WHEN BAD THINGS HAPPEN, reporters run to the scene. Fires, murders, hurricanes, wars, whatever ... they run. No matter if the story is on the other side of the country or the other side of the world.Each genre of media does it. But television, especially local news, loves to send local reporters to major events. Dann Cuellar of Philadelphia's 6ABC has been in Southern California for the past few days covering the wildfires there.
But why?
A media consultant explained to the New York Daily News today: "It does say to that local audience, 'They're keeping me informed on something that is important to my life.'"
Are the local stations sending reporters to far off places because it is good journalism or because it appeals to viewers? Is this a way of making the significant relevant or is this a practice of pandering to the masses?
4 comments:
There's a lot of merit that comes with being a local newscaster and going across the country to report on big stories.
Channel 6 is just bringing important information to people who may not watch BBC World News or CNN. There have also been stories about the wildfires in The Daily News and in The Inquirer (I don't know if they're syndicated or not) but it's not only the local newcasters who are bringing information from far away. People need to be informed.
I agree that people need to be informed, but why not send local news reporters to Rwanda? Or to the newest findings in Iraq more often? For one, I feel this is an act to attract viewers. The wildfires are new. They are dangerous. They are compelling. If people are interested in them, why not pull them in to a local news station. Journalism is a business, right?
-Matt Daddona
I think it brings merit to a station when you have one of your own reporters at the story. Also, it brings a sense of comfort to viewers to see someone there used to seeing reporting on an out-of-town story rather than a reporter of a station in the area where the story is. Dan Cuellar is a great example of this, he's been almost everywhere. I still remember the great job he did in New Orleans for Katrina, so I guess that says something about the comfort level.
When you have another natural headline, like Atlanta possible running out of drinking water, there seems to be no rush to stand in front of a dry reservoir. These California wildfires still aren't made locally relevant to me, because I haven't heard any meteorologist explaining the possible chances of the Philadelphia region breaking into wildfires (before this soggy rainy week of weather). I applaud the local news for not just assuming the Philadelphia tri state is only concerned about Philadelphia, but I don't find the California wildfires as something that significantly influences our history.
Post a Comment