news program is much better than anything I have seen on Cleveland's news programs in years. WGN, for example, has one meteorologist (Jim Ramsey) who fills in for that station's Tom Skilling, and does the weather on the weekends. Ramsey has an excellent voice and sounds as if he should be on radio in a major market such as Los Angeles or New York (or even Chicago). I have never heard a local newscaster in Cleveland with a voice that good. What is it about the Cleveland television news programs that prevents the companies that own the area's stations from hiring news anchors with decent voices and who use formal language during their newscasts? Channel 3 is owned and operated by Gannett Broadcasting; channel 5 is a Scripps-Howard O&O (owned and operated) station; channel 8 is a FOX affiliate and was owned/operated by Fox, but has been sold; and channel 19 is owned and operated by Raycom Media. Would it kill these companies to hire newscasters who sound like they belong in the media and do not clown around on the air? While they are at it, I wish these companies would set standards for the manner in which news stories are worded on Cleveland newscasts. I am getting sick and tired of hearing, for example, about "cop killings" rather than police shootings, the stations' referral to children as "kids", and the like. If these newscasters cannot use formal language on the air as they once did, quite frankly, IMHO, they shouldn't be on television in a major city in the first place.
And the Cleveland television stations wonder why they are always third in the ratings. Cleveland has had an image problem (being referred to for years, from the late '60s through the seventies and into the eighties, as "the mistake on the lake", for example--thank goodness that nonsense has stopped and the city is starting to turn around), for decades; the news media, including TV, radio, and newspapers, are not helping to solve the problem, again IMHO. The newscasters on Cleveland radio are terrible as well, which is why I do not listen to WTAM 1100, the so-called "news radio" station in Cleveland.
WTAM 1100 does, however, have a weather forecast which is picked up a couple of times an hour by WMJI-FM 105.7, the oldies station in Cleveland; that forecast sounds good to me (as far as the manner in which it is presented is concerned), but their newscasts leave an awful lot to be desired.
How on earth is Cleveland going to turn itself around and become one of the Midwest's great cities if it continues to have radio and TV newscasts anchored by people who sound and look as if they don't even belong in the business, not to mention newspapers which are written in less than formal English? I am almost convinced that Cleveland is the city where TV and radio newscasters, disk jockeys, newspaper reporters/writers, etc. either begin or end their careers. The networks know this, which is why NBC pulled out of Cleveland nearly 18 years ago. Channel 3 in Cleveland was operated by NBC for many years; first from 1948 to 1955, then from 1965 until 1972. NBC sold the station in 1990 and purchased WCMH-TV in Columbus, probably because by that time Columbus had overtaken Cleveland as the largest city in Ohio. Several years later, however, NBC sold WCMH-TV to Media General a couple of years ago, so as of now, NBC has no operated stations in Ohio. As far as WKYC-TV channel 3 in Cleveland is concerned, I'm sure the reason NBC sold it almost eighteen years ago was because of falling ratings; at least this may have been their rationale for selling the station at the time.
Nowadays NBC is selling off its operated stations in smaller markets left and right; it has already sold its O&Os in Hartford, Connecticut (WVIT-TV channel 30), Providence, Rhode Island (WJAR-TV), and is in the process of selling WTVJ-TV channel 6 in Miami (the sale is pending FCC aproval). I can see why NBC would sell its operated stations in smaller cities (lower ratings than they would like to see these stations drawing), but for the network to pull out of a major city such as Cleveland is, IMHO, inexcusable. As I said above, Cleveland has had an image problem for decades, but that should not be the sole basis for NBC to have sold its affiliate in the city for a station in another, lesser-known media market. Why couldn't NBC have held onto its Cleveland station and bought the Columbus station? Other states have two or more major network affiliates owned by the same company, and cities such as New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles have stations that are operated by the three major networks. I would think if Cleveland's TV stations were operated by NBC, ABC and CBS, their newscasts would be a lot better than they are now, and the stations could be producing more locally-originated programming, rather than running those darned things called infomercials between network shows. The only locally-produced programming I've seen on channel 3 in the last 5-10 years has been sports (Indians and Browns games) and a series titled "Lake Erie: Below the Surface", narrated by former channel 3 meteorologist Mark Nolan. On channel 5 the only local programming (aside from Live on Five, an early evening newscast airing at 5 p.m. five days a week) is on in the very early morning hours of Saturday and Sunday mornings. I don't know if channels eight or 19 even have any locally-produced shows.
Oh well. At least all of Cleveland's TV stations are broadcasting in HD, so they must be doing something right. Now, if only they would cut out the nonsense on their newscasts, these stations might get out of the so-called "ratings basement" and help Cleveland improve its image. For me, that day cannot come too soon. Cleveland is not some hick town in the middle of nowhere; it is a major U. S. Midwestern city that deserves better than to have second-rate (or worse) television and radio newscasts and newspapers. Northeast Ohio has suffered enough with all this nonsense. I hope some day the area will be recognized for all its wonderful qualities, rather than as a "mistake on the lake". That phrase was coined almost 40 years ago but, unfortunately, it has stuck. It is bad enough that northeastern Ohio has to put up with this outdated image; what is worse is that folks from outside the area and in other parts of the country hear about it and some believe it. This is no way to promote a city that has the potential to become one of the region's finest cities. Granted, Cleveland has problems, but so does every other major city in this country.
Some day I would like to find out how and why Cleveland got stuck with the image of "the mistake (on Lake Erie)" that never seems to die. I have lived here, outside greater Cleveland (in suburbs the first 43 years of my life, then in Fairport Harbor, where I live now), all my life and do not (never have) consider Cleveland any kind of "mistake"; in fact, I think the city will turn around in time. Maybe not tomorrow, next week, next month or even next year, but eventually Cleveland will be great again. As a thread on CityData.com's Ohio section is titled, "Stop the Cleveland bashing!" Cleveland deserves better; in fact, no city deserves the kind of merciless bashing Cleveland has endured over the last nearly 40 years.
Also, I have noticed that two local newscasts in this area, on channels 3 (NBC) and 19 (CBS), use very large letters on the captions on the news photos behind the anchor, to describe the story being reported. Both stations also have these letters on a slant. What are they trying to prove, by having the captions on these news photos in such large letters (about three inches high or more), not to mention the large, animated signage that promotes the station's next news story after a commercial break? And that constant reminder that the stations' newscasts are presented in HD (high definition)--come on, already! Channel 3 trumpets this by way of a logo at the lower right corner of the screen that states "HD 3" with the NBC peacock to the right of the 3. The logo is transparent, so it isn't too noticeable. However, on channel 5 there is a blue logo that states "News Channel 5", with the 5 in a circle (I think they may have gotten the idea for that from the ABC-operated stations in Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, et al. on channel 7, which put the number in a circle as well). That doesn't bother me but what does, is that on the video screen in front of the anchor desk, the phrase "News Channel 5" and the letters "HD" appear, one logo after the other (the HD is shown as two letters; the station's news branding is shown all together as one slogan). These logos are shown, yup, you guessed it (!), in large letters that are impossible to miss.
My question is, why in the world are Cleveland's television newscasts so radically different (using gimmicks, newscasters who have terrible voices, etc.) from newscasts in other cities? I watch the noon news on WGN in Chicago (on cable), and I feel their news program is much better than anything I have seen on Cleveland's news programs in years. WGN, for example, has one meteorologist (Jim Ramsey) who fills in for that station's Tom Skilling, and does the weather on the weekends. Ramsey has an excellent voice and sounds as if he should be on radio in a major market such as Los Angeles or New York (or even Chicago). I have never heard a local newscaster in Cleveland with a voice that good. What is it about the Cleveland television news programs that prevents the companies that own the area's stations from hiring news anchors with decent voices and who use formal language during their newscasts? Channel 3 is owned and operated by Gannett Broadcasting; channel 5 is a Scripps-Howard O&O (owned and operated) station; channel 8 is a FOX affiliate and was owned/operated by Fox, but has been sold; and channel 19 is owned and operated by Raycom Media. Would it kill these companies to hire newscasters who sound like they belong in the media and do not clown around on the air? While they are at it, I wish these companies would set standards for the manner in which news stories are worded on Cleveland newscasts. I am getting sick and tired of hearing, for example, about "cop killings" rather than police shootings, the stations' referral to children as "kids", and the like. If these newscasters cannot use formal language on the air as they once did, quite frankly, IMHO, they shouldn't be on television in a major city in the first place.
And the Cleveland television stations wonder why they are always third in the ratings. Cleveland has had an image problem (being referred to for years, from the late '60s through the seventies and into the eighties, as "the mistake on the lake", for example--thank goodness that nonsense has stopped and the city is starting to turn around), for decades; the news media, including TV, radio, and newspapers, are not helping to solve the problem, again IMHO. The newscasters on Cleveland radio are terrible as well, which is why I do not listen to WTAM 1100, the so-called "news radio" station in Cleveland.
WTAM 1100 does, however, have a weather forecast which is picked up a couple of times an hour by WMJI-FM 105.7, the oldies station in Cleveland; that forecast sounds good to me (as far as the manner in which it is presented is concerned), but their newscasts leave an awful lot to be desired.
How on earth is Cleveland going to turn itself around and become one of the Midwest's great cities if it continues to have radio and TV newscasts anchored by people who sound and look as if they don't even belong in the business, not to mention newspapers which are written in less than formal English? I am almost convinced that Cleveland is the city where TV and radio newscasters, disk jockeys, newspaper reporters/writers, etc. either begin or end their careers. The networks know this, which is why NBC pulled out of Cleveland nearly 18 years ago. Channel 3 in Cleveland was operated by NBC for many years; first from 1948 to 1955, then from 1965 until 1972. NBC sold the station in 1990 and purchased WCMH-TV in Columbus, probably because by that time Columbus had overtaken Cleveland as the largest city in Ohio. Several years later, however, NBC sold WCMH-TV to Media General a couple of years ago, so as of now, NBC has no operated stations in Ohio. As far as WKYC-TV channel 3 in Cleveland is concerned, I'm sure the reason NBC sold it almost eighteen years ago was because of falling ratings; at least this may have been their rationale for selling the station at the time.
Nowadays NBC is selling off its operated stations in smaller markets left and right; it has already sold its O&Os in Hartford, Connecticut (WVIT-TV channel 30), Providence, Rhode Island (WJAR-TV), and is in the process of selling WTVJ-TV channel 6 in Miami (the sale is pending FCC aproval). I can see why NBC would sell its operated stations in smaller cities (lower ratings than they would like to see these stations drawing), but for the network to pull out of a major city such as Cleveland is, IMHO, inexcusable. As I said above, Cleveland has had an image problem for decades, but that should not be the sole basis for NBC to have sold its affiliate in the city for a station in another, lesser-known media market. Why couldn't NBC have held onto its Cleveland station and bought the Columbus station? Other states have two or more major network affiliates owned by the same company, and cities such as New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles have stations that are operated by the three major networks. I would think if Cleveland's TV stations were operated by NBC, ABC and CBS, their newscasts would be a lot better than they are now, and the stations could be producing more locally-originated programming, rather than running those darned things called infomercials between network shows. The only locally-produced programming I've seen on channel 3 in the last 5-10 years has been sports (Indians and Browns games) and a series titled "Lake Erie: Below the Surface", narrated by former channel 3 meteorologist Mark Nolan. On channel 5 the only local programming (aside from Live on Five, an early evening newscast airing at 5 p.m. five days a week) is on in the very early morning hours of Saturday and Sunday mornings. I don't know if channels eight or 19 even have any locally-produced shows.
Oh well. At least all of Cleveland's TV stations are broadcasting in HD, so they must be doing something right. Now, if only they would cut out the nonsense on their newscasts, these stations might get out of the so-called "ratings basement" and help Cleveland improve its image. For me, that day cannot come too soon. Cleveland is not some hick town in the middle of nowhere; it is a major U. S. Midwestern city that deserves better than to have second-rate (or worse) television and radio newscasts and newspapers. Northeast Ohio has suffered enough with all this nonsense. I hope some day the area will be recognized for all its wonderful qualities, rather than as a "mistake on the lake". That phrase was coined almost 40 years ago but, unfortunately, it has stuck. It is bad enough that northeastern Ohio has to put up with this outdated image; what is worse is that folks from outside the area and in other parts of the country hear about it and some believe it. This is no way to promote a city that has the potential to become one of the region's finest cities. Granted, Cleveland has problems, but so does every other major city in this country.
Some day I would like to find out how and why Cleveland got stuck with the image of "the mistake (on Lake Erie)" that never seems to die. I have lived here, outside greater Cleveland (in suburbs the first 43 years of my life, then in Fairport Harbor, where I live now), all my life and do not (never have) consider Cleveland any kind of "mistake"; in fact, I think the city will turn around in time. Maybe not tomorrow, next week, next month or even next year, but eventually Cleveland will be great again. As a thread on CityData.com's Ohio section is titled, "Stop the Cleveland bashing!" Cleveland deserves better; in fact, no city deserves the kind of merciless bashing Cleveland has endured over the last nearly 40 years.
