Jump to content

WABC - 7 Eyewitness News


Smitha A

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, ns8401 said:

Editorial contributions on every story were once a standard operating procedure some places you realize…

Just because something used to be done frequently doesn’t make it a good thing by virtue of it being done in the past.

 

I’m not a fan of commentary during the news; I think stations should trust their viewers to be informed enough to think critically and form their own opinions based on the information they’re given. If stations don’t trust their viewers to have informed opinions, to me that implies they’re doing a piss poor job of informing them.
 

That being said, if a station runs editorials, they should be clearly labeled as such and separated from straight news. Bill Beutel anchored editorial segments at WABC after he retired, but to my knowledge, he always kept it straight when he anchored the news. There’s a difference between a clearly identifiable editorial and a newsreader who thinks his/her opinion needs to be injected into every story.

Edited by nycnewsjunkie
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

Just because something used to be done frequently doesn’t make it a good thing by virtue of it being done in the past.

 

I’m not a fan of commentary during the news; I think stations should trust their viewers to be informed enough to think critically and form their own opinions based on the information they’re given. If stations don’t trust their viewers to have informed opinions, to me that implies they’re doing a piss poor job of informing them.
 

That being said, if a station runs editorials, they should be clearly labeled as such and separated from straight news. Bill Beutel anchored editorial segments at WABC after he retired, but to my knowledge, he always kept it straight when he anchored the news. There’s a difference between a clearly identifiable editorial and a newsreader who thinks his/her opinion needs to be injected into every story.

That’s exactly it. FOX5 used to do Lews View and clearly label it.. I believe WPIX too used to do something similar.. Bill just interjects and shows clear bias. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RealNews18 said:

That’s exactly it. FOX5 used to do Lews View and clearly label it.. I believe WPIX too used to do something similar.. Bill just interjects and shows clear bias. 

The format itself is known for what they call “happy talk”… things like “gee it’s a shame that happened” or “let’s hope they get those guys!”.. are you suggesting it goes beyond innocuous comments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ns8401 said:

The format itself is known for what they call “happy talk”… things like “gee it’s a shame that happened” or “let’s hope they get those guys!”.. are you suggesting it goes beyond innocuous comments?

Yes it absolutely does, he shows clear bias. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is bad for an anchor , after reading a story to go "just horrible" or show empathy for something (for instance) that we all agree is morally wrong; as long as it doesn't go too far beyond that and step into political bounds. Haven't watched in a while but it seems Bill steps into that political sphere he shouldn't be in.

 

And I think we all too well remember the WPIX era where Lionel and Larry Mentde dominated the news. We all knew Larry's past, and after searching Lionel is now a leading q-anon promoter. Point of the story- if you don't want your news reputation to be hurt, don't delve into commentary. 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill Beutel finished every 6pm and numerous broadcasts with his own comments. He certainly earned his right to do so. Bill has his biases. That happens. If the ratings aren't showing problems with it, then why would staff do anything about it? 

Edited by Roadgeek Adam
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ns8401 said:

The format itself is known for what they call “happy talk”… 

There is a difference between "happy talk" comments like you stated and Ritter's snarky side comments which delve into outright stating his opinion.

13 hours ago, Roadgeek Adam said:

Bill Beutel finished every 6pm and numerous broadcasts with his own comments..... If the ratings aren't showing problems with it....

Yes but again, Beutel's segment was identified as commentary, evidenced by signature below the screen (I would have still opted for a clear editorial graphic). Some of his opinions weren't even direct, just generic wise sentiments such as below:

Wether or not the ratings are affected,  it's the principle if it. News is supposed to be straight fact and repoters must minimize their opinions as much as possible unless it's an editorial or analysis segment. Cable news teaches us what happens when too much opinionated content seeps into news. 

 

Alex S. Jones of Neiman Reports (not THAT Alex Jones) had a good take on this: "Enemies of objectivity argue that because journalists must be free of bias to be objective, and because this is impossible, it follows that objectivity is a false ideal...But objectivity does not require that journalists be blank slates free of bias. In fact, objectivity is necessary precisely because they are biased".

 

In short, because we are all biased we need a source of outright fact, which in turn helps us create informed opinions.

Edited by MediaZone4K
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2023 at 9:53 PM, MediaZone4K said:

There is a difference between "happy talk" comments like you stated and Ritter's snarky side comments which delve into outright stating his opinion.

Yes but again, Beutel's segment was identified as commentary, evidenced by signature below the screen (I would have still opted for a clear editorial graphic). Some of his opinions weren't even direct, just generic wise sentiments such as below:

Wether or not the ratings are affected,  it's the principle if it. News is supposed to be straight fact and repoters must minimize their opinions as much as possible unless it's an editorial or analysis segment. Cable news teaches us what happens when too much opinionated content seeps into news. 

 

Alex S. Jones of Neiman Reports (not THAT Alex Jones) had a good take on this: "Enemies of objectivity argue that because journalists must be free of bias to be objective, and because this is impossible, it follows that objectivity is a false ideal...But objectivity does not require that journalists be blank slates free of bias. In fact, objectivity is necessary precisely because they are biased".

 

In short, because we are all biased we need a source of outright fact, which in turn helps us create informed opinions.

 

Can you point out in that clip where opinions are stated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Ken Rosato and Michelle Charlesworth do is much more aligned with happy talk than what Bill often provides. I’m as big an anti-former president as it gets, but there’s still a level of journalistic integrity that should be involved when reporting on political matters big and small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Geoffrey said:

Can you show/explain an example or two?

One example was in 2020 during the pandemic, when Andrew Cuomo and Cnris Cuomo swapped stories during a press conference. Bill basically waxed poetic about the whole thing and said something along the lines of “I wonder what their father would think.” I don’t have as much of a problem w/ that if you slap on a “Bill Ritter: Commentary” lower third, but that wasn’t present. As it turned out, the governor was less than truthful about NY’s COVID death count, and Chris would be fired from CNN for actively aiding his brother while working as a journalist.
 

I know that Bill wasn’t aware of what both Cuomo brothers were doing, nor do I blame him for their actions. I also have nothing against Bill personally; he does a good job as an anchor, and perhaps I’m admittedly being a little pedantic about this and am judging with the benefit of hindsight re: the Cuomos. However, I still believe that what should’ve been healthy scrutiny on Bill’s part was substituted for nostalgia for Mario Cuomo.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/chris-cuomo-crashes-governor-cuomos-173839115.html

 

31 minutes ago, Roadgeek Adam said:

I will say that wasn't the case until really late. Even by 1995 they still were just "Finally tonight" on a shot of Bill Beutel. 

That’s still a separate segment from the rest of the newscast though, and the signature at the bottom of the screen was the indicator that it was a commentary. To be fair, there is no specific “Commentary” or “Editorial” label, but perhaps the station didn’t think it was warranted due to the brevity of the segment.

Edited by nycnewsjunkie
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

One example was in 2020 during the pandemic, when Andrew Cuomo and Cnris Cuomo swapped stories during a press conference. Bill basically waxed poetic about the whole thing and said something along the lines of “I wonder what their father would think.” I don’t have as much of a problem w/ that if you slap on a “Bill Ritter: Commentary” lower third, but that wasn’t present. As it turned out, the governor was less than truthful about NY’s COVID death count, and Chris would be fired from CNN for actively aiding his brother while working as a journalist.

 

I don't think what you explained that counts as editorializing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Geoffrey said:

 

I don't think what you explained that counts as editorializing. 

I shared a year or two ago about his comments on a civilian complaint on an NYPD arrest and his “by the way” editorialization about what cops are morally supposed and not supposed to do as he tossed to the reporter. Not a NYPD loyalist personally but should the person presenting the “news” really be voicing whether the incident was appropriate or not when an investigation is ongoing? Considering the heightened level of civilian / police relations across the nation, it just feels like he would be a bit more careful in his delivery. 
 

Again, there’s a distinction between happy talk and what Bill seems to be doing a lot more frequently recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, kshow said:

 

Can you point out in that clip where opinions are stated?

Looking for some clips now. WABC's website doesn't include the toss back to the anchor in their youtube clips, where most of Bill's side comments are inserted (at least from what I've observed). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

It SEEMS as if WABC is testing some different anchor pairings. Today I guess Liz is off.. I’m not sure who anchored at 4 but Sandra and Sade did the 5:00 show. Bill who is not off did not off did the 6:00 show solo. I noticed too a few weeks ago when Bill did the evening shows that he did not do the 11 and Mike Marza was on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RealNews18 said:

It SEEMS as if WABC is testing some different anchor pairings. Today I guess Liz is off.. I’m not sure who anchored at 4 but Sandra and Sade did the 5:00 show. Bill who is not off did not off did the 6:00 show solo. I noticed too a few weeks ago when Bill did the evening shows that he did not do the 11 and Mike Marza was on.

 

Lauren Glassberg and Sandra anchored at 4. As for Bill, he only recently returned from a knee(?) surgery. I'm guessing he might be on a reduced work schedule, for a little while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, WABC does weird pairings from time to time based on anchor availability for any given reason. I’ve seen days where Shirleen wasn’t on the morning news but anchored noon because of an appointment or speaking engagement. I’ve also seen instances where Bill was off the early evenings for an event but anchored the 11pm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 24994J said:

 

Lauren Glassberg and Sandra anchored at 4. As for Bill, he only recently returned from a knee(?) surgery. I'm guessing he might be on a reduced work schedule, for a little while.

 

Knee replacement surgery. 

Edited by Roadgeek Adam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NYNewsCoverage said:

Hmmm. I don't have access to this, but wonder who this could be and if its accurate?

https://www.ftvlive.com/sqsp-test/2023/5/10/anchor-is-out-at-the-no-1-station-in-the-no-1-market 

I’m 99% confident it’s Ken Rosato. Michelle and Mike have been on the morning show with Shirleen this week with no mention of filling in (which they’re typically pedantic about) and the talent opens have been scraped from 4:30, 5,5:30,6am blocks. Thought that was weird but didn’t think twice about it. 
 

Wonder what the story to this is. 

Edited by MorningNews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who are they referring to? Ken Rosato?

 

I would be truly sad if it were true.. True class act for the station and such a great talent for the station.

 

https://abc7ny.com/about/newsteam/ken-rosato/

 

His news bio is still up on the site. Perhaps he's on vacation?

 

Best,

Vlad

 

 

Edited by Vlad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Vlad said:

Who are they referring to? Ken Rosato?

 

I would be truly sad if it were true.. True class act for the station and such a great talent for the station.

 

https://abc7ny.com/about/newsteam/ken-rosato/

 

His news bio is still up on the site. Perhaps he's on vacation?

 

Best,

Vlad

If it’s Ken Rosato, that would be a mind-numbingly awful move on channel 7’s part.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FTVLive posts says Ken and the station are negotiating the terms of his exit. Yes, the bio is still up, but as stated, the talent opens and mentions of his absence are non-existent. That's all that's known, right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

If it’s Ken Rosato, that would be a mind-numbingly awful move on channel 7’s part.

Except…

The thing about WABC is that viewers are loyal and fickle at the same time. They become very attached to and protective of long time anchors. But once they’re gone, viewing habits don’t change. WABC has lost big names over the years including Roz Abrams, Bill Beutel, Bill Evans, Scott Clark and Lori Stokes. They may have left, but the viewers stayed. Perhaps because the other talent are also strong long timers. Perhaps because WABC attracts anchors and reporters that people like watching. 

 

Whoever it might be, WABC’s strength will continue. That’s not to say individual anchors aren’t valuable. It’s just that viewers aren’t as committed as one might think. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using TVNewsTalk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.