THE FUTURE OF LOCAL NEWS

February 2001
		WBBM-Chicago recently ended its experiment with no-frills, content-driven local news. Is news without fluff stories or flashy graphics a thing of the past? Three experts respond to your questions.

Forum introduction What can viewers do to improve local news quality? Why are there so many remote broadcasts on TV news? Should newspapers monitor local TV quality? Should Marin's broadcast have been given more time? What role should PBS stations play? When will broadcasters return to "broadcasting" rather than "narrow-casting"?     Online Special Changing Local News Online Special Media Watch Feb. 7, 2001: Carol Marin and two analysts on the future of local news. October 31, 2000: Anchor Carol Marin signs off. May 24, 2000 A Chicago newscast chooses facts over fluff. Browse the NewsHour's coverage of the media     Audience Research and Development CBS News The Project for Excellence in Journalism

Brian Benschoter, general manager of News 8 Austin in Austin, TX, asks: I think Time Warner Cable's 24-hour local news channels come close to achieving the ideals Ms. Marin has championed. I think that, to a great degree, this is because we are primarily a subscriber service rather than an advertising-supported news product. We also are, by design, inclusive in our coverage because we are not chasing narrow demographics dictated by advertisers. My question: Do you agree that, as a subscriber service, a cable news channel has an intrinsic advantage in producing a "better" product from a journalistic perspective (assuming, of course, management support for such an emphasis)? Second, what is it going to take to get broadcasters return to "broadcasting" rather than "narrowcasting" [tailoring content to a specific segment of the audience]? Carl Gottlieb responds: Great question. I agree with you about cable's advantage. Much of the cable news I've seen developed over the past decade has been more local, of better quality and more relevant to viewers than over-the-air counterparts. So why isn't everyone watching local cable? You know the answer. It's in fewer homes. I am quite impressed with the Time Warner (AOL), Cablevision and New England Cable models in particular. I believe that as we move into true [media] convergence, cable will be the way to go. The highly focused content is made to order for features such as "news on demand" and the idea of "worming," or viewer control of how much information he/she would like to access at any given moment. In this year's Local TV News Study we make mention of demographic targeting, which we find insulting with a tendency to stereotype people and groups. As you know, along with "fear and loathing" these are great driving forces behind many targeted stories. Too bad, our research shows that viewers see through the stunting and indeed are turned off by these tricks. What will it take for TV to get back to broadcasting? The realization that they can't make money narrowcasting. By the way, we'll let you know just how good local cable news is in our next Local TV News Study. We are taking a look at some of the local cables around the country.   Marty Haag responds: First, your setup is pretty self-serving. Yes, 24-hour cable news channel operations have the opportunity to do some of the things Carol Marin’s broadcast attempted to do. To make a 7x24 operation valuable, some of the money from a subscriber service should be spent on product. Often, this is not the case. It’s common to see the news reported by pre-pubescent squeaky-voiced kids who could not differentiate between the Norman invasion and the Invasion of Normandy. And the “local news” turns out to be two water main breaks and a street closing. I am showing my bias, of course, but I prefer a more mature operation, such as TXCN, which can’t be seen in Austin.   Carol Marin responds: I don't feel well enough versed in cable/subscriber services to write intelligently on the first part of your question but I have strong views and some experience with issues of broad vs. narrowcasting. I don't believe that commercial local news stations are forced to "narrowcast". Moreover, I think in the long run it's bad business. We're seeing the consequences. Fewer and fewer viewers find local news relevant. Why? Because some consultant or sales exec argues for demographic targeting as the key to success. Consider, as an example, the coveted 18-49 female demographic. For some inexplicable reason, they offer women of that age group the dumbest possible stories: "The Marriage Test"; "High Heel Hell"; "The Best and Worst Face Creams". Forgotten in the demographic frenzy is that women are smarter than that and have lots of interests spanning everything from children to politics to sports. Similarly, the elderly don't just want stories about aging, the young actually watch something other than stories about teen rock stars. Good stories, well told, get people to watch; consistent quality gets them to stick around, and simplistic, consultant- driven formulas that pervade the airwaves drive them away. What's wonderful is that there are executives like you still interested in a traditional notion of broadcasting. Good luck.