[SpongeBobSnakePants]

Regardless of the reason why local media sucks, I find it hilarious. Sometimes they are just so beyond pathetic it's laughable. And to be honest, channel 7 is about the worst for me. They try to be experts in everything they are not - comedy being the most prevalent. Between the pre-break comedy acts, to the sad face for "sad" stories which immediatly flips to a smile on the very next "happy" story, or even the constant stuttering and misinformation, they make me want to vomit all over my TV.

Why do people care? Generally local media is the face of your community, and Omaha generally looks pretty ugly.

[McBain II]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

Honestly...why do you guys care that much?

Why are you so intent on defending them? Do you work for the networks or something?

Seriously, it's a pretty common topic both on here and EOmaha and Ted's blog was so popular it started a mini **** storm in the Omaha media circles. Obviously it's something that people in Omaha care about and feel like discussing.

[pheaton]

The biggest issue for me is that the local media just seems fundamentally off. At it's basic function the media should be factual, non-biased, and relevant, when you can't get the basics right, it really means the big important things are wrong too.

The basic things:
1. Making sure people know their queues.
2. Making sure things are spelled correctly.
3. Providing new and relevant informaton. Not just some version of a story you druged up from someone elses reporting work.
4. Finding the facts, finding the correct terminology for things instead of guessing.
5. Not just slapping the stuff from your website into the TV version or vice versa.
6. Calling your website a website instead of a web channel.
7. Having a story that is relevant enough to stand on it's own, for example you shouldn't have to have a reporter on the corner to prove it's snowing. Is snow even breaking news anyways?
8. Interviewing people that provide relevant input to the story.

There are many more, but this is a starter.

[billiefan2000]

bosco is right.

Obviously it's something that people in Omaha care about and feel like discussing.

the city of omaha deserves better city leaders and better local media, but you have folks who treat omaha folks like hicks and gotta act stupid cause that is somehow assumed that omahans arent bright.


the local media is trying to contibute to dumbing down this town by being impotent and it has to stop. Omaha is a great city and deserves a comptent media with people who take their jobs seriously.



and it isnt just the 3 tv stations (aka wowt and ketv and kmtv ), the omaha world herald has become a joke


(and we arent just talking about Rainbow Rowell or Kevin Coffey cause those 2 we all know are a joke, but there are other OWH reporters who have made the paper look like a joke.



btw: just saw the latest omaha media 2011 predictions at

Omaha TV News: Turnovers

[billiefan2000]

Originally Posted by pheaton

The biggest issue for me is that the local media just seems fundamentally off. At it's basic function the media should be factual, non-biased, and relevant, when you can't get the basics right, it really means the big important things are wrong too.

The basic things:
1. Making sure people know their queues.
2. Making sure things are spelled correctly.
3. Providing new and relevant informaton. Not just some version of a story you druged up from someone elses reporting work.
4. Finding the facts, finding the correct terminology for things instead of guessing.
5. Not just slapping the stuff from your website into the TV version or vice versa.
6. Calling your website a website instead of a web channel.
7. Having a story that is relevant enough to stand on it's own, for example you shouldn't have to have a reporter on the corner to prove it's snowing. Is snow even breaking news anyways?
8. Interviewing people that provide relevant input to the story.

There are many more, but this is a starter.

pheaton, great post.

[billiefan2000]

btw:

considering kptm fox 42's sat. 9 pm newscast is gone.

maybe getting rid of the saturday newscast at 10 pm on all 3 stations may need to happen.

nothing but 35 minutes of non-stop nebraska cornhusker news.


i mean, kmtv and wowt got multiple sports shows on sunday nights. why does the sat. 10 pm news need to be all nebraska cornhusker news.

[RhettB]

I'd be happy if one of the 3 could produce a near accurate weather forecast. Flowers needs to retire. Last summer he said "slight chance of rain", yet there was a downpour followed by steady rain outside my window. KETV is the better of the 3.

Actually, back when Ron Gerard was at KPTM, he did the best job of all the locals at the weather.

[pheaton]

New pictures for your entertainment:

public pictures by pheaton - Photobucket

If you view as a sideshow you get to see my always rewarding captions.

[pheaton]

I was just thinking. Does anyone know what copyright laws say about me posting those pictures? I don't care to break the law over Sux News.. They created the content, put it out to the public, is there issues with me capturing it in a picture and posting it? Just wondering.

[McBain II]

Originally Posted by pheaton

I was just thinking. Does anyone know what copyright laws say about me posting those pictures? I don't care to break the law over Sux News.. They created the content, put it out to the public, is there issues with me capturing it in a picture and posting it? Just wondering.

What you're doing is legal under Fair Use law.

17 U.S.C. § 107 Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.