SPECIAL REPORT: LOCAL TV NEWS This study was produced by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, an affiliate of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. The study uses empirical data to measure the quality of local TV news and compare those results with ratings. Time of Peril forTV News Quality Sells, But Commitment and Viewership Continue to Erode BY TOM ROSENSTIEL,CARL GOTTLIEB,AND LEE ANN BRADY ocal television news has reached trick up newscasts with easy gimmicks a crossroad.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx DOES QUALITY SELL? — eye candy,ratings stunts and hype. Viewers are beginning to aban- 1998–2000 In a test of28 stations,only one “A”sta- don the medium,especially to tion was failing to add to its lead-in. Percentage of stations, the Internet,much as network Only two with a “C”grade or lower by quality grade, rising in ratings Lnews began t o lose audience more than a were adding to it. ■The best way to build or keep audi- decade ago with the advent ofcable. 70% ence is to cover a broader r ange of But in response the industry is head- 64% ed toward making a fateful mistake. 60% issues and topics.Stations that cover less ofthe community,or aim news- A major ongoing study oflocal televi- 50% sion news reveals that the business is 50% casts at specific audiences,are the most cutting back on the precisely the ele- 40% likely to be losing r atings.This chal- ments that att racts viewers — including 37% lenges one ofthe popular programming 30% 33% 33% enterprise,localism,breadth,innova- strategies today in broadcasting:demo- tion,and sourcing.A major reason is graphic targeting,which is done t o 20% please advertisers. that the business is committed to main- ■ taining profit margins it enjoyed in an 10% Local news seems t o be moving in the earlier er a. wrong direction.In particular it is get- Without needing to,local television 0% ting thinner.The amount ofenterprise, ABCDF already shrinking,is withering to almost news is driving Americans away from Quality Grade what was long the most popular and nothing.The amount ofout-of-town trusted source ofinformation in the stations were building ratings ,a higher feeds and recycled material is growing. country. percentage than any other grade and The majority ofstories studied this year These are some ofthe key conclusions nearly double most grades. were either feeds or footage aired with- The problem is that not enough sta- out an on-scene reporter. ofYear Three ofthe continuing study of ■ local television news by the Project for tions produce quality.In those th ree Local TV ignores whole sect ors ofsoci- Excellence in Journalism,a think tank years,just 10% ofstations in our main ety.The poor have all but disappeared. affiliated with Columbia University study earned “A”grades.Most ear ned Out of8,095 st ories studied this year,only Graduate School ofJournalism and “Cs.”And that percentage is even lower if seven concerned the disadvantaged.By funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts. we include prime-time hours and early- comparison,336 concerned entertainers. The study,which this year e xamined morning news.This lack offaith in qual- Over three years,and some 25,000 st ories, 49 stations in 15 cities,continues to pro- ity is the issue. only 35 focused on the needy. vide empirical evidence repudiating Consider these other key findings of This year the stud y examined news- many ofthe conventional assumptions the study,produced by the Project and a casts in 15 cities during a February and current business trends in local tele- team oflocal TV journalists,university sweeps w eek and a March non-sweeps vision news. scholars and professional content week,some 49 stations in all.A team of Once again,the study finds that qual- researchers: professional coders analyzed 8,095 st o- ity sells — bett er than any other ries from 500 broadcasts,or 300 hours approach.Over three years,across 146 ■Quality is the best way to retain or oflocal news.The results were then sta- different stations ofvarying sizes,the increase lead-in audience.And the tistically analyzed by researchers at case is clear:Overall,64% of“A”quality surest way to lose lead-in audience is t o Wellesley College and Princeton Survey 84 CJRNovember/December 2000 Research Associates and interpreted by a In eight cities, we measured how team of journalists. TOP FIVE LOCAL NEWS much lead-in audience was retained In eight of these cities we studied the TOPICS IN 2000 throughout the whole newscast and cor- most popular news time slot, as we have related that to quality scores and ratings. in earlier years. In four markets, we Percentage of stories Once again, across 28 stations, only examined the hour-long primetime by broad topic category one with an “A” grade was failing to add news, and in three other cities the 6 a.m. 25% to its lead-in audience. news. In two other cities, where we had In Atlanta, WXIA earned an “A” for earlier studied 11 p.m. news, we studied 20% 3% quality and beat its lead in by 33%. In 18% 6 p.m. We also looked at innovative 15% Denver, KUSA put on the best broadcast newscasts from two stations for com- 5% in town and beat its lead-in by an aver- parison purposes: KTVU in Oakland, 10% 4% age of 21%. In Phoenix, KTVK had the 10% 1% and WBBM in Chicago. 8% 3% best 6 p.m. newscast in the market, the 5% 7% In the morning, when audiences (and 5% best ratings and more viewers than the thus ad rates) are small, newscasts are 0% show that preceded it. produced on the cheap, and it shows. And again, only two stations with a While local morning news is heavy on “C” or lower were succeeding in adding traffic and weather, it’s light on original Crime/Law to their lead-in. reporting, enterprise and even sourcing We also measured this audience Politics/Government Economics/Business (see Morning Lite). retention over time. Again, we found “A” Education/Welfare/Society In prime time, the assumption is that Technology/Health/Consumer stations had the best long-term record it may be the only broadcast people see, of building on their lead-in audience. National and so there is more national and inter- Local In short, stations can try to win audi- national news. But the shows are sur- ence two ways. By hitchhiking on the prisingly light on ideas, heavy on crime popularity of the show that came and celebrity. local people were working in the cam- before, which tends to put a ceiling on One program, Oakland’s KTVU, paign or felt about the country. Earlier the potential viewership. Or by trying to showed how good these hours can be years of the study show that this kind of build their own intrinsic audience, (see Bucking the Trend). Most seem to horse-race political coverage is associat- which is loyal regardless of what shows be aiming fairly low. A former TV news ed with lower ratings. the networks or others may provide. consultant offers concrete suggestions The coverage was also of the most The data show clearly that quality is to improve primetime broadcasts (see reactive kind. Ninety-five percent of the the way to build loyalty. News in Prime Time.) stories were either wire feeds or the sta- And it’s not enough to hold onto We also did our annual survey of sta- tion going to a staged campaign event people for the first 15 minutes, as sta- tions and found some deeply alarming — and remember, this is not some dis- tions often promise advertisers they’ll trends. Among them, a third of stations tant campaign but a primary happening do. The study measured how well a sta- now report being pressured to slant the in one’s own community. tion holds its audience through an news in favor of advertisers (see Sponsor In short, few stations built stories entire newscast. TV news reasearchers Interference). around local people or their concerns. agree. Norman Hecht of Norman They defined the campaign as the can- Hecht Research says retaining audience CAMPAIGN 2000 didates and their rhetoric. is “crucially important.” We did see one wrinkle about ratings. Losing people later in the broadcast Our study this year happened to coin- When they went to these prearranged suggests viewers are losing interest, or cide with the presidential campaign, campaign events, those stations build- maybe even becoming irritated by teas- and nearly two-thirds of our stations — ing ratings were much more likely to es and promos. Stations that offer peo- 32 in all — were in states holding pri- interview local voters at the scene (they ple value all the way through are the maries during one of the two weeks in did so in 21% of their stories) than most likely to have those viewers come which we taped. This gave us an unusu- those stations dropping in ratings (6%). back, researchers said. “It’s important to al opportunity to study how local TV The implication: politics about candi- retain people to the end,” said Harry covers presidential politics, especially dates is a turnoff. Politics as it affects Kovsky of Kovsky & Miller Research, a when it comes to town. local people is more interesting. television research firm. The results were not inspiring. There was a fair amount of coverage. In total, 8% of stories concerned the presidential race, AUDIENCE RETENTION ENTERPRISE REPORTING elevating politics to No.