Bollocks. Plenty of Editors have rubbish bins full of it.
You have something that works on Seven Sharp or The Project, but not the 6pm news. Keep that for the news, not the emotive stuff, thanks.
Bollocks. Plenty of Editors have rubbish bins full of it.
You have something that works on Seven Sharp or The Project, but not the 6pm news. Keep that for the news, not the emotive stuff, thanks.
Sorry, thatâs bollocks⌠what you have is crap editors, not to mention sub par reporters and producers.
No one is suggesting that absolutely every story should be told, of course there are plenty of things that arenât going to make the cut. If you took that from what I said then youâre being deliberately obtuse.
And even then not every story is going to set the world on fire (yes, yes pun intended) but it can be made at least a little more accessible and interesting.
Itâs not âemotive stuffâ itâs about making a connection with your audience and knowing who they are and how to be relevant to them.
Facts and compelling story telling arenât mutually exclusive.
The days of the stoic news reader presenting a laundry list of facts are long gone.
Because tonightâs 6pm bulletin was half an hour due to the Black Clash cricket, there was no sports presenter. Simon read the sport.
Dan Corbett still did weather.
Youâre living up to your handle⌠well done.
It IS emotive stuff, thatâs what stories are, thatâs why people like them. Prostitution is not the oldest vocation, storytelling is.
And I never said newsreaders should sit statuesque dryly reading the autocue. What I am saying is the focus of national news bulletins should be on news that has implications for the entire nation. Not just a few people in a suburb that happens to be close to a reporters flat, as in the Epsom house fire example.
All I said was story telling should be compelling, relevant and accessible⌠and that a good reporter doing that can make pretty much any story interesting.
I donât believe you really have a problem with that.
This exchange is now really getting quite silly⌠particularly because I think we both agree on the main concept that their are stories that donât necessarily belong in a national news (again my point was about story telling nothing more). If you want to explore the Epsom fire example, it would have to have some exceptional circumstances to warrant inclusion.
Perhaps the wider debate is do we need an hour of news anymore? Thereâs a lot of crap in these bulletins in Australia and NZ.
One already had an hour of news and current affairs (Holmes) when Three expanded to an hour and One felt the need to follow. Since then things have changed and we all have the internet etc. Is one hour of news really needed? Particularly when there is a lot of filler in there. Maybe 45 mins of national news and 15 mins of regional news or regional opt outs.
And yes, Iâve been around the industry for a while, I do know what Iâm talking about⌠af least a little bit. (Some media companies have been stupid enough to pay me)
By the way I said stoic⌠not statuesque⌠statuesque is a good thing⌠there should be more of it
tonightâs 1 News opener was just Into with couple headlines the straight to presenter. Background is darker maybe the Tonight background. Seems to be no graphics so far the TVNZ 1 watermark as appeared. Few problems?
No studio shots after ad breaks just a presenter zoom also no news wall story shots.
Edit; no sports presenter just Melissa at desk.
they have in the past but guessing they may not have been able to do it at short notice? And when things are going wrong itâs probably just easier to get something to air.
Just realised TVNZ put this up last year (I canât seem to link it properly so youâll have to click through). Vision of the 6pm One News opener on September 12, 2001 (NZT). Thereâs the full TV3 bulletin available on YouTube (Iâll post in a separate post below) but surprisingly nothing from One.
As soon as I started playing the video I recognised the United States Under Attack graphic they used on a lot of their coverage that day.
I remember being woken up and flicking between CNN and One and (even as a youngster then) can recall a graphic on Breakfast (or perhaps it was branded as a One News special) that all normal programming had been suspended.
Iâd love to see more of the TVNZ coverage but as time goes on it becomes less and less likely itâll see the light of day again.
As promised, the TV3 opener. Itâs not the full opener but it appears both networks took glimpses of the day and used them in their openers.
Absolute class anchors on both bulletins at the time. Who was presenting Breakfast then? Hosk and Liz Gunn?
The themes were damn fine too. Iâd really love for Newshub to have a go at putting a modern take on the olâ Carol and John theme for Threeâs 30th anni this year.
Yeah I definitely remember seeing Hosking that morning and I would presume Liz Gunn was on with him as normal.