Why are CBS local newscasts so bad?

[wofchristian 24]

When it comes to local newscasts, I've noticed a pattern emerge in most media markets, especially the top 10.

 

ABC is usually no.1 in the market.

NBC is a close 2nd, though sometimes it surpasses ABC.

But CBS? Almost always in a distant last place.

 

Is there any reason as to why CBS is so bad?

[Encore Emp 24]

A lot of CBS stations especially in the top ten markets had historically have less stability and branding changes regularly while NBC and especially ABC stations have way more stability and reporters/anchors tend to stay at these stations longer so viewers get familiar with them and trust these people more to deliver the news. Most people want a quality newscast over quantity.

Edited February 21 by Encore Emp

[HSV cheesehead 88]

6 hours ago, Encore Emp said:

A lot of CBS stations especially in the top ten markets had historically have less stability and branding changes regularly while NBC and especially ABC stations have way more stability and reporters/anchors tend to stay at these stations longer so viewers get familiar with them and trust these people more to deliver the news. Most people want a quality newscast over quantity.

A notable exception is CBS owned KDKA in Pittsburgh, although a lot of it is historical preference hanging on tight.

[Abraham J. Simpson 303]

There can be common threads, but no situations are identical. Each station has its own unique competitors and market dynamics at work. In some cases (a la KDKA as noted) that has worked to the station's benefit. Others, not so much. Sometimes you can employ a solid plan and execute it well, and still not show big results, if the competition hasn't given people enough reason to go elsewhere. And your network performance matters; while a really strong local affiliate can outperform and even give the parent network a bit of a boost there, by and large, you're also partially at the mercy of factors outside your control. 

[GodfreyGR 493]

10 minutes ago, HSV cheesehead said:

although a lot of it is historical preference hanging on tight.

Outside of the Top 10, but same reasoning can go for WCCO... By a quick count, at least eight anchors/reporters/mets have been with the station over a decade (Ameilia Santeniello ('96), Frank Vascellaro ('06), Esme Murphy (1990), Chris Schaffer (06), Heather Brown (06), Mike Max ('05) and that's just from the anchor list)

[HSV cheesehead 88]

8 hours ago, Abraham J. Simpson said:

There can be common threads, but no situations are identical. Each station has its own unique competitors and market dynamics at work. In some cases (a la KDKA as noted) that has worked to the station's benefit. Others, not so much. Sometimes you can employ a solid plan and execute it well, and still not show big results, if the competition hasn't given people enough reason to go elsewhere. And your network performance matters; while a really strong local affiliate can outperform and even give the parent network a bit of a boost there, by and large, you're also partially at the mercy of factors outside your control. 

You can partially give the New World-FOX partnership/merger the blame for all of this too.

 

Additionally, before WAGA was bought by/transferred to FOX in the 1994-96 realignment, it was arguably one of their stronger affiliates. Notably it is also the only station in Atlanta that currently has a chance at surpassing the almighty WSB-TV. Same goes for the prior affiliates in Detroit, Milwaukee, etc.

New World must have run their stations well because the majority of them continue to maintain strong viewership. This time period also coincides with when CBS began to see declining ratings as a whole.

Also during realignment CBS had to affiliate with small unheard of channels with relatively high channel numbers, and in many cases the news room was built from scratch.

[Breaking News 802]

20 minutes ago, HSV cheesehead said:

You can partially give the New World-FOX partnership/merger the blame for all of this too.

 

Additionally, before WAGA was bought by/transferred to FOX in the 1994-96 realignment, it was arguably one of their stronger affiliates. Notably it is also the only station in Atlanta that currently has a chance at surpassing the almighty WSB-TV. Same goes for the prior affiliates in Detroit, Milwaukee, etc.

New World must have run their stations well because the majority of them continue to maintain strong viewership. This time period also coincides with when CBS began to see declining ratings as a whole.

Also during realignment CBS had to affiliate with small unheard of channels with relatively high channel numbers, and in many cases the news room was built from scratch.

There were times where WAGA did beat WSB in the 70s, 80s and 90s before the switch. There were times WXIA beat both WSB & WAGA at 11pm due to NBC primetime lead in the late 80s and early 90s.

 

When the 80s came around in the bigger markets  NBC & ABC just changed with the times.  CBS hasn't fared well in the bigger markets, but NBC & ABC does really well.  CBS does well in mid size, smaller and rural markets.  Prior to the switch in the 90s.  Atlanta, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Dallas, Phoenix & Tampa Bay those CBS affiliates did really well.

Edited February 21 by Breaking News

[newscopter7 198]

CBS O&Os that were formerly Group W stations tend to outperform their CBS peers. While WCBS seems to have stabilized over the past few years, WBBM is blown up every few years in favor of the next best thing that will turn things around and in LA they threw in the towel on KCBS in favor of KCAL. 

Edited February 22 by newscopter7

[MediaZone4K 1509]

My theory for the affiliates is that their struggles stem from the '94 realignments.  They lost some stronger affiliates, left to pick up weaker ones. Look at ATL, CBS lost WAGA 5 to Fox, so they had to settle for WGNX 46, a weaker station with a dial number up in the boondocks.  

 

For the owned and operated stations I'll say again...CBS O&O newscasts have a very generic, corporate, "Spectrum News" like feel, that isn't always authentic to the markets they're in. Big example, CBS' defunct "Nowcasts". WUPA's version, produced in NYC, felt so out of place in a country/soulful/hip hop city like Atlanta.

 

WCBS' Mary Calvi and Chris Wragge could do one of those nowcasts because they don't add any extra personality to make it feel like you're watching a New York morning show. This in contrast to the loud-brash-Brooklyn Rosanna Scotto on GDNY or the Jamaican Dancehall or Street Soldiers segments covered on WNYW.

 

Even though all o&o station groups duplicate their formats across markets, ABC, NBC, and especially FOX & CW stations are great at adding local touches.

 

Edited March 19 by MediaZone4K

[HSV cheesehead 88]

16 minutes ago, MediaZone4K said:

For the owned and operated stations I'll say again...

 

CBS O&O newscasts have a very generic, corporate, "Spectrum News" like feel, that isn't always authentic to the markets they're in. Big example, the CBS' defunct "Nowcasts". WUPA's version, produced in NYC, felt so out of place in a country/soulful/hip hop city like Atlanta.

I was interviewed for one of WUPA's "newscasts" back in December of 2022, with one of their only MMJs. Watched the newscast that evening to see what was what and definitely disappointed. Wasn't surprised, I didn't even know what the local CW affiliate was at the time until that morning, let alone that they had a newscast.

 

I will definitely agree  that they were produced like "Spectrum News 1".

[MediaZone4K 1509]

4 hours ago, Breaking News said:

There were times where WAGA did beat WSB in the 70s, 80s and 90s before the switch. There were times WXIA beat both WSB & WAGA at 11pm due to NBC primetime lead in the late 80s and early 90s.

 

When the 80s came around in the bigger markets  NBC & ABC just changed with the times.  CBS hasn't fared well in the bigger markets, but NBC & ABC does really well.  CBS does well in mid size, smaller and rural markets.  Prior to the switch in the 90s.  Atlanta, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Dallas, Phoenix & Tampa Bay those CBS affiliates did really well.

Yes! CBS shows appeal to an older audience.

 

I can also see why CBS stations do well in rural smaller areas. Historically the network has run rural comedies like Green Acres and in the 90s *shows* like Murder She Wrote, Diagnosis Murder, Walker Texas Ranger etc. Today they've got an endless portfolio of procedurals. It's definitely a watch with your grandparents kind of channel which must trickle down to the newscasts.

Edited February 22 by MediaZone4K

[jerseyfla 193]

23 hours ago, MediaZone4K said:

Yes! CBS shows appeal to an older audience.

 

I can also see why CBS stations do well in rural smaller areas. Historically the network has run rural comedies like Green Acres and in the 90s procedurals like Murder She Wrote, Diagnosis Murder, Walker Texas Ranger etc. Today they've got an endless portfolio of procedurals. It's definitely a watch with your grandparents kind of channel which must trickle down to the newscasts.

To put sports into it. CBS losing the NFL (NFC) in 1994 was a huge blow to the network along with their subpar prime time programming at the time. CBS then started to turnaround in 1996 and started what would turn into a 27 year relationship with SEC football before getting the NFL back in 1998 but with the AFC it wasn't the same as the majority of their original NFC crew were already at Fox. One has to wonder how losing SEC football this coming season will come into to play for those Southern large and rural markets.  Yes, the Big Ten is a much bigger market conference but I bet those newscasts on Saturdays in the South will take a hit with the exception of places where the CBS affiliate is the only choice like WMAZ in Macon.  (I'm so glad I left that area! It's the only TEGNA station that was ran well. The competition there is a joke! They should be absorbed into Atlanta DMA)

Edited February 23 by jerseyfla

[CircleWXYZ 173]

I feel CBS getting the rights to Big Ten football will help its O&O in Detroit, WWJ,  Michigan football is a huge ratings draw and you know CBS will show Michigan as much as possible.

[tyrannical bastard 3443]

Given the questionable status of Alabama (and other SEC schools), and the dominance of Michigan (and potentially Ohio State), this change of CBS from SEC to Big 10 may help in more important places as opposed to the CBS stations taking a dive without SEC football.

 

I don't think that it's going to lead to any affiliation switches, unless one of the big owners really drops the ball with Paramount and they go elsewhere....

[HSV cheesehead 88]

19 hours ago, tyrannical bastard said:

Given the questionable status of Alabama (and other SEC schools), and the dominance of Michigan (and potentially Ohio State), this change of CBS from SEC to Big 10 may help in more important places as opposed to the CBS stations taking a dive without SEC football.

 

I don't think that it's going to lead to any affiliation switches, unless one of the big owners really drops the ball with Paramount and they go elsewhere....

From experience living in the south, and the dominance of the SEC, this could certainly hurt viewership on Saturdays. As SEC college football is king in the south. 

 

Also, there is a thin possibility that it could help in markets like Atlanta, Austin, Charlotte and Nashville due to the amount of people that are transplants from historical BIG10 territory (Atlanta has a lot from rust belt, Charlotte and Nashville is more from across the country).

[Breaking News 802]

On 2/21/2024 at 7:14 PM, newscopter7 said:

CBS O&Os that were formerly Group W stations tend to outperform their CBS peers. While WCBS seems to have stabilized over the past few years, WBBM is blown up every few years in favor of the next best thing that will turn things around and in LA they threw in the towel on KCBS in favor of KCAL. 

It sad how KCBS got dumped on. The 2nd largest market and the CBS affiliate seems to be non existing.

[mouseboy33 39]

1 hour ago, Breaking News said:

It sad how KCBS got dumped on. The 2nd largest market and the CBS affiliate seems to be non existing.

WBBM used to be number one and they went from this

To this and audiences returned briefly and then abandoned ship and never came back .

 

[bmasters1 377]

On 2/21/2024 at 7:16 PM, MediaZone4K said:

My theory for the affiliates is that their struggles stem from the '94 realignments.  They lost some stronger affiliates, left to pick up weaker ones. Look at ATL, CBS lost WAGA 5 to Fox, so they had to settle for WGNX 46, a weaker station with a dial number up in the boondocks. 

 

 

And Milwaukee, where WITI Channel 6 became Fox from CBS, so CBS had to go to WDJT Channel 58, also in the boondocks.

[MediaZone4K 1509]

Focusing on WCBS, alot of their troubles stem from a mass talent firing and re-branding in 1996. They abandoned the good "Channel 2 News" format which boasted a tabloid feel and commanding news theme ---though the NY Times says it performed behind CH 4 & 7.

 

It was replaced by several rebrands, studio, talent and graphics changes, until they finally stabalized in 2007. 10 years of instability! In the last 5 or so years WCBS has lost some 'flavor' and I'm not sure where they stand in the ratings today.

 

"Channel 2 News" final era (1993-1996)

2 News (1996-1997). The set and graphics were fine. The music, format changes etc though...

"CBS News New York" generic pharmacy jingle 2023

 

Edited February 25 by MediaZone4K

[MidwestTV 1173]

I think the biggest problem CBS O&Os face today is the nationalization of its local markets. How much is "CBS Colorado" actually covering news from places like Pueblo, Grand Junction, or CO Springs? Genuine question, I don't know. You also have, in my opinion, overlapping brands. Saying you're watching CBS 2 News from CBS News New York is unnecessarily layered and almost totally removes the local aspect. I get what they've tried to do, but I don't think it's been implemented well.

[tyrannical bastard 3443]

How is Pittsburgh doing these days?  Even though the newscast is pumping out the same garbage that all the other CBS markets are, they're allowed to use the ugly black and yellow to cater to the "Stillers" fans, and probably get a lot more traction by doing so!

Edited February 25 by tyrannical bastard

[bmasters1 377]

1 hour ago, MidwestTV said:

I think the biggest problem CBS O&Os face today is the nationalization of its local markets. How much is "CBS Colorado" actually covering news from places like Pueblo, Grand Junction, or CO Springs? Genuine question, I don't know. You also have, in my opinion, overlapping brands. Saying you're watching CBS 2 News from CBS News New York is unnecessarily layered and almost totally removes the local aspect. I get what they've tried to do, but I don't think it's been implemented well.

 

Which is why KCNC should really be called CBS News Denver, IMO (and KTVT of the Metroplex should be called CBS News DFW, instead of CBS News Texas).

 

[Breaking News 802]

2 hours ago, tyrannical bastard said:

How is Pittsburgh doing these days?  Even though the newscast is pumping out the same garbage that all the other CBS markets are, they're allowed to use the ugly black and yellow to cater to the "Stillers" fans, and probably get a lot more traction by doing so!

Running away #1 12,4,5,6,11pm news.  WTAE #1 in the morning.  WTAE & WPXI fight for #2 and sometimes one out do the other in different parts of the day.  ABC seems to have a weak lead-in into11pm so 11 usually beats 4 at 11pm.

2 hours ago, bmasters1 said:

 

Which is why KCNC should really be called CBS News Denver, IMO (and KTVT of the Metroplex should be called CBS News DFW, instead of CBS News Texas).

 

Both those branding names are trash! CBS11 was good for KTVT. CBS4 was standard, but seem to have a better branding during their NBC days.

[CoopInTheHouse 63]

2 hours ago, bmasters1 said:

Which is why KCNC should really be called CBS News Denver, IMO (and KTVT of the Metroplex should be called CBS News DFW, instead of CBS News Texas).

I mean, given that those 2 stations are the only CBS O&O’s in their states (Colorado and Texas, respectively), you can’t really blame them.

[carolinanews4 316]

For the CBS owned stations, I think comes down to a lack of budget and the resulting lack of identity. CBS O&Os historically have spent less than their ABC and NBC counterparts leaving them with fewer resources. To play catchup stations like WCBS and WBBM have gone through numerous rebrandings.

 

From a corporate standpoint, CBS has undervalued the "presentation" portion of TV news which has been reflected in the way they fund their local stations. They live in the Walter Cronkite era of storytelling. Admirable? Sure. But television is a visual medium and newscasts are built on a relationship with the viewer. I don't feel like CBS has ever truly embraced either of those things. The lack of investment was easier to hide in the 70s and 80s because everyone's presentation was crude. But as technology has evolved, CBS always seems to be playing catch-up. 

 

When Jeff Zucker cut NBC budgets in the early 2000s, WNBC went into their "WCBS era" where they lacked identity and money. The NBC O&O group launched Daily Connection which was a "newscast" that featured repurposed content from across NBCU properties. The pieces of the show were assembled in NYC and then fed to stations to be produced with local talent. (Sound similar to the equally generic CBS News Now broadcast from Texas?) Cost efficient? You bet. Compelling tv? Not at all.

 

WNBC eliminated Live at Five in favor of News4You and Extra. When that didn't work, WNBC played musical chairs with timeslots, anchors, and formats for years. WNBC their newsroom into a "Content Center" which was nothing more than a gimmick, like the gimmick WCBS tried in launching the short-lived CBS 2 Information Network. It was during this time when WCBS was able to move up to #2, not because Channel 2 was doing anything particularly compelling but because they offered stability where WNBC didn't.

 

Valari Staab, formerly with the ABC O&O group, has spent over a decade rebuilding the newsgathering resources of the NBC group. New radar technology, studios, increased digital resources, heck even new buildings have been added. CBS meanwhile appears to continue the "more with less" mantra that has been in place for over 40 years. While NBC was rebuilding, the ABC stations, with their well-defined local identities, have steamrolled everyone with a consistent and well-funded product. Meanwhile the FOX O&O group, with seemingly endless hours of local news, generates strong local revenue. 

 

What has CBS done? Slapped the last-place 'CBS News' brand onto their local stations. Most of the CBS stations lack the type of true community investment it takes to be a strong player. With audiences for linear TV newscasts continuing to shrink, one could argue it Is way too late for them to catch up.