Getting Along With Peers – Page 2 – Survive Your Job In Television News

I can’t believe that aired again! Why anchors complain on the set.

This makes many producers blood boil. You toil over a newscast for hours, then during the show, the anchors start complaining about and/or making fun of the copy you worked so hard on. Complaining on set during the newscasts about the show, is the number one way to create a huge divide between anchors and producers. It creates the “us vs them” mentality that causes so much friction. But there are two sides to this, and we are going to really delve into both.

That said, many of those anchors are really not trying to just be jerks. I PROMISE YOU. There are reasons behind the decision, (and it often is a decision) to complain about copy on the set during the newscast. The biggest reason, FRUSTRATION. When anchors reach the point of complaining on set, most are usually at their wits end. From their point of view, they have tried to “talk things through” and the producer/management has ignored the issue. Many veteran anchors are just tired and frustrated that they constantly have to “train newbies.” If you step back and really think about it, you can see how this can happen. One anchor I consulted with on this article says, “Even if you are not normally a complainer, when you get an anchor sitting next to you who is a little immature and starts going off, it can be very difficult not to give into the temptation and complain also. It is human nature.” Another anchor mentioned, “I worked so hard to get to this point, I don’t want to come across as clueless or even just plain stupid. Why aren’t we (anchors) protected?”

A key thing to remember, is when the anchors “mess up” and read copy that is factually incorrect or just doesn’t make sense, it isn’t just the anchor that looks stupid. The entire news operation loses credibility. Anchors are very aware that they are the poster children for the entire organization. They understand that if they come across as not credible, their job is on the line, because that lack of credibility undermines the entire station’s standing in the community. When you separate yourself from the insults, and really think about that, you can see why anchors sometimes “go off.” It is a lot of responsibility, and yet they give up control of the newscasts to producers. It is how the system works, except in rare cases. Anchors are depending on you to get the facts right, so they look credible. Yes anchors can, and most will, get into the newscast and fact check and rewrite if they notice a potential issue. But in the morning, and during breaking news that is not always possible. The anchors need the information to be correct, or at least quickly fixed if there is a problem.

Which leads to the second reason, anchors find themselves complaining on the set over a mistake. It is absolutely maddening, when they see an issue, raise the issue to the producer and then it is not corrected and airs incorrectly two and three times. Many anchors say they try to help and bring up an issue with a super, or a misspelled item on the ticker, and then it isn’t changed. The anchor doesn’t have access, and can only watch the mistake happen again and again. Remember, credibility for the entire news organization is on the line, anchors are the final gate keepers.

There also are issues in many shops where veteran anchors are told, to just read whatever is there, and let the producers do all the gate keeping. Anchors are told to stay out of the decision making and that producers rule (see Producer Driven) the roost. Problem is, often the producers are much less experienced than the anchors. No matter how smart you are, experience brings a lot of knowledge. So veteran anchors sit, wishing they could just bang their heads against the wall and watch something they could have prevented play out on the air. Excruciating!

That said, giving in to human nature and complaining on the set, diminishes respect toward you if you are one of those anchors. It sends a message that you think you are superior and fed up with the underlings. And that’s even if what you say is absolutely true. So this is where things get hard for the frustrated anchor. You need to find a different forum to vent. Maybe that’s after the show, on the phone with your co-anchor. Maybe it is at the gym working out your frustrations. Maybe it is in a meeting with the EP or AND. Just make sure you keep the conversation pro-active. Producers and managers, put ointment on the sting, and look to see if the anchor really does have a good point. If the anchor feels they have a forum to address concerns, the on set rants will eventually stop. Chances the quality of the newscast will improve as well.

“Yes, that’s your assignment. Now do it and like it! “ Assignment Editors: Behind the gruffness.

Take a moment and think about the most colorful characters in the newsroom. For me there are two groups, photographers and assignment editors. We’ve decoded some photographer behaviors in “You exist to hold my tripod.” Bottom line, photojournalists are incredible information gatherers and because they see the facts in a visual way, they make TV news what it is today.

The hardest job inside newsrooms, that all of us love to take for granted is assignment editor. The people who do it are the “whipping posts” for managing editors, assistant news directors, producers and reporters. Photographers usually get their assignments this way and love to grumble as well. Yet, as I look back on my career, I see that the strength of an assignment desk makes or breaks a newsroom. It truly is the tie that binds.

So why are assignment editors so, well, intimidating (or even irritating)? Being everyone’s whipping post is one start. They also tend to really have a grasp on the market and the stations strengths and weaknesses. Heck, when you think about it, that’s their primary job. Yet assignment editors are often not really given a voice in crucial decisions. They actually understand drive times to various places. They understand that the PIO in city A really hates the station UNLESS you call and say XYZ. And they also understand that live truck 13 really does suck! In many cases they try and warn us know it all producer and manager types. They try and give reporters gentle nudges on how to handle a particularly ornery mayor. Do we listen? If the answer is no, then we have a very irritable assignment editor on our hands. Chances are you are going to be yelled at, have papers thrown around the newsroom and hear curse words in interesting sequences you never would have thought possible! Think about it. If you were told to make the ship run smoothly, then saw the iceberg, warned and begged everyone to listen, then watched the boat slam into the iceberg, you would be a tad pissy as well.

A few secrets about assignment editors for you: If you stink at or just don’t get how to source build yet, befriend a veteran assignment editor. They source build as well as most investigative reporters. And they don’t get to leave the station. Heck, most barely get potty breaks. Also, be clear reporters, assignment editors are not your personal secretaries. You need to make the calls to get the information. If you are behind or overwhelmed talk with an EP first about whether an associate producer can help you out. And, yes, I am serious. The assignment editor has you, all the other reporters on your shift, the planning producers, the reporters on the next shift and usually at least one manager asking them to make phone calls. That’s in addition to calling their contacts and listening to scanners and reading 5 million news releases to make sure the station isn’t missing something important. And, if the station misses a big story, it is usually the assignment editor that gets reamed for it.

Producers, your assignment editor can help protect your show from technical disasters as well or better than the production team. He/she knows intimate details about the live trucks, signal strengths, how to get around a lazy person in master control, when to humor an ENG engineer and lots of other very useful stuff. Beyond that, they know which crews are great at cranking out work and which ones need a constant swift kick. If you have a story that must make slot, period, make sure the assignment editor is well aware ASAP. If you see the assignment editor is in the weeds, answer the newsroom phone. Help out. There is nothing more excruciating than trying to take down information while hearing phones ringing all around you. Think about the times when every reporter feels the need to call in for script approval all at once. All of them need it “RIGHT NOW!” to make slot and you can only read/listen to so much at a time and actually comprehend what’s going on. That’s what it’s like being an assignment editor for at least half of every workday. Cut ‘em some slack!

Managers, when an assignment editor walks into your office and shuts the door to discuss a potential issue, stop what you are doing and listen. Most of the time, this person is saving you from potential disaster. If they do, throw them a bone once in a while. Have a favorite meal dropped off for lunch. Buy them a latte. Write a thank you note for all he/she does and throw it into his/her mailbox. Everyone should remember to say thank you once in a while. The strength of the assignment desk plays a huge role in whether your station is #1, #3 or worse. It can set the tone for morale in the whole newsroom because the desk has direct contact with all the key players every day.

So, when you get an assignment that just plain sucks, don’t kill the messenger. The assignment editor is following orders. When you are told do it and like it, remember that’s the mantra these guys/gals live under every day. They often take more crap than the rest of us, and then turn it into gold.

How to repair producer/director relationship

A frazzled producer recently asked for advice dealing with his director. Their relationship was strained. The director was starting to question this producer’s calls in the booth, and at times making calls instead of checking with the producer to see if they were on the same page. This is not uncommon. Directors are in charge of making sure the show looks clean and at times will make quick decisions while live. Your director “taking over and calling the shots” is not all bad, if you have established protocols you both agree on for certain situations. (See Right hand/left for more on how the two of you can compliment each other, by showing mutual respect.) If the director is taking over to the point where you are unable to make key decisions that could impact content making air and/or it’s affecting you timing your show, then you have a problem.

The key is to nip that kind of issue in the bud right away by sitting down and talking about it. I would usually ask the director when we could meet and discuss how the newscast is going in general terms. I wanted the chance to talk before a show aired, not right after when tensions are high. You need to be clear headed so you can both listen and figure out what needs to be done. Also, go into this type of meeting knowing the director will have criticisms and hopefully suggestions to help things run more smoothly. Keep an open mind and really listen. Relationships require some compromise. You need to be aware that directors have a lot of pressure on them as well and share your desire for a clean show. The way you two define “clean” and make decisions can vary. You need to explain where you are coming from in a non-argumentative way.

Another crucial thing to set up is a nightly discrep. meeting with your director. This used to be required in most newsrooms, but with cuts in OT pay and longer working hours, many shifts now blow off these meetings. This is a big mistake! Ideally you want the entire staff to weigh in on these meetings. If you cannot because of OT issues etc., then meet with just your director. But make sure you meet. You need the daily dialog, face-to-face, to actually talk about what went right and wrong in the newscast. And, by the way, email does not cut it. You need to look each other in the eye and talk. This helps you learn how the other person thinks so you can find common ground and set up protocols. I cannot emphasize enough how crucial it really is to have a daily meeting. Find a way, period. Make sure the meetings are short and sweet. Suggest you each come to the meeting with one thing you liked and one you didn’t. If there was an issue during the newscast, talk solutions for the next time it comes up. You can do all of this in 10 to 15 minutes. You really can. That is a small sacrifice of time to really create a solid working relationship. Tell your director that. Most will not only agree, but be happy to meet.

Finally, make sure even when you are really ticked about a call the director made you remain respectful. Your director is a professional and likely extremely passionate about his/her job too. Openly respect that level of dedication. It will only help you both grow and your newscast get better.

On the Spot! When anchors put reporters in uncomfortable positions on live TV.

I recently got a message posing this question: “Why do anchors so often make strange comments at the end of live shots that are nearly impossible for a reporter to gracefully respond to.” Examples you ask? Okay, see if these sound familiar. A live shot ends about something very sad, like a murder and the anchor says: “Great job, Joe Schmo, reporting live downtown.” What’s great? Someone died! Another common scenario: The reporter tags out with a fact like a vote scheduled in council tomorrow and the anchor parrots the very same fact like this: “You know Joe Schmo, the vote is tomorrow.” Joe the reporter is stuck thinking: “Yeah, idiot, I just said that.” and stares at the screen with a look of confusion. The final example, Joe the reporter explains an element of the story in the live intro or within the package, wraps up, then on the two shot out the anchor asks about that same element, like it was never addressed. The reporter is thinking: “Didn’t you listen to what I just said?” Usually that quizzical look is on his face, on live TV.

So let’s look at why this happens, then try and keep it from happening again. The “why” is usually tied to one of two things:

The need for the last word, to tie things up and transition.
Questions required in tags, by management, for interaction.

Let’s make it clear, in my experience, the need for the last word is not always an ego thing. The anchor may not be trying to act all knowing. Anchors often feel compelled to compliment reporters or reinforce team. They sometimes just don’t have very good timing. Hence the “Great job Joe Schmo” comments after a story about a murder. Instead of focusing on the story, the anchor is complimenting the reporter and it just comes off as weird. The intentions are good, but it doesn’t make the reporter feel complimented at all and leaves the viewers wondering what just happened.

Often anchors are ordered to make say something out of live shots, while in a double box. This can be mandated by management or producers who are taught to start and end live shots on double boxes, period. Sometimes this leads to the anchor getting stuck with nothing relevant to say while trying to transition. The end result is a weird comment parroting back facts the reporter just said and hoping it sounds different enough that it passes for a real reaction.

While we are on the subject of double box live tag outs, producers take note, scripting “Thanks Joe Schmo” is not always the best route. It sets up the inane comment scenario. Suggestion: Tell the anchor to call the reporter and ask for a factoid they can bring up in the double box.

Notice, I did not say ask for a question. That call should vary depending on the story and what the reporter knows about the subject. Often the most uncomfortable moments between an anchor and reporter are during a q and a in a live tag. Over time, I saw these q and a’s go awry most often when management required a question coming out of every live shot. I could (and probably will) go on and on about why scripting tag questions every time is bad in a future article. For now a summary: Sometimes it makes sense to ask a question, sometimes it is better to share a factoid the anchor can state quickly for emphasis. Both the reporter and anchor should not be blindsided. These double box interactions work best if the reporter and anchor can work them out together. Also, don’t be afraid to end a live shot, then do a two shot transition to a new subject. You can create team interactions other ways. Something like this:

((Joe Bob – 2 shot))

Thanks Joe Schmo, Suzie, there’s a similar situation in Atlanta tonight.

((Suzie Q -2 shot))

There is Joe… and it’s causing problems for a lot of people.

((Suzie turns to 1 shot))

See Anchor’s don’t have chemistry for more on how to work these two shot transitions.

Now, let’s look at more solutions to prevent these “on the spot” moments. Anchors, it is human nature to want to tie up a conversation with a thank you or a compliment. Just be cognizant of what the subject is about. Think about talking with a friend about a tragedy in his/her life, the end of the conversation might be silence. It might also be a shake of the head. That is appropriate at the end of a live shot as long as you are really feeling the emotion. If you are just plain uncomfortable, ask the producer not to script a two shot for that particular tag and explain that you are uncomfortable. Just remember, if the subject is heavy, that is not the time to tell the reporter “Great job.” Send a text after the show instead. Reporters, if the anchor does say great job, nodding your head and saying nothing else is fine. Reporters also do not have to have the last word. Let the emotion ride a second in the silence. It may seem counterintuitive in a business where you are paid to talk, but it is more natural to the way we communicate in the real world.

If the anchor asks about something the reporter just said, it is best for the reporter to briefly summarize with an added tidbit. You might say, “Yes Suzie, that council vote I referenced earlier will be at 7, and they’re expecting a big crowd, so you might want to come early if you want a seat.” This lessens the “Huh, he already said that!” blow. If you cannot add anything when you summarize, just say “That’s right.” and wrap.

Finally, if the anchor says something really out there and you don’t know what to do, just sig out. Viewers are used to seeing reporters not react to things anchors say and will likely assume you couldn’t hear the anchor or there was a technical difficulty. That assumption, and slightly tense moment is better than fumbling through a response that just doesn’t make sense and/or being visibly uncomfortable. Then make sure the producer knows what happened, so everyone can trouble shoot in the future. Bottom line, there needs to be communication between anchors, producers and reporters to avoid putting a reporter “on the spot” the next night.