Know Your Newsroom – Page 7 – Survive Your Job In Television News

Emotional Toll: How to design rundowns

My guess is Gary Vosot has a whole line of comedy about this common faux pas in newscasts (if he doesn’t, he should!). The anchor reads a heavy story that involves death, then either the same anchor or the other anchor has to read a story about something warm and fuzzy, like bunnies. (Yes I am exaggerating, but only slightly.)

Producers have so many decisions to make when designing rundowns. Length of block, not too many packages or chunks in a row, hitting key audiences, not too much crime.. and something positive to balance out the hard to take news. What often happens is, producers trying to jam it all in, end up putting stories next to each other that simply do not carry the same emotional weight to the viewer.

We know facts are extremely important to share with viewers. But we forget that, because we present our information with images, we naturally play on viewers emotions and, at times, intensely. This even happens with vo’s and vo/sots. Do not assume that storytelling only happens in packages. That is the first mistake that leads to these very uncomfortable, mass murder to a story about a cute puppy rescue, scenarios.

Remember that your ultimate goal is to have your anchors be the “tour guides” for your viewers, taking them through the stories of the day. When you think of it this way, you have to think about step one leading to step two.. etc. By the way, this type of “stacking” or designing your rundown will not only prevent a lot of these uncomfortable emotional clashes, it will also help prevent all the other issues you face when stacking… like too many packages in a row, too much crime, too many stories from the same part of the DMA etc.

When putting together your rundown, you need to gradually lead your viewer through emotions as well as subjects. You need to identify the less emotionally taxing stories that are good transitions, in your tour. On an actual tour you have rest stops. This needs to be true of rundowns too. Just remember to include those quick breathers. Then you can go from one strong emotion to the next. And try to end on a thoughtful or happy note. That is naturally how most conversations end. At least conversations that will lead to more talk later. That’s obviously what you want to create.

Here’s an example of types of stories that can come after highly emotional ones: white collar crime stories, political news like updates on city council plans, roads, tax increases etc. You want stories with high impact, just not such intense emotion as to trivialize the story before. This is why many places do crime stories in threes. The first, very emotional, the second a little less, the third either more white collar in nature, or where the good guy wins in the end. That allows you to switch gears completely and talk politics, education, economic news, health news etc without the viewer sensing a rough transition.

Finally when I mention ending on a thoughtful note, or happy one that doesn’t just apply to a kicker. It also applies to these series of three. Do not do three stories in a row about children being killed, then just transition to a political story. You need to button up this kind of coverage, with some perspective that allows the viewer to emotionally catch up and frankly feel like there is control of these situations. Maybe it’s a vo on an initiative that’s preventing other crimes against children. Maybe it is a graphic showing less children are actually dying overall. Something thought provoking to help the viewer emotionally transition. Then you pick some more neutral stories, then a warm fuzzy to end the block. This type of flow, heavy emotion, thought provoking, neutral, thought provoking, then uplifting can really make your newscast feel powerful and easier for the viewers to take. Especially when you have a lot of emotionally taxing news to report. Break it up. Many just throw it all in at the top, and reward the viewer for getting through it. The problem is the viewer will likely tune out before you get to the “reward” or feel emotionally drained and think the “reward” is trivial in comparison. Better to ease the message throughout. When you think of times you have “tough” conversations with people, we naturally mix in a little of the bad, some neutral, some good back to neutral then to bad and so on throughout the conversation. Do the same with your rundown. Your viewer will appreciate it and notice.

Should anchors help write newscasts?

Here’s an age old debate. Should anchors help write newscasts? Some say yes. Many say no.
The answer to this question is not as simple as it seems. It all depends on the resources used to build newscasts and the makeup of the newsroom itself.

Let me explain. If you work in a newsroom where there is one producer for two hours of a morning show, or the producers are very inexperienced, anchors need to have more of a hand in writing the newscasts. It’s just smart business. If there is a story that is legally dicey, either the anchor needs to write some stories to give the producer time to work on it. If the anchor is a more seasoned journalist than the producer, then the anchor needs to write the dicey story. He/she should have a better understanding of the potential legal ramifications of a mistake. Again, it’s smart business.

Recently I spoke with a producer who got stuck producing three hours of a morning newscast, alone. The anchors not only did not write anything, but the male anchor yelled at this producer for a mistake in a graphic in front of guests in the newscast. This is just plain wrong. News flash for this anchor: You are a journalist not an actor. Help get the newscast on the air clean. You are part of a team. Pitch in. The producer was asked to do too much. Management was not fair in this situation. Do not make it worse by hanging that producer out to dry. Step up and help. If you do, you generally win a huge advocate. I promise that anchor this, if that producer gets a chance to burn you later, that producer will take it. If you are late to work, regularly take dinner breaks that are too long or make a fact error in a script , management will find out. That producer will also share what you did with the other producers and managers. You are now marked. It will come back to bite. Why not just pitch in, be a team player and help write instead of taking that risk?

Now let’s talk about well staffed newsrooms. If there is an EP, producers and AP’s then anchors should have a chance to jazz up scripts and not have to write large sections of the rundown. If that producing team cannot pull off getting the newscasts done in a timely fashion with that much help, there is a serious problem. EP’s and producers in this environment need to understand that anchors need time to look over the sheer volume. Too often the “systems” are messed up in this scenario. Producers are not time managing well. AP’s are not being asked to do the right things. EP’s are not delegating properly. The anchor should not be responsible for picking up that slack.

I recently spoke with an anchor in a top 20 market who was told he was responsible for any fact errors in the newscast, not the EP. He was also told that he had to write significant sections of the morning newscasts. This anchor works with a staff where there is a producer for each hour in the morning, an EP and several AP’s. It is common in this scenario to have the anchors helping to look for fact errors. But to write significant sections of the newscast? I quickly found out that the producers were simply not getting their writing done in time. With that much help, a veteran former producer cannot help but ask: Why? (And no, they are not also desktop editing or contributing to the web.) In this case, it really is better to make sure the anchor has time to read over all scripts, HELP look for errors and focus on “performance.” That is why there are so many content generating resources dedicated to the newscast day part. If you really need the anchor to write, have him do stories that showcase his personality. Write about subjects he knows a lot about, to save him time and help him come across authoritatively. (See “How to Get Inside Your Anchors Head”.)

Too often in newsrooms the work load is not divided up equitably, or even sensibly. This is to me one of the largest problems local newsrooms face as they try and “modernize” and command three screens (TV, computer, smart phone). The “systems” in newsrooms need to be reviewed better and corporate needs to respect what management needs. Too often managers are forced into positions to make anchors responsible for all fact errors, or to require producers to produce three hours a morning, solo, because of decisions made in an office several states away, by number pushers. The question of whether an anchor should write for newscasts highlights this larger problem. Cutting fat is one thing, breaking down systems is quite another.

“Technical Difficulties”: A Sideways Live Shot Survival Guide

Recently a reporter emailed “Survive” for advice on how to learn to ad lib while in the field. The main concern, how to get around technical problems. So I asked a veteran reporter for advice. Here goes…

History is filled with quotes about the importance of preparation from very brilliant, very famous people. One of my favorites comes from a B or maybe even C-level actor named Richard Kline. (Best known as “Larry” the neighbor on “Three’s Company”) Kline says, “Confidence is preparation. Everything else is beyond your control.” I like this one because it is perfect for live shots. If you are prepared, you should and will be confident. If there is one constant in live shots (as in much of life) it’s that something will inevitably get sideways at the worst possible moment. That moment is simply beyond your control so don’t sweat it. Just be as prepared as possible and chances are pretty good you will be able to get through it when something goes squirrelly.

In order to learn to tap dance your way through a sideways live shot, you first have to have the basics of doing a live shot down pat. I still remember the first time I knew I was going to do a live shot at my first real reporting job. I went to an experienced friend in the newsroom and asked for some advice. The advice they gave me was very basic and perfect! Best advice I’ve ever been given in my career actually. Do not script your live shot word-for-word. Let me say that again: Do NOT script out your live shots. If you script your live shot you will have to memorize it. This is a recipe for disaster! Ask anyone who’s done any acting what happens when you miss just one word in your lines. The answer: It generally throws everything off from that point on. Additionally, when you memorize a bunch of lines they are just that: A bunch of lines. You do not have near as much comprehension of what they mean. It’s just a bunch of words floating around in your brain waiting to come streaming out. Once they are out, so are the meanings behind them. More on retaining meaning in a moment.

First, here’s the key to basic live shots. Rather than memorizing a script, write bullet points. Each one should have a word or three for each key thought you’re going to present. Each of those bullet points acts as a memory trigger for the information you are imparting in your shot. You can then glance down at each bullet point and be easily guided through. You will also find that your comprehension of the subject matter increases too. You will not only have smoother live shots but also retain the meaning more.

Start trying the bullet point trick today. Do it every time you are out live. It will quickly become a natural way to do your shots. Eventually, you will depend on those bullet points less and less. Your live shots will also get smoother and smoother.

No matter how smooth you become on your basic live shots, at some point something will go wrong that you cannot control. A package will not run correctly; the wrong package will run; the video server will crash. If it can happen, it will. So how do you “prepare” for this? Try making some extra bullet points that sum up the package. Keep it on the next page in your reporter’s notebook after your life shot bullet points. Don’t try to quote the sound bites in the package though. Use your bullet points to help you paraphrase one or two of those bites. Do this and then if something goes wrong you have somewhere to go. Just pause briefly then look up at the camera and cooly say something like: “We’re having a little trouble with that story. But here’s what you need to know.” Then run through a few of those bullet points, sig out and toss back to your anchors. Don’t make it overly complicated. Keep it simple and smooth. Better to keep it short and clean than try to get everything in that was in your package and muck it up. Most of the time when something like this happens, viewers know something went wrong technically. They do understand and will forgive as long as you don’t compound the problem by stammering on and looking unprepared.

One quick aside. When something goes wrong do not refer to your story as a “package” or a “VO/SOT” or talk about “sound bites.” These are the terms WE use in the industry. Viewers do not talk like this and do not know what these terms mean. It will confuse them and then you have lost the battle.

Legendary writer Ernest Hemingway once said: “Courage is grace under pressure.” Use these tips to sharpen your basic live shot skills, then when the pressure is really on, you will come off looking courageous indeed!

For more advice on how to ad-lib read “Art of Ad-lib” written by veteran anchor, Cameron Harper.

Are producers moving up in market size too quickly?

Want to know a big topic that news managers sit around and discuss? Are journalists, producers in particular, are moving up in market size too quickly? Even more interesting, a lot of the managers I talk with, who think it’s a bad idea, moved up the ranks while they were young themselves.

Yep. Many were 2 to 4 years into the biz and EP’ing or taking gigs as small market AND’s. Others were producing main shows in top 10 markets by age 25. Why then are they so hard on the journalists who want to do the same?

Well, with experience comes wisdom. These managers know how hard they had to work to get that distinction of being the youngest in the newsroom. They also are still keenly aware of the hazing they endured.

Before you get annoyed at these “old timers” who “aren’t being fair” know this: While they often put a newbie journalist through the ringer in the interview process, they tend to be your greatest advocates once you “prove worthy.” Yep, they will give you a shot. They remember being hungry and wanting to prove to the world just how driven, talented and passionate they were. But when they cut you a break, they ask one simple thing in return. Listen when given advice. We crusty old timers who moved up the ranks really young (yes, me included) also learned that a lot of being a great journalist is simply grinding out the news each day, day after day, year after year. No matter how much raw talent you have, no matter how many “it” factors you have, gaining hands on experience is the best way to become excellent at what you do.

So, I am going to ask you to consider a different question: Are younger journalists, especially producers, mature enough to take constructive criticism from the “been there done that” set? Or, perhaps even more importantly, is that hunger and eagerness to push and be the best each day, better for a newsroom than the tired, set in their ways, group? If newsrooms focus more on getting people who think alike and can have mutual respect for each other, this debate becomes largely irrelevant. Newsroom managers usually hire younger producers to inject new energy and ideas into a tired, staid, news philosophy. Truthfully, many times the managers are being asked to change the way news is presented and are out of ideas. The trouble lies not in hiring someone too young, but in hiring someone who cannot define the type of news he/she loves to do. That’s the biggest risk in hiring younger journalists. If they don’t know what kind of product they want to put their stamp on each day, they will get bogged down on the wrong things. So crusty old managers, who came up the ranks young, often know to ask the pointed questions and make sure they see eye to eye with those up and coming journalists. When there’s a mutual respect, and an environment where younger and older journalists know they can and should learn from each other, great things happen. Those of us who came up the ranks ‘too soon” know it. That’s why the trend continues, and probably should.