[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: attacks on Afghanistan have begun
On Sunday, October 7, 2001, at 10:08 PM, Dan Billings wrote:
> It's not like today's attacks were a surprise.
I think that's the key sentence when it comes to breaking format for war
news. Other than report on explosions, there wasn't a lot of live news
to report. The TV networks gave us the usual lineup of expert opinions,
repeated blurry videotapes, and creative speculation.
Of course this is a big story, but there's a huge difference in what the
"homeland" audience needed to hear. On September 11, everyone was
stunned, afraid for the Americans in the attack zones, unsure of what
was to come next, and in desperate need of instantaneous information.
Today, everyone wanted to hear that the attacks had started, and then
for many people there was no immediate need for wall-to-wall information.
Listeners to a music station don't expect or want continuous news
coverage in most situations. I think today's news is more like the Gulf
War attacks, when many people wanted to be updated and reassured, but
not to lose the music completely. What they really need is to trust
their radio station to give them important breaking news when it's
It's ironic that these attacks happened right after two of Los Angeles'
biggest stations (Clear Channel's KOST and KBIG) decided to voice-track
many of their airshifts. Their audiences won't have the reassurance
that a live human being is there to keep them informed when it's
necessary. Of course Clear Channel and others have inflicted this
situation on many stations across the country, but on major stations in
the number 2 market, that's pathetic.