Oct 1, 2008
Should TV carry a Pres speech LIVE just because he's here in town? No!
If I was a KC news director and learned that one of the top 4 was speaking in my two state area, I'd be on the horn to my sister affiliates and decide among us who's going to send the satellite truck and the cameras and send the live TV feed to the world. A KC area visit obviously means it's a KC station. St Louis has to cover their area, Springfield its, and Joplin, its area.
If in bum-fuque Missouri, then draw straws to see which sister affiliate of my network station sends its satellite truck. No need for all of em to cover it but somebody needs to, and share it. Not rocket science.
Should it interrupt regular programming? Well, no. I wouldn't bust my local programs to carry it just because it was in our city! I'd only provide the national feed, and just cover it for my local news that night!
There's nothing actually LOCAL about these candidates dropping into a hot state like Missouri to do their current stump speech. That's what CNN, MSNBC and FOX are for. Send THEM the signal! Don't interrupt programming to carry a candidate locally just to play into their hands with live coverage of their usual stump speeches just because they're hot to win our state! Instead, give them a bit more time on the evening news cuz they flew in here. But that's all.
So I'd provide the feed, put it up in the sky for everybody, as my turn to cover the news cuz it's in my town but not carry it locally. It's part of the television coop, isn't it?
Not sure what you believe, but I really don't think any local station is partisan, any more than anybody else. Sure, company ownership might be conservative because they're companies and about investments, and reporters will be liberal because reporters want to be doo-gooders and that means by definition, they're progressive.
So what? We know that already. Welcome to America. I'd rather it this way than state run media, wouldn't you?
at 4:54 PM