Watch out Gibson, Stewart is coming to the news

‘The Daily Show’ host Jon Stewart seems to be doing a better job than some anchors

After the Democratic Debate on April 16th, both Gibson and Stephanopoulos received a beating for the questions they asked Clinton and Obama. Apparently, both Gibson and Stephanopoulos went for ratings instead of answers at the debate not knowing that it would kick them in the face later. On the other hand, ‘The Daily Show’ host Jon Stewart is racking up ratings and delivering the news to more viewers each day. A lot of people get their news from Stewart rather than a local or national news network station. Not only does Jon Stewart provide humor to his shows but he also presents factual information about politics and other important news. A recent article compares Stewart to a journalist:

Stewart is a funnyman first and may never be taken seriously as a journalist. But the journalistic portion of his show is done better than most of those offered by many of the blatherheads on television today. He interviews fascinating people in the news. He goes toe-to-toe with individuals who have been at or near the seats of power in the world, from Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf to Ralph Nader to former U.S. presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and many others.

Stewart gets information from these powerful people that people care about. He actually has intelligent questions to ask that other journalists would not think of. Of course he cracks his jokes here and there in between questions during the interviews, but he still can receive better answers than Gibson or Stephanopoulos have. I believe that people tune into ‘The Daily Show’ mainly for Stewart’s witty humor, but they can find that he can be seen as a journalist. Maybe people would rather get their news from him because they get tired of learning about the latest murderer or criminal who is on the loose. Just because he is a funny man does not mean that he is not smart, too.

If ABC and other traditional news outlets are hell-bent on treating future presidential debates with all the decorum of celebrity roasts, maybe it’s time to hand the microphones over to Stewart and his esteemed colleague, Stephen Colbert. There’s a better than even chance they’ll ask questions about the economy and health care during the first 52 minutes rather than regurgitate picked-over tripe such as the absence of a flag pin on Obama’s lapel or Clinton’s memory of sniper fire in Bosnia.

It seems as if the regular American journalist just is not doing their job anymore. We need to leave it to the comedian to get the answers out to the public now.

The World of Digital

President and CEO of the National Association of Broadcasters, David Rehr, is trying to open the eyes of society to the up-and-coming world of digital. According to an article posted by thr.com, the NAB is spending one billion dollars just on educating the DTV switch. This amount seems unbelievable at first; but we have to put in to account the $40 coupon that they are distributing to those that need the adapter to switch from analog to digital television. Now, David Rehr wants to continue the convergence of digital to other devices, including mobile screens. NAB is trying to get digital TV on cell phones, iPods, TV screens in cars, portable video players, laptops computers, and other devices.

David Rehr stated at the 2008 NAB show in Las Vegas on April 14 that ‘Some are not optimistic about broadcasting's future. Some people in this business have been staring so long at the door that's closing, they haven't seen the new door that's opening -- the digital door.’

,

Although it may seem like a long stretch, people just need to realize that it is the 21st century and that our technology and knowledge is growing. Things will not always stay the way they are. Digital has gotten such hype and attention that NAB wants to continue spreading this technology to other items that many Americans enjoy now. Digital television can ear up to an estimated $2 billion a year in revenues from mobile video alone.

We have HD radio out already but we don’t really know if it is going to take to the consumers. There are too few stations that actually offer this amenity and it is also too expensive. Also, radio stations are stepping up to offer the programming to support new multicast channels of HD radio. There is still a lot of work to be done if NAB and FCC want to change broadcasting in its entirety from analog to digital. I believe that it won’t take much longer before we are watching digital television in our vehicles.

Will CBS divorce Couric?

The first female to anchor evening news alone might be out of her $15 million-a-year all because she was not careful about the switch from morning to evening news.

Katie Couric has caught the attention of many people for many years now as the host of the Today Show but it seems as soon as she switched to the evening news, she lost her viewers and gained attention in the wrong way. Instead of being called a great anchor, the majority are calling her a train wreck. The reason why CBS brought Couric down to the evening news was to change the demographics a bit from more male viewers and add more female viewers. Supposedly, there has been a lot of speculation that she will end her time at CBS after the presidential election before her contract is up in 2011. That is huge! She must be getting a lot of crap from viewers and other employees at CBS for her to consider this “divorce.” Or maybe it is her ratings that are making her want out:

The bulk of the viewers of evening newscasts apparently grew up watching Cronkite, so they rejected the 51-year-old whippersnapper Couric. She debuted with impressive ratings (13 million viewers), but CBS soon fell to third place and hit as low as 5.5 million last year. Nearly 7 million watch her now. "NBC Nightly News With Brian Williams" leads the pack with an average of 9 million viewers per night. ABC's newscast with Charles Gibson falls in the middle at more than 8 million.

If there are so many Cronkite lovers and then CBS throws in Katie Couric to pretty mush take his spot, then of course the viewers are going to be disappointed. Cronkite is a legend, and just because I am all about supporting female news anchors doesn’t mean I don’t like Katie Couric. However, there is no way that Couric could take on a task like the evening news like Cronkite did. She has lost that spark that everyone used to love. Also, at this day and age with the Internet attempting to take over, the evening news has become less viewed by the population. In order to keep viewers, CBS needs a better evening news anchor to keep the ratings up. Obviously, Couric is not fitting that position. Maybe network news was trying to evolve too fast. Barbara Walters had to Co-host the ABC evening news and she got a mouthful all the time from her desk mate. And way back when Connie Chung teamed up with the legend Dan Rather, thing were not any easier then either.

With all this said, I do feel some sympathy for Couric. Can’t we all just blame the newer technology that is taking over our media trends?

Local Broadcasters = More News

So is it quite possible that a smaller local news station can produce more news than a larger national news station? Well according to the GAO news study, there are ways to make it work.

With cable and satellite service, the public can receive programming from nationwide outlets, such as CNN and FOX News, and television stations in adjacent markets," concludes the Government and Accountability Office's (GAO) new study. "However, media outlets located in a market are more likely to provide local news, public affairs, and political programming addressing the needs of residents in that market, such as coverage of local political campaigns, compared to nationwide and adjacent-market outlets.

So if you want to watch local news, instead of just tuning into the short clips on www.CNN.com you can simply turn on your local news station! Who would have thought! Even though national broadcasting stations such as CNN do produce local news, locally owned TV stations do produce more local news than they do. Instead of typing in your city and/or zip code to search for current news or events, it could be more convenient for the average person to just tune into the local broadcasted news station.

Not surprisingly, the agency observes that bigger markets tend to offer consumers a wider variety of media services, including more providers that offer content in a language besides English. Although locally-based, independent stations provide more local coverage, the GAO says that smaller market area stations often make content sharing agreements with each other, which may reduce the amount of independent news material being produced.

Of course the bigger markets are going to be able to offer more amenities than the smaller ones, but the point is that if you are looking for your basic local news, it is just as easy to turn on the television to a local news station to receive this information. It is good that the GAO has done this study and they need to continue their studies to find out if any content sharing agreements will reduce the amount of independent news material being produced.

WiFi Nationwide

Google is basically asking permission from the government to create an unparalleled WiFi network that will make high speed Internet access available just about anywhere. Wireless Internet anywhere…sort of has a nice ring to the ear doesn’t it? Google is aiming at using the unused airwaves between the TV channels also known as white space. Google has sent in letters to the FCC asking permission for their wish granted. They were defeated in the FCC auction two weeks ago for these vacant frequencies:

That auction concluded last week when Google lost out to Verizon Wireless and AT&T, which collectively agreed to pay $19.6 billion for most of the 700 MHz spectrum. The wireless giants hope to build out their own wireless phone and data networks on the frequencies.

AT&T and Verizon Wireless are obviously worried about their monopolies being threatened by the idea of open access. Google has many great products on their website with their maps, Google Earth, and their phone directory system; they are just out to get more. Google wants to change part of the regulation and open up more WiFi interaction with the vacant frequencies. All AT&T and Verizon can do is shake their finger at the fact that Google is trying to change things with the FCC. They are just mad because Google could interfere with their monopolies.

“Google's latest plea to the FCC claims that with new spectrum sensing technology, the white spaces can be used for public WiFi and not interfere with other services.”

Google wants to use the open radio frequencies as a natural resource as not to interfere with anybody else’s service. Whether Google is just saying this to get by the government regulation or is being truthful to AT&T and Verizon, it sounds like it might work. But still, wireless companies like AT&T and Verizon Wireless, have all their hard work and earnings gone down the drain because Google is about to get granted WiFi access to all Americans anywhere? They have made their massive investments, and now it is Google’s turn to profit. Some broadcasters even feel like their companies might be affected by Google’s plan by using this extra white space. I guess time will tell.

Merging Together

The XM and Sirius Satellite Radio Merger

Because the world is always about money and competition, the Justice Department has to figure out if a merger between XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio would lessen competition. Of course in order for this issue to come to a conclusion the great people with the Federal Communications Commissions must follow suit. So what is the big problem then? Well the National Association of Broadcasters begs to differ with the Justice Department and disagrees whether it will lessen competition. An article quoted:

“In the retail channel, where the parties likely would continue to compete to attract new subscribers absent the merger," it said, "the division found that the evidence did not support defining a market limited to the two satellite-radio firms that would exclude various alternative sources for audio entertainment, and similarly did not establish that the combined firm could profitably sustain an increased price to satellite-radio consumers."

So, in the end no one is paying anymore money…no one gets hurt, right? The division has reached this conclusion because the merger would not enable the parties to increase any prices to satellite-radio customers for several reasons. First, there is a lack of competition between the parties even without the merger. Second, there are competitive alternative services available to the consumers. Third, there is plenty of technological change headed out way. So the Department feels that the merger will be a great thing of course. However, The National Association of Broadcasters are angry because they are not getting heard.

Of course The National Association of Broadcasters is still going to be upset because they feel that the Justice Department has broken FCC rules all along. They believe that giving them a monopoly is basically absurd. The broadcasters were the ones who felt betrayed:

“The merger had been strongly opposed by broadcasters, which argued that allowing the two companies to get together would create a monopoly in satellite radio, while the companies had said that they would simply be a stronger competitor in a crowded audio market that included cable radio, terrestrial radio and the Internet.”

Beware: Rabbit-Ear Lovers

From Analog to Digital just like that!

If you do not yet own a digital television set, you will have to buy one before February 17, 2009 in order to watch your much loved cable television shows because 21st century TV is going digital. Many of our older generation still owns and religiously watches their programs on their antique analog televisions.
This change to digital will most likely not be a big deal or problem to very many people; especially those legendary couch potatoes who basically worship the TV and all its holiness. However, there is that other percentage of our population that will most likely be frantically confused about what they need to do. I call this population the “old folks,” a.k.a. the senior citizens.
According to an article by Market Watch, many senior citizens are actually catching onto some of these changes being made and are already adapting to them appropriately. There are a few options to change from analog broadcasting to the new digital way which is taking over:

“ 1)Purchase a converter that will translate the analog airwaves of standard broadcast pictures to the higher-definition digital spectrum that will generate greater clarity in viewing and more channels for programming, 2) Subscribe to a cable TV service or satellite broadcasting that will do the legwork for consumers, 3) Purchase a new TV with a digital tuner already loaded into it, 4) Do nothing and give up watching TV.”

All of the above are decent options, however, I would go with my favorite option and just purchase a new TV (of course a digital one). The article states that many television stations are already broadcasting public-service announcements to insure the fact that viewers have plenty of time to act before the actual transformation occurs. This new digital era will let Digital TV, or DTV, allow for “multicasting.” This is where broadcasters at the local network stations can split their signal into multiple streams. In other words, one station will be able to carry anywhere from three to six programs at one time.

Hopefully this new change will not anger any of our fellow TV viewers or beloved couch potatoes. With time, those who have been affected by the change, will soon grow to learn that digital is in and bunny ears are out.