<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>In Depth: Digital</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/" />
   
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2011:/news//1</id>
   <updated>2010-10-14T17:59:27Z</updated>
   <subtitle>Formerly News</subtitle>
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Pro 4.31-en</generator>


<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/News-Digital" /><feedburner:info xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" uri="news-digital" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><entry>
   <title>Google, NBC Universal End TV Ad-Sales Pact Early; Agreement Allowed Google to Sell Cable Inventory</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/10/google_nbc_universal_end_tv_ad.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.44245</id>
   
   <published>2010-10-14T17:53:46Z</published>
   <updated>2010-10-14T17:59:27Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Brian SteinbergAdvertising AgeGoogle and NBC Universal have dissolved an intriguing ad pact they established in 2008 nearly a year before it was set to expire, dealing a setback to Google's ambition to become a big player in TV ad sales.Under terms of the pact, which was set to end in the fall of 2011, Google was allowed to sell advertising inventory on select NBC Universal-owned cable outlets -- such as Syfy, Oxygen, MSNBC, CNBC, Sleuth and Chiller -- with the potential to expand to other networks down the line. That was seen as an important step in Google's efforts to expand its reach beyond its main business, paid-search advertising on the internet, and get into TV in a significant way. For NBC, the agreement was described as a way to bring in new advertisers, particularly the local ones Google often deals with.Rather than expanding, however, the pact has ended early. &quot;We're not currently contributing inventory into the Google marketplace, but we continue to work with Google on multiple projects involving advanced advertising,&quot; NBC Universal said in a statement Wednesday.&quot;While we are no longer offering NBC Universal inventory through Google TV Ads, NBC Universal continues to be a great partner to Google,&quot; Mark Piesanen, director of strategic partner development for Google TV Ads, said in a statement. &quot;Both NBC and Google are committed to bringing more relevance to TV viewership and advertising. CNBC is an important partner in the launch of Google TV and we are working together on research studies.&quot; The two companies are also both investors in Invidi Technologies Corp., a company involved in developing the technology behind addressable TV advertising.The end of the arrangement, however, leaves Google without access to the broad inventory of a top-tier media company. It continues its TV-advertising efforts with satellite-providers DirecTV and EchoStar's Dish Network as well as some smaller cable outlets, including Hallmark Channel, Tennis Channel, Ovation and CBS College Sports.NBC and Google's ad-sales agreement was an unusual one. NBC Universal raised eyebrows by allowing Google to sell some of its cable channels' inventory. At the time of the deal's unveiling, ad-buying executives suggested Google wasn't getting its hands on prime ad inventory, but rather less desirable stuff.Under the terms of the pact, NBC was able to set a floor for pricing as well as quality standards. The company also maintained control over its inventory, so that if a Google TV ad were to pose a conflict with another advertiser on air, the Google ad would have to run in a different fashion.A person familiar with the situation said NBC Universal felt the Google ad system worked but that it added the most value to smaller, unrated TV networks. While Chiller and Sleuth were unrated when the pact was established, they are both rated now.]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Chuck Ross</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Advertising" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Syndication" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Brian SteinbergAdvertising AgeGoogle and NBC Universal have dissolved an intriguing ad pact they established in 2008 nearly a year before it was set to expire, dealing a setback to Google's ambition to become a big player in TV ad sales.Under terms of the pact, which was set to end in the fall of 2011, Google was allowed to sell advertising inventory on select NBC Universal-owned cable outlets -- such as Syfy, Oxygen, MSNBC, CNBC, Sleuth and Chiller -- with the potential to expand to other networks down the line. That was seen as an important step in Google's efforts to expand its reach beyond its main business, paid-search advertising on the internet, and get into TV in a significant way. For NBC, the agreement was described as a way to bring in new advertisers, particularly the local ones Google often deals with.Rather than expanding, however, the pact has ended early. &quot;We're not currently contributing inventory into the Google marketplace, but we continue to work with Google on multiple projects involving advanced advertising,&quot; NBC Universal said in a statement Wednesday.&quot;While we are no longer offering NBC Universal inventory through Google TV Ads, NBC Universal continues to be a great partner to Google,&quot; Mark Piesanen, director of strategic partner development for Google TV Ads, said in a statement. &quot;Both NBC and Google are committed to bringing more relevance to TV viewership and advertising. CNBC is an important partner in the launch of Google TV and we are working together on research studies.&quot; The two companies are also both investors in Invidi Technologies Corp., a company involved in developing the technology behind addressable TV advertising.The end of the arrangement, however, leaves Google without access to the broad inventory of a top-tier media company. It continues its TV-advertising efforts with satellite-providers DirecTV and EchoStar's Dish Network as well as some smaller cable outlets, including Hallmark Channel, Tennis Channel, Ovation and CBS College Sports.NBC and Google's ad-sales agreement was an unusual one. NBC Universal raised eyebrows by allowing Google to sell some of its cable channels' inventory. At the time of the deal's unveiling, ad-buying executives suggested Google wasn't getting its hands on prime ad inventory, but rather less desirable stuff.Under the terms of the pact, NBC was able to set a floor for pricing as well as quality standards. The company also maintained control over its inventory, so that if a Google TV ad were to pose a conflict with another advertiser on air, the Google ad would have to run in a different fashion.A person familiar with the situation said NBC Universal felt the Google ad system worked but that it added the most value to smaller, unrated TV networks. While Chiller and Sleuth were unrated when the pact was established, they are both rated now.]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>October NewsPro: Environmental Journalism</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/10/october_newspro_environmental.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.44161</id>
   
   <published>2010-10-11T13:36:33Z</published>
   <updated>2010-10-11T13:44:42Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[An astonishing number of breaking stories so far in 2010 have been about the environment. TV viewers and newspaper readers were bombarded by dramatic pictures and accounts of the environment run amok, from the coal ash spill in West Virginia; the plume of volcanic ash over Europe; mine disasters in West Virginia, Chile and China; floods in Pakistan; the natural gas explosion in northern California; and, of course, the oil refinery explosions in Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.Challenges facing the journalists who cover these topics will be explored at the 20th anniversary conference of the Society of Environmental Journalists, being held in Missoula, Mont., Oct. 13 to 17. To see the entire October issue NewsPro, which is devoted to Environmental Journalism and the SEJ event, click here.. &nbsp;]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Syndication" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[An astonishing number of breaking stories so far in 2010 have been about the environment. TV viewers and newspaper readers were bombarded by dramatic pictures and accounts of the environment run amok, from the coal ash spill in West Virginia; the plume of volcanic ash over Europe; mine disasters in West Virginia, Chile and China; floods in Pakistan; the natural gas explosion in northern California; and, of course, the oil refinery explosions in Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.Challenges facing the journalists who cover these topics will be explored at the 20th anniversary conference of the Society of Environmental Journalists, being held in Missoula, Mont., Oct. 13 to 17. To see the entire October issue NewsPro, which is devoted to Environmental Journalism and the SEJ event, click here.. &nbsp;]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title><![CDATA[CBS News Top Winner at News & Documentary Emmys; Full List of Winners Here]]></title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/09/cbs_news_top_winner_at_news_do.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.43969</id>
   
   <published>2010-09-28T04:03:21Z</published>
   <updated>2010-09-28T20:08:44Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[CBS News led the winners of the National Academy of Television Arts &amp; Sciences' 31st annual News &amp; Documentary Emmy Awards Monday night, taking a total of seven awards.CBS was recognized for &quot;60 Minutes,&quot; which notched four wins, and &quot;CBS Evening News With Katie Couric,&quot; which took three honors.NBC News  and PBS closely followed CBS, winning six and five awards, respectively.ABC, HDNet, History Channel, National Geographic Channel, Planet Green and Sundance Channel each scored two wins, and CNBC, Discovery Channel, Globeandmail.com, HBO, NYTimes.com, TIME.com and VH1 were awarded one Emmy apiece.KPIX-TV, San Francisco, KSTP-TV, Minneapolis/St. Paul, and KHOU-TV, Houston, took the News &amp; Documentary Emmys for regional reporting.The News &amp; Documentary Emmys were presented at a ceremony at Frederick P. Rose Hall, Home of Jazz at Lincoln Center, located in the Time Warner Center in New York City. The ceremony will be broadcast Oct. 9 at 8 p.m. ET on C-SPAN.A complete list of winners follows:OUTSTANDING COVERAGE OF A BREAKING NEWS STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTNBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (NBC)Miracle on the HudsonAnchor and Managing Editor: Brian WilliamsExecutive Producer: Bob EpsteinSenior Broadcast Producer: Patrick Burkey, Aurelia GraysonDirector: Brett HoleySenior Producers: Subrata De, Mary Laurence Flynn, Tracey Lyons, Albert OetgenSupervising Producer: Jay BlackmanCorrespondents: Robert Bazell, Tom Costello, Rehema Ellis, Martin Fletcher, Mike Taibbi, Chuck ToddProducers: Donna Bass, Beverly Chase, Christine Colvin, Bob Croce, Tom Dawson, Clare Duffy, Carol Eggers, Lauren Fairbanks, Andy Franklin, Anthony Galloway, Mario Garcia, Hilary Guy, Jody Henenfeld, Robert Kaplan, Maggie Kassner, Susan Kroll, Victor Limjoco, Daniel Linden, Carla Marcus, Megan Marcus, Daniel Nagin, Samuel Singal, Robin Skolnick, Christina Vallice, Kelly VenardosOUTSTANDING CONTINUING COVERAGE OF A NEWS STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTNBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (NBC)Unlikely RefugesAnchor and Managing Editor: Brian WilliamsExecutive Producer: Bob EpsteinSenior Broadcast Producer: Aurelia GraysonDirector: Brett HoleySenior Producer: Mary Laurence FlynnCorrespondents: Richard Engel, Adrienne MongProducers: Maria Alcon, Bredun Edwards, Madeleine Haeringer, Maggie Kassner, Paul Nassar,Matt Softley, Rachele WebbOUTSTANDING FEATURE STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTToday (NBC)Fighting GrossmansProducer: Amanda Marshall, David EmanueleCorrespondent: Bob DotsonOUTSTANDING INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTCBS Evening News with Katie Couric (CBS)Rape in America: Justice DeniedAnchor and Managing Editor: Katie CouricExecutive Producer: Rick KaplanSenior Producer: Keith SummaProducer: Laura StricklerChief Investigative Correspondent: Armen KeteyianOUTSTANDING BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC REPORTING IN A REGULARY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTCBS Evening News with Katie Couric (CBS)Financial Family TreeAnchor and Managing Editor: Katie CouricExecutive Producer: Rick KaplanSenior Producer: Kim GodwinProducers: Brandon Baur, Marsha Cooke, Erin George, Chris WeicherCorrespondents: John Blackstone, Cynthia Bowers, Kelly Cobiella, Barry PetersonOUTSTANDING COVERAGE OF A BREAKING NEWS STORY IN A NEWS MAGAZINEDateline NBC (NBC)Miracle on the HudsonExecutive Producer: David CorvoExecutive Editor: Liz ColeManaging Editor: Aretha MarshallDirectors: John Libretto, Judith FarinetSenior Producers: Ellen Mason, Jim GeretySenior Producers: Liz Cole, Ellen MasonSupervising Producer: Joe DelmonicoAnchor: Ann CurryCorrespondents: Peter Greenberg, Chris Hansen, Hoda Kotb, Dennis MurphyProducers: Tim Beacham, John Block, Katherine Chan, Bradley Davis, Cameo George, Bob Gilmartin, Marianne Haggerty, Meade Jorgensen, Sarah Longden, Marianne O'Donnell, Robin Oelkers, Mary Ann Rotondi, Susan Simpson, Dan Slepian, Justin Smith, Jane EStone, Tim Uehlinger, Esther ZuckerField Producers: Falguni Lakhani, Alex Waterfield, Katie YuCoordinating Producer: Biju MathewOUTSTANDING CONTINUING COVERAGE OF A NEWS STORY IN A NEWS MAGAZINE60 Minutes (CBS)War in PakistanExecutive Producer: Jeff FagerExecutive Editor: Bill OwensProducer: Draggan MihailovichCorrespondent: Steve KroftOUTSTANDING FEATURE STORY IN A NEWS MAGAZINEHDNet World Report (HDNet)South Africa's Shame: Modern‑Day Slavery and the World CupExecutive Producer: Dennis O'BrienSenior Producer: Kathy GettingsProducer: Gareth HarveyCorrespondent: Paul BebanOUTSTANDING INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IN A NEWS MAGAZINEFRONTLINE/World (PBS)Ghana: Digital Dumping GroundExecutive Producer: David FanningSenior Producers: Ken DornsteinSeries Executive Director: Sharon TillerProducer/Correspondent: Peter KleinProducer: Sarah CarterCo-Producers: Shira Bick, Ian Bickis, Krysia Collyer, Allison Cross, Heba Elasaad, Dan Haves, Doerthe Keilholz, Jodie Martinson, Dan McKinney, Blake Sifton, Leslie YoungOUTSTANDING BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC REPORTING IN A NEWS MAGAZINEDan Rather Reports (HDNet)Iran's Manhattan ProjectCorrespondent and Managing Editor: Dan RatherExecutive Producer: Wayne NelsonSenior Producer: Elliot KirschnerProducer: Andrew GlazerOUTSTANDING LIVE COVERAGE OF A CURRENT NEWS STORY &ndash; LONG FORMABC News Special Events (ABC)Inauguration 2009 ‑ Barack ObamaExecutive Producer: Marc BursteinExecutive Director: Roger GoodmanAnchors: Charles Gibson, Diane Sawyer, George StephanopoulosAnchor/Correspondents: Robin Roberts, Ron Claiborne, Chris Cuomo, Sam Donaldson, JohnDonvan, Dan Harris, Jonathan Karl, Cynthia McFadden, Terry Moran, David Muir, Martha Raddatz, Cokie Roberts, Deborah Roberts, Brian Ross, Claire Shipman, Kate Snow, Betsy Stark, Lisa Stark, Jake Tapper, Pierre Thomas, Barbara Walters, Bill Weir, Bob WoodruffSenior Producers: Bob Wheelock, Paula Cohen, Richard Sergay, Laiea Smith, Joan Preztunik, Bob Roy, Nancy Gabriner, Ricki Goldberg, Kathy O&rsquo;Hearn, Andrew MorseProducers: Annie Allen, Perita Carpenter, Teddy Davis, Jonathan Greenberger, Farnaz Haghighi, Sally Hawkins, Akilah Joseph, Lourdes Leahy, Mary Wojcik, Sunlen Miller, Eric Noll, Andrea Owen, Lana Zak, Margaret Aro, Katie Munley, Susan Archer, Ben NewmanRemote Location Producers: Stephanie Smith, Avery Miller, Dena Norland, Clayton Sandell, Quiana Burns, Matt Hosford, Kirit Radia, Drew Millhon, Courtney Chapman, Jon Garcia, Brett Hovell, Richard Coolidge, Tom Giusto, Lisa Chinn, Jen Duck, Susan Kriskey, Matt Jaffee, Jack Date, Bruno Roeber, Margaret Conley, Nick Schifrin, Ann Marie Dorning, George Pilla, Lee Alexander, Glen DacyOUTSTANDING CONTINUING COVERAGE OF A NEWS STORY &ndash; LONG FORMFRONTLINE (PBS)A Death in TehranExecutive Producer: David Fanning, Angus MacQueenSenior Producers: Raney Aronson‑Rath, Ken DornsteinProducer: Monica Garnsey, Arash SahamiOUTSTANDING INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM &ndash; LONG FORMFRONTLINE (PBS)The WarningProducer/Director: Michael KirkProducer/Reporter: Jim GilmoreProducer: Mike WiserExecutive Producer: David FanningSenior Producer: Raney Aronson‑RathOUTSTANDING INFORMATIONAL PROGRAMMING &ndash; LONG FORMHBO Documentary Films (HBO)Which Way HomeDirector/Producer: Rebecca CammisaField Producers: Nina Alvarez, Eric Goethals, Lorenzo Hagerman, Alejandra Liceaga, Stephany Slaughter, Gabriela Sosa, Sascha WeissExecutive Producers: Bristol Baughan, Lianne Halfon, Bette Cerf Hill, John Malkovich, Sheila Nevins, Russell Smith, Jack TurnerSupervising Producer: Sara BernsteinOUTSTANDING HISTORICAL PROGRAMMING &ndash; LONG FORMBill Moyers Journal (PBS)The Good SoldierFor Out of the Blue Productions, Inc.Producer/Directors: Lexy Lovell, Michael UysFor Bill Moyers JournalExecutive Producers: Judy Doctoroff O'Neill, Sally RoyExecutive Editors: Bill Moyers, Judith Davidson MoyersProducer: Jessica WangOUTSTANDING BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC REPORTING &ndash; LONG FORMInside the Mind of Google (CNBC)Correspondent: Maria BartiromoSenior Executive Producer: Mitch WeitznerSenior Producer: Wally GriffithProducer: Morgan DownsContributing Producer: Lulu ChiangOUTSTANDING INTERVIEW60 Minutes (CBS)Saving Flight 1549Executive Producer: Jeff FagerExecutive Editor: Bill OwensCorrespondent: Katie CouricSenior Producer: Michael RadutzkyProducers: Lori Beecher, Tanya SimonCo‑Producers: Jenny Dubin, Andrew MetzOUTSTANDING ARTS &amp; CULTURE PROGRAMMINGAnvil! The Story of Anvil (VH1)Executive Producer/Director: Sacha GervasiProducer: Rebecca YeldhamExecutive Producers: Brad Abramson, Rick Krim, Christopher Soos, Shelly TatroSupervising Producer: Warren CohenOUTSTANDING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMMINGPOV (PBS)The English SurgeonDirector/Producer: Geoffrey SmithCo‑Producer: Rachel WexlerExecutive Producers: Simon Kilmurry, , Sally Jo Fifer, Nick Fraser, Greg SandersonOUTSTANDING NATURE PROGRAMMINGThe Last Beekeeper (Planet Green)Director: Jeremy SimmonsProducers: Fenton Bailey, Randy BarbatoBEST STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTCBS Evening News with Katie Couric (CBS)The Battle of WanatAnchor and Managing Editor: Katie CouricNational Security Correspondent: David MartinExecutive Producer: Rick KaplanSenior Producer: Ward SloaneProducer: Mary WalshBEST REPORT IN A NEWS MAGAZINE60 Minutes (CBS)The Winter of Our Hardship and The Long RecessionExecutive Producer: Jeff FagerExecutive Editor: Bill OwensCorrespondent: Scott PelleyProducers: Solly Granatstein, Nicole YoungCo-Producers: Tom Honeysett, Matthew RichmanBEST DOCUMENTARYWar Dance (Sundance Channel)Directors: Sean Fine, Andrea Nix FineExecutive Producer: Susan MacLauryProducer: Albie HechtCo‑Producers: Kari Kim, Josie SwantekNEW APPROACHES TO NEWS &amp; DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMMING: CURRENT NEWS COVERAGEBehind the Veil (Globeandmail.com)Reporter: Jessica LeederPhotojournalist: Paula LernerMultimedia Producer: Jayson TaylorInteractive Designer: Chris ManzaNEW APPROACHES TO NEWS &amp; DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMMING: DOCUMENTARIESOne in 8 Million (NYTimes.com)Executive Producers: Juliet Gorman, Jodi Rudoren, Andrew De VigalSeries Producers: Sarah Kramer, Alexis Mainland, Meagan Looram, Todd HeislerInteractive Producer: Tom JacksonContributing Producers: Joshua Brustein, Jeffery DelViscio, Nancy Donaldson, Catrin Einhorn, Rogene Fisher, J. David Goodman, Lisa Iaboni, Miki Meek, Conrad Mulcahy, Emily S. Rueb, Tanzina Vega, Emily WeinsteinNEW APPROACHES TO NEWS &amp; DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMMING: ARTS, LIFESTYLE &amp; CULTUREThe Iconic Photo Series (TIME.com)Producer/Editor: Craig DuffPhotographer: Anthony SuauPhoto Editor: Mark RykoffOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: WRITINGNBC News Special (NBC)Inside the Obama White HouseWriters: Doug Adams, Marisa Buchanan, Robert Buchanan, Matt Carluccio, Katherine Chan, Bradley Davis, Subrata De, Joe Delmonico, Andrew Franklin, Annette Freeman, David Gelles, Meade Jorgensen, Mark Lukasiewicz, Amna Nawaz, Benita Noel, Meaghan Rady, Rayner Ramirez, Mary Ann Rotondi, Tim Uehlinger, Brian WilliamsOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: RESEARCHReel Impact Series (Planet Green)Split EstateResearchers: Debra Anderson, Mitchell Marti, Matt VestOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: CINEMATOGRAPHY - NATUREWild Pacific (Discovery Channel)SurvivorsCinematographers: Rod Clarke, Wade Fairley, Richard WollocombeOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: CINEMATOGRAPHY - NEWS COVERAGE / DOCUMENTARIESWar Dance (Sundance Channel)Director of Photography: Sean FineOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: EDITINGNational Geographic's Most Incredible Photos (National Geographic Channel)         Afghan WarriorEditor: Jeremy SieferOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: EDITING&ndash;QUICK TURNAROUNDNBC News Special (NBC)Inside the Obama White HouseEditors: Rob Allen, Chad Bergacs, Deb Brown, Bruce Burger, Saverio Camporeale, Sam Casalino, Justin Cece, Linda Diehl, David Emanuele, Victor Fabilli, Anthony Innarelli, Paul Nichols, Richard Platt, William Ray, Bob Spencer, Alvaro Trenchi, Irene Trullinger, David VargaOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: GRAPHIC DESIGN &amp; ART DIRECTIONStealing Lincoln's Body (History Channel)Graphic Designer: Ray DowningOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: MUSIC &amp; SOUNDWWII in HD (History Channel)Point of No ReturnSound Design and Mix: Joel RaabeAdditional Sound Design: Allison Casey, Brian Scibinico, Frank TurbeOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: LIGHTING DIRECTION &amp; SCENIC DESIGNCIA Confidential: Pakistan Undercover (National Geographic Channel)                                              Lighting Directors: Boujemaa Rassourance, Peter Schnall, Doug ShultzOUTSTANDING PROMOTIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT: INSTITUTIONAL60 Minutes (CBS)60 Minutes in 60 SecondsSenior Vice President and Creative Director: Dave McCoyDirector, Advertising &amp; Marketing: Julie HaalandDirector of Operations: Nicole FiftalProducer/Editor: Rich O'ConnellProducers: Joanne Stern, Charles HowlandSound Designers: Eric Casimiro, Daniel MaierEditor: Wes CarltonGraphic Designer: Adam SaulOUTSTANDING PROMOTIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT: EPISODICDiane Sawyer 20/20 Special (ABC)A Hidden America: Children of the MountainsExecutive Producer: Alan IvesSenior Producer: Rene Hallal-GonenProducer: Kevin SmallsArt Director: Rodrigo RedondoSound Designer/Editor: Leslie Mona-MathusOUTSTANDING REGIONAL NEWS STORY &ndash; SPOT NEWSKPIX Eyewitness News (KPIX‑TV, San Francisco)Oakland RiotReporters: Joe Vazquez, Linda YeeProducer: Brian NealPhotographers: Patrick Sedillo, Robert Moonan, Chris Mistrot, Don FordAssignment Editor: Leona WongOUTSTANDING REGIONAL NEWS STORY &ndash; INVESTIGATIVE REPORTINGKHOU News at 10 p.m. (KHOU‑TV, Houston)Soldiers at Risk: The Iraq Water InvestigationInvestigative Reporter: Jeremy RogalskiExecutive Producer for Investigations: David RaziqInvestigative Photojournalist: Keith TomsheKSTP 5 Eyewitness News (KSTP‑TV, Minneapolis)Prisoners Ride the BusInvestigative Reporter: Bob McNaneyProducer: Mike MaybayAssistant News Director: Sam ZeffBREAKDOWN BY PROGRAMCBS (7)60 Minutes (4)60 Minutes in 60 Seconds ...&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 1Saving Flight 1549 &hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..........................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.... 1War in Pakistan &hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;......................&hellip;.......... 1The Winter of Our Hardship and the Long Recession &hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;....&hellip;........... 1CBS Evening News With Katie Couric (3)The Battle of Wanat &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;................ 1Financial Family Tree &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............. 1Rape in America &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;................ 1NBC (6)NBC News Special (2)Inside the Obama White House &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..........&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 2NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (2)Miracle on the Hudson &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;..........&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;............... 1Unlikely Refugees &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;................&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;............. 1Dateline NBC (1)Miracle on the Hudson &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;..........&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............. 1Today (1)Fighting Grossmans &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;............ 1PBS (5)FRONTLINE (2)A Death in Tehran &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.....................................................................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.. 1The Warning &hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............................................................................&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip; 1Bill Moyers Journal (1)The Good Soldier &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;....&hellip; 1FRONTLINE/World (1)Ghana: Digital Dumping Ground &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;...........................................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 1P.O.V. (1)The English Surgeon .&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;...............................................&hellip;&hellip;1ABC (2)ABC News Special Events (1)Inauguration 2009: Barack Obama &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip; 1Diane Sawyer 20/20 Special (1)A Hidden America: Children of the Mountains &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;. 1HDNet (2)HDNet World Report (1)South Africa&rsquo;s Shame: Modern-Day Slavery and the World Cup &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 1Dan Rather Reports (1)Iran&rsquo;s Manhattan Project &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip; 1History Channel (2)Stealing Lincoln&rsquo;s Body (1)WWII in HD (1)Point of No Return &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 1National Geographic Channel (2)CIA Confidential: Pakistan Undercover(1)National Geographic&rsquo;s Most Incredible Photos (1)Afghan Warrior &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;...&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;....&hellip; 1Planet Green (2)The Last Beekeeper (1)Reel Impact Series (1)Split Estate &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.. 1Sundance Channel (2)War Dance (2)CNBC (1)Inside the Mind of Google (1)Discovery Channel (1)Wild Pacific (1)Survivors &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;............................................. 1Globeandmail.com (1)Behind the Veil (1)HBO (1)HBO Documentary Films (1)Which Way Home &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;............................ 1NYTimes.com (1)One in 8 Million (1)TIME.com (1)The Iconic Photo Series (1)VH1 (1)Anvil! The Story of Anvil (1)REGIONAL REPORTINGKHOU-TV (Houston, TX) (1)KHOU News at 10pm (1)Soldiers at Risk: The Iraq Water Investigation &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 1KPIX-TV (San Francisco, CA) (1)KPIX Eyewitness News (1)Oakland Riot &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 1KSTP-TV (Minneapolis, MN) (1)KSTP 5 Eyewitness News (1)Prisoners Ride the Bus &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.... 1]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Syndication" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="9624" label="awards" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="11" label="CBS" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="5536" label="documentary" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="3200" label="Emmy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="439" label="News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[CBS News led the winners of the National Academy of Television Arts &amp; Sciences' 31st annual News &amp; Documentary Emmy Awards Monday night, taking a total of seven awards.CBS was recognized for &quot;60 Minutes,&quot; which notched four wins, and &quot;CBS Evening News With Katie Couric,&quot; which took three honors.NBC News  and PBS closely followed CBS, winning six and five awards, respectively.ABC, HDNet, History Channel, National Geographic Channel, Planet Green and Sundance Channel each scored two wins, and CNBC, Discovery Channel, Globeandmail.com, HBO, NYTimes.com, TIME.com and VH1 were awarded one Emmy apiece.KPIX-TV, San Francisco, KSTP-TV, Minneapolis/St. Paul, and KHOU-TV, Houston, took the News &amp; Documentary Emmys for regional reporting.The News &amp; Documentary Emmys were presented at a ceremony at Frederick P. Rose Hall, Home of Jazz at Lincoln Center, located in the Time Warner Center in New York City. The ceremony will be broadcast Oct. 9 at 8 p.m. ET on C-SPAN.A complete list of winners follows:OUTSTANDING COVERAGE OF A BREAKING NEWS STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTNBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (NBC)Miracle on the HudsonAnchor and Managing Editor: Brian WilliamsExecutive Producer: Bob EpsteinSenior Broadcast Producer: Patrick Burkey, Aurelia GraysonDirector: Brett HoleySenior Producers: Subrata De, Mary Laurence Flynn, Tracey Lyons, Albert OetgenSupervising Producer: Jay BlackmanCorrespondents: Robert Bazell, Tom Costello, Rehema Ellis, Martin Fletcher, Mike Taibbi, Chuck ToddProducers: Donna Bass, Beverly Chase, Christine Colvin, Bob Croce, Tom Dawson, Clare Duffy, Carol Eggers, Lauren Fairbanks, Andy Franklin, Anthony Galloway, Mario Garcia, Hilary Guy, Jody Henenfeld, Robert Kaplan, Maggie Kassner, Susan Kroll, Victor Limjoco, Daniel Linden, Carla Marcus, Megan Marcus, Daniel Nagin, Samuel Singal, Robin Skolnick, Christina Vallice, Kelly VenardosOUTSTANDING CONTINUING COVERAGE OF A NEWS STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTNBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (NBC)Unlikely RefugesAnchor and Managing Editor: Brian WilliamsExecutive Producer: Bob EpsteinSenior Broadcast Producer: Aurelia GraysonDirector: Brett HoleySenior Producer: Mary Laurence FlynnCorrespondents: Richard Engel, Adrienne MongProducers: Maria Alcon, Bredun Edwards, Madeleine Haeringer, Maggie Kassner, Paul Nassar,Matt Softley, Rachele WebbOUTSTANDING FEATURE STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTToday (NBC)Fighting GrossmansProducer: Amanda Marshall, David EmanueleCorrespondent: Bob DotsonOUTSTANDING INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTCBS Evening News with Katie Couric (CBS)Rape in America: Justice DeniedAnchor and Managing Editor: Katie CouricExecutive Producer: Rick KaplanSenior Producer: Keith SummaProducer: Laura StricklerChief Investigative Correspondent: Armen KeteyianOUTSTANDING BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC REPORTING IN A REGULARY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTCBS Evening News with Katie Couric (CBS)Financial Family TreeAnchor and Managing Editor: Katie CouricExecutive Producer: Rick KaplanSenior Producer: Kim GodwinProducers: Brandon Baur, Marsha Cooke, Erin George, Chris WeicherCorrespondents: John Blackstone, Cynthia Bowers, Kelly Cobiella, Barry PetersonOUTSTANDING COVERAGE OF A BREAKING NEWS STORY IN A NEWS MAGAZINEDateline NBC (NBC)Miracle on the HudsonExecutive Producer: David CorvoExecutive Editor: Liz ColeManaging Editor: Aretha MarshallDirectors: John Libretto, Judith FarinetSenior Producers: Ellen Mason, Jim GeretySenior Producers: Liz Cole, Ellen MasonSupervising Producer: Joe DelmonicoAnchor: Ann CurryCorrespondents: Peter Greenberg, Chris Hansen, Hoda Kotb, Dennis MurphyProducers: Tim Beacham, John Block, Katherine Chan, Bradley Davis, Cameo George, Bob Gilmartin, Marianne Haggerty, Meade Jorgensen, Sarah Longden, Marianne O'Donnell, Robin Oelkers, Mary Ann Rotondi, Susan Simpson, Dan Slepian, Justin Smith, Jane EStone, Tim Uehlinger, Esther ZuckerField Producers: Falguni Lakhani, Alex Waterfield, Katie YuCoordinating Producer: Biju MathewOUTSTANDING CONTINUING COVERAGE OF A NEWS STORY IN A NEWS MAGAZINE60 Minutes (CBS)War in PakistanExecutive Producer: Jeff FagerExecutive Editor: Bill OwensProducer: Draggan MihailovichCorrespondent: Steve KroftOUTSTANDING FEATURE STORY IN A NEWS MAGAZINEHDNet World Report (HDNet)South Africa's Shame: Modern‑Day Slavery and the World CupExecutive Producer: Dennis O'BrienSenior Producer: Kathy GettingsProducer: Gareth HarveyCorrespondent: Paul BebanOUTSTANDING INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IN A NEWS MAGAZINEFRONTLINE/World (PBS)Ghana: Digital Dumping GroundExecutive Producer: David FanningSenior Producers: Ken DornsteinSeries Executive Director: Sharon TillerProducer/Correspondent: Peter KleinProducer: Sarah CarterCo-Producers: Shira Bick, Ian Bickis, Krysia Collyer, Allison Cross, Heba Elasaad, Dan Haves, Doerthe Keilholz, Jodie Martinson, Dan McKinney, Blake Sifton, Leslie YoungOUTSTANDING BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC REPORTING IN A NEWS MAGAZINEDan Rather Reports (HDNet)Iran's Manhattan ProjectCorrespondent and Managing Editor: Dan RatherExecutive Producer: Wayne NelsonSenior Producer: Elliot KirschnerProducer: Andrew GlazerOUTSTANDING LIVE COVERAGE OF A CURRENT NEWS STORY &ndash; LONG FORMABC News Special Events (ABC)Inauguration 2009 ‑ Barack ObamaExecutive Producer: Marc BursteinExecutive Director: Roger GoodmanAnchors: Charles Gibson, Diane Sawyer, George StephanopoulosAnchor/Correspondents: Robin Roberts, Ron Claiborne, Chris Cuomo, Sam Donaldson, JohnDonvan, Dan Harris, Jonathan Karl, Cynthia McFadden, Terry Moran, David Muir, Martha Raddatz, Cokie Roberts, Deborah Roberts, Brian Ross, Claire Shipman, Kate Snow, Betsy Stark, Lisa Stark, Jake Tapper, Pierre Thomas, Barbara Walters, Bill Weir, Bob WoodruffSenior Producers: Bob Wheelock, Paula Cohen, Richard Sergay, Laiea Smith, Joan Preztunik, Bob Roy, Nancy Gabriner, Ricki Goldberg, Kathy O&rsquo;Hearn, Andrew MorseProducers: Annie Allen, Perita Carpenter, Teddy Davis, Jonathan Greenberger, Farnaz Haghighi, Sally Hawkins, Akilah Joseph, Lourdes Leahy, Mary Wojcik, Sunlen Miller, Eric Noll, Andrea Owen, Lana Zak, Margaret Aro, Katie Munley, Susan Archer, Ben NewmanRemote Location Producers: Stephanie Smith, Avery Miller, Dena Norland, Clayton Sandell, Quiana Burns, Matt Hosford, Kirit Radia, Drew Millhon, Courtney Chapman, Jon Garcia, Brett Hovell, Richard Coolidge, Tom Giusto, Lisa Chinn, Jen Duck, Susan Kriskey, Matt Jaffee, Jack Date, Bruno Roeber, Margaret Conley, Nick Schifrin, Ann Marie Dorning, George Pilla, Lee Alexander, Glen DacyOUTSTANDING CONTINUING COVERAGE OF A NEWS STORY &ndash; LONG FORMFRONTLINE (PBS)A Death in TehranExecutive Producer: David Fanning, Angus MacQueenSenior Producers: Raney Aronson‑Rath, Ken DornsteinProducer: Monica Garnsey, Arash SahamiOUTSTANDING INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM &ndash; LONG FORMFRONTLINE (PBS)The WarningProducer/Director: Michael KirkProducer/Reporter: Jim GilmoreProducer: Mike WiserExecutive Producer: David FanningSenior Producer: Raney Aronson‑RathOUTSTANDING INFORMATIONAL PROGRAMMING &ndash; LONG FORMHBO Documentary Films (HBO)Which Way HomeDirector/Producer: Rebecca CammisaField Producers: Nina Alvarez, Eric Goethals, Lorenzo Hagerman, Alejandra Liceaga, Stephany Slaughter, Gabriela Sosa, Sascha WeissExecutive Producers: Bristol Baughan, Lianne Halfon, Bette Cerf Hill, John Malkovich, Sheila Nevins, Russell Smith, Jack TurnerSupervising Producer: Sara BernsteinOUTSTANDING HISTORICAL PROGRAMMING &ndash; LONG FORMBill Moyers Journal (PBS)The Good SoldierFor Out of the Blue Productions, Inc.Producer/Directors: Lexy Lovell, Michael UysFor Bill Moyers JournalExecutive Producers: Judy Doctoroff O'Neill, Sally RoyExecutive Editors: Bill Moyers, Judith Davidson MoyersProducer: Jessica WangOUTSTANDING BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC REPORTING &ndash; LONG FORMInside the Mind of Google (CNBC)Correspondent: Maria BartiromoSenior Executive Producer: Mitch WeitznerSenior Producer: Wally GriffithProducer: Morgan DownsContributing Producer: Lulu ChiangOUTSTANDING INTERVIEW60 Minutes (CBS)Saving Flight 1549Executive Producer: Jeff FagerExecutive Editor: Bill OwensCorrespondent: Katie CouricSenior Producer: Michael RadutzkyProducers: Lori Beecher, Tanya SimonCo‑Producers: Jenny Dubin, Andrew MetzOUTSTANDING ARTS &amp; CULTURE PROGRAMMINGAnvil! The Story of Anvil (VH1)Executive Producer/Director: Sacha GervasiProducer: Rebecca YeldhamExecutive Producers: Brad Abramson, Rick Krim, Christopher Soos, Shelly TatroSupervising Producer: Warren CohenOUTSTANDING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMMINGPOV (PBS)The English SurgeonDirector/Producer: Geoffrey SmithCo‑Producer: Rachel WexlerExecutive Producers: Simon Kilmurry, , Sally Jo Fifer, Nick Fraser, Greg SandersonOUTSTANDING NATURE PROGRAMMINGThe Last Beekeeper (Planet Green)Director: Jeremy SimmonsProducers: Fenton Bailey, Randy BarbatoBEST STORY IN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED NEWSCASTCBS Evening News with Katie Couric (CBS)The Battle of WanatAnchor and Managing Editor: Katie CouricNational Security Correspondent: David MartinExecutive Producer: Rick KaplanSenior Producer: Ward SloaneProducer: Mary WalshBEST REPORT IN A NEWS MAGAZINE60 Minutes (CBS)The Winter of Our Hardship and The Long RecessionExecutive Producer: Jeff FagerExecutive Editor: Bill OwensCorrespondent: Scott PelleyProducers: Solly Granatstein, Nicole YoungCo-Producers: Tom Honeysett, Matthew RichmanBEST DOCUMENTARYWar Dance (Sundance Channel)Directors: Sean Fine, Andrea Nix FineExecutive Producer: Susan MacLauryProducer: Albie HechtCo‑Producers: Kari Kim, Josie SwantekNEW APPROACHES TO NEWS &amp; DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMMING: CURRENT NEWS COVERAGEBehind the Veil (Globeandmail.com)Reporter: Jessica LeederPhotojournalist: Paula LernerMultimedia Producer: Jayson TaylorInteractive Designer: Chris ManzaNEW APPROACHES TO NEWS &amp; DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMMING: DOCUMENTARIESOne in 8 Million (NYTimes.com)Executive Producers: Juliet Gorman, Jodi Rudoren, Andrew De VigalSeries Producers: Sarah Kramer, Alexis Mainland, Meagan Looram, Todd HeislerInteractive Producer: Tom JacksonContributing Producers: Joshua Brustein, Jeffery DelViscio, Nancy Donaldson, Catrin Einhorn, Rogene Fisher, J. David Goodman, Lisa Iaboni, Miki Meek, Conrad Mulcahy, Emily S. Rueb, Tanzina Vega, Emily WeinsteinNEW APPROACHES TO NEWS &amp; DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMMING: ARTS, LIFESTYLE &amp; CULTUREThe Iconic Photo Series (TIME.com)Producer/Editor: Craig DuffPhotographer: Anthony SuauPhoto Editor: Mark RykoffOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: WRITINGNBC News Special (NBC)Inside the Obama White HouseWriters: Doug Adams, Marisa Buchanan, Robert Buchanan, Matt Carluccio, Katherine Chan, Bradley Davis, Subrata De, Joe Delmonico, Andrew Franklin, Annette Freeman, David Gelles, Meade Jorgensen, Mark Lukasiewicz, Amna Nawaz, Benita Noel, Meaghan Rady, Rayner Ramirez, Mary Ann Rotondi, Tim Uehlinger, Brian WilliamsOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: RESEARCHReel Impact Series (Planet Green)Split EstateResearchers: Debra Anderson, Mitchell Marti, Matt VestOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: CINEMATOGRAPHY - NATUREWild Pacific (Discovery Channel)SurvivorsCinematographers: Rod Clarke, Wade Fairley, Richard WollocombeOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: CINEMATOGRAPHY - NEWS COVERAGE / DOCUMENTARIESWar Dance (Sundance Channel)Director of Photography: Sean FineOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: EDITINGNational Geographic's Most Incredible Photos (National Geographic Channel)         Afghan WarriorEditor: Jeremy SieferOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: EDITING&ndash;QUICK TURNAROUNDNBC News Special (NBC)Inside the Obama White HouseEditors: Rob Allen, Chad Bergacs, Deb Brown, Bruce Burger, Saverio Camporeale, Sam Casalino, Justin Cece, Linda Diehl, David Emanuele, Victor Fabilli, Anthony Innarelli, Paul Nichols, Richard Platt, William Ray, Bob Spencer, Alvaro Trenchi, Irene Trullinger, David VargaOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: GRAPHIC DESIGN &amp; ART DIRECTIONStealing Lincoln's Body (History Channel)Graphic Designer: Ray DowningOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: MUSIC &amp; SOUNDWWII in HD (History Channel)Point of No ReturnSound Design and Mix: Joel RaabeAdditional Sound Design: Allison Casey, Brian Scibinico, Frank TurbeOUTSTANDING INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN A CRAFT: LIGHTING DIRECTION &amp; SCENIC DESIGNCIA Confidential: Pakistan Undercover (National Geographic Channel)                                              Lighting Directors: Boujemaa Rassourance, Peter Schnall, Doug ShultzOUTSTANDING PROMOTIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT: INSTITUTIONAL60 Minutes (CBS)60 Minutes in 60 SecondsSenior Vice President and Creative Director: Dave McCoyDirector, Advertising &amp; Marketing: Julie HaalandDirector of Operations: Nicole FiftalProducer/Editor: Rich O'ConnellProducers: Joanne Stern, Charles HowlandSound Designers: Eric Casimiro, Daniel MaierEditor: Wes CarltonGraphic Designer: Adam SaulOUTSTANDING PROMOTIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT: EPISODICDiane Sawyer 20/20 Special (ABC)A Hidden America: Children of the MountainsExecutive Producer: Alan IvesSenior Producer: Rene Hallal-GonenProducer: Kevin SmallsArt Director: Rodrigo RedondoSound Designer/Editor: Leslie Mona-MathusOUTSTANDING REGIONAL NEWS STORY &ndash; SPOT NEWSKPIX Eyewitness News (KPIX‑TV, San Francisco)Oakland RiotReporters: Joe Vazquez, Linda YeeProducer: Brian NealPhotographers: Patrick Sedillo, Robert Moonan, Chris Mistrot, Don FordAssignment Editor: Leona WongOUTSTANDING REGIONAL NEWS STORY &ndash; INVESTIGATIVE REPORTINGKHOU News at 10 p.m. (KHOU‑TV, Houston)Soldiers at Risk: The Iraq Water InvestigationInvestigative Reporter: Jeremy RogalskiExecutive Producer for Investigations: David RaziqInvestigative Photojournalist: Keith TomsheKSTP 5 Eyewitness News (KSTP‑TV, Minneapolis)Prisoners Ride the BusInvestigative Reporter: Bob McNaneyProducer: Mike MaybayAssistant News Director: Sam ZeffBREAKDOWN BY PROGRAMCBS (7)60 Minutes (4)60 Minutes in 60 Seconds ...&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 1Saving Flight 1549 &hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..........................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.... 1War in Pakistan &hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;......................&hellip;.......... 1The Winter of Our Hardship and the Long Recession &hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;....&hellip;........... 1CBS Evening News With Katie Couric (3)The Battle of Wanat &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;................ 1Financial Family Tree &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............. 1Rape in America &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;................ 1NBC (6)NBC News Special (2)Inside the Obama White House &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..........&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 2NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (2)Miracle on the Hudson &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;..........&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;............... 1Unlikely Refugees &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;................&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;............. 1Dateline NBC (1)Miracle on the Hudson &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;..........&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............. 1Today (1)Fighting Grossmans &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............&hellip;...............&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;............ 1PBS (5)FRONTLINE (2)A Death in Tehran &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.....................................................................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.. 1The Warning &hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.............................................................................&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip; 1Bill Moyers Journal (1)The Good Soldier &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;....&hellip; 1FRONTLINE/World (1)Ghana: Digital Dumping Ground &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;...........................................&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 1P.O.V. (1)The English Surgeon .&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;...............................................&hellip;&hellip;1ABC (2)ABC News Special Events (1)Inauguration 2009: Barack Obama &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip; 1Diane Sawyer 20/20 Special (1)A Hidden America: Children of the Mountains &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;. 1HDNet (2)HDNet World Report (1)South Africa&rsquo;s Shame: Modern-Day Slavery and the World Cup &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 1Dan Rather Reports (1)Iran&rsquo;s Manhattan Project &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip; 1History Channel (2)Stealing Lincoln&rsquo;s Body (1)WWII in HD (1)Point of No Return &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 1National Geographic Channel (2)CIA Confidential: Pakistan Undercover(1)National Geographic&rsquo;s Most Incredible Photos (1)Afghan Warrior &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;...&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;....&hellip; 1Planet Green (2)The Last Beekeeper (1)Reel Impact Series (1)Split Estate &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.. 1Sundance Channel (2)War Dance (2)CNBC (1)Inside the Mind of Google (1)Discovery Channel (1)Wild Pacific (1)Survivors &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;............................................. 1Globeandmail.com (1)Behind the Veil (1)HBO (1)HBO Documentary Films (1)Which Way Home &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;............................ 1NYTimes.com (1)One in 8 Million (1)TIME.com (1)The Iconic Photo Series (1)VH1 (1)Anvil! The Story of Anvil (1)REGIONAL REPORTINGKHOU-TV (Houston, TX) (1)KHOU News at 10pm (1)Soldiers at Risk: The Iraq Water Investigation &hellip;&hellip;.&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;... 1KPIX-TV (San Francisco, CA) (1)KPIX Eyewitness News (1)Oakland Riot &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 1KSTP-TV (Minneapolis, MN) (1)KSTP 5 Eyewitness News (1)Prisoners Ride the Bus &hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;.... 1]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Program for the News &amp; Documentary Emmys, to Be Presented Tonight</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/09/news_and_documentary_emmys_to.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.43943</id>
   
   <published>2010-09-26T23:14:10Z</published>
   <updated>2010-09-27T03:22:53Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[The 31st Annual News &amp; Documentary Emmy Awards will be presented Monday night by the National Academy of Television Arts &amp; Sciences (NATAS) at Frederick P. Rose Hall, Home of Jazz at Lincoln Center, located in the Time Warner Center in New York City.Awards will be handed out in 41 categories, including Breaking News, Investigative Reporting, Outstanding Interview and Best Documentary, among others.&ldquo;From the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the struggling American economy, to the inauguration of Barack Obama, 2009 was a significant year for major news stories,&rdquo; said&nbsp;News &amp; Documentary Emmy Awards Chairman&nbsp;Bill Small. &ldquo;The journalists and documentary filmmakers nominated this year have educated viewers in understanding some of the most compelling issues of our time, and we salute them for their efforts.&rdquo;Click here to see complete program for the event.&nbsp;]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="10663" label="Awards" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="5536" label="documentary" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="3200" label="Emmy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="439" label="News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[The 31st Annual News &amp; Documentary Emmy Awards will be presented Monday night by the National Academy of Television Arts &amp; Sciences (NATAS) at Frederick P. Rose Hall, Home of Jazz at Lincoln Center, located in the Time Warner Center in New York City.Awards will be handed out in 41 categories, including Breaking News, Investigative Reporting, Outstanding Interview and Best Documentary, among others.&ldquo;From the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the struggling American economy, to the inauguration of Barack Obama, 2009 was a significant year for major news stories,&rdquo; said&nbsp;News &amp; Documentary Emmy Awards Chairman&nbsp;Bill Small. &ldquo;The journalists and documentary filmmakers nominated this year have educated viewers in understanding some of the most compelling issues of our time, and we salute them for their efforts.&rdquo;Click here to see complete program for the event.&nbsp;]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Bill Abbott, President and CEO of the Hallmark Channels, Who Came Up on the Ad Side of the Business, On the Importance of Brand Strategy</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/05/bill_abbott_president_and_ceo.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41675</id>
   
   <published>2010-05-05T20:21:16Z</published>
   <updated>2010-05-05T21:14:01Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[Clearly, over the past two decades, one of the smartest, yet unsung,&nbsp;ad sales executives in the TV business has been Bill Abbott, first at Fox Family and Fox Kids, and then at Hallmark. One of the hallmarks of his career, if you'll excuse the pun, has been his ability to mesh the brands he's been selling with the brands of his client in win-win situations that not not only make sense for those on both sides of the negotiating table, but for&nbsp;viewers and consumers as well.With Abbott's ascension to the top spot at Hallmark, as its President and CEO, TVWeek's Chuck Ross caught up with&nbsp;him to talk about brand stategy, particularly that of the Hallmark Channel, and its importance on the eve of the Upfront marketplace. An edited transcript follows.TVWEEK: Having covered the advertising and media and TV businesses for more than three decades, I&rsquo;ve always been struck that there are not more heads of networks who have come up on the ad sales side of the business. I was fairly close to Larry Divney, who came up from ad sales and eventually ran Comedy Central. Has the fact it doesn&rsquo;t happen more often struck you as well?BILL ABBOTT: You&rsquo;re right. It&rsquo;s odd to me why it doesn&rsquo;t happen more often. Ad sales provides such a great platform on how to learn the business. There&rsquo;s no business that ad sales really doesn&rsquo;t touch.TVWEEK: Absolutely.ABBOTT: You&rsquo;re intimately involved in the finances and economics. You&rsquo;re intimately involved in the ratings and the programming decisions that get made, and why certain things are scheduled and why they work. And certainly from a marketing point of view, there&rsquo;s no one better qualified to think about marketing than people who are out selling the product.So it&rsquo;s odd to me that more ad sales people aren&rsquo;t tapped to&nbsp;run networks.&nbsp;But then you look at history, and while there aren&rsquo;t that many&nbsp;out of ad sales, certainly some of the ones that have been the most successful in the business were out of ad sales. From Mark Lazarus, who used to be at Turner, to David Levy, who&rsquo;s there now, to Charlie Collier, who runs AMC, all remarkably successful in their own right.TVWEEK: Absolutely.ABBOTT: But that makes it all the more interesting why ad sales isn&rsquo;t a bigger breeding ground. I could not ask for a better area to have been trained within and have grown up within than ad sales and research, which is the better part of my background. The learning that you get from those areas is really critical to how you run the business.TVWEEK: Is running a network something in the back of your mind you&rsquo;d hope your career path would lead to at some point?ABBOTT: I think so. I think that I&rsquo;ve always felt like a research background certainly, along with the strategy and financial understanding of the business that ad sales provides, puts you in a position where you hope to gain more responsibility and take it to a new level. I&rsquo;ve been fortunate in that I&rsquo;ve been in management for a long part of my career, for almost 20 years.TVWEEK: How long exactly have you been at Hallmark now?ABBOTT: Just over 10 years, at this point, at Hallmark. I was at what was a combination of Family Channel, Fox Family and ABC Family over a 12-year period before being at Hallmark.TVWEEK: As you&rsquo;ve looked at how Hallmark has evolved, how did you decide where you wanted to take it and how are you going about taking it where you want it to go?ABBOTT: I think if you look at the channel we&rsquo;ve had remarkable success: a very highly-rated property that&rsquo;s grown distribution to be fully distributed over the years. We had a lot of product that was highly-rated, but wasn&rsquo;t necessarily tied as much to the brand as we would like.So, when I took over in May, we developed a new mission statement and vision around how we can celebrate life&rsquo;s special moments everyday, which we feel is very much is in line with what the essence of Hallmark really is.You look at the Hallmark television business and there&rsquo;s certainly their heritage and legacy and award-winning Hallmark Hall of Fame&mdash;the quality and the high ratings there, and that&rsquo;s a very important part of who we are that will ultimately be our Hallmark Movie Channel. It&rsquo;s in 35 million homes, on its way to 40 million pretty quickly here. It&rsquo;s becoming a strong service in its own right.And then we look at the Hallmark Channel, and we thought about what direction that might go. We came to the conclusion that, in terms of helping celebrate life&rsquo;s special moments everyday, we could really tap into that part of the Hallmark brand that up until now has not been reflected on TV.That would be holidays and events and cooking and decorating and different things people do everyday to celebrate life and that lifestyle category area. And so the direction we have gone in is really beginning to develop the channel towards more of that lifestyle celebration mood.TVWEEK: Can you tell me how that evolution led you to get Martha Stewart involved? I&rsquo;m assuming that as you were sitting there brainstorming about this lifestyle direction you wanted to move the channel towards that getting somehow involved with Stewart was high on your wish list.ABBOTT: We were fortunate that the stars were really aligned. If you sat for two weeks, you couldn&rsquo;t come up with a better name than Martha Stewart in terms of helping celebrate life&rsquo;s special moments everyday. She is the ultimate banner ad for that type of product.Fortunately, they also had been thinking about a little bit of a different business model in that syndication [which is the TV business Stewart was in] doesn&rsquo;t provide that consistent day and date opportunity that cable does. And as we developed our definition of who we wanted to be and we started having conversations with them, we started to make it a bigger proposition. And they started to see a bigger opportunity with Omnimedia and across the different talent that Martha has at Omnimedia and had really vested so well.So you begin to see that it&rsquo;s more than just &lsquo;The Martha Stewart Show&rsquo; and that you have the opportunity to develop a fully integrated lifestyle block on multiple platforms. And that lifestyle block speaks to the strengths of both Hallmark and Martha Stewart. That&rsquo;s really where the conversation went, actually very, very quickly once we got in the same room and we started to brainstorm about Martha.It wasn&rsquo;t &lsquo;Let&rsquo;s just take &lsquo;The Martha Stewart Show&rsquo; and move it from syndication to cable&rsquo; but, &lsquo;How can we make this a bigger, better partnership.&rsquo; And I give [Omnimedia Chairman] Charles Koppleman and Martha full credit for recognizing the opportunity and the value of what a 24/7 cable platform can do to help them develop their properties and products and how they can help us develop our channel.TVWEEK: Makes a lot of sense. As you look across the landscape, is something you pay attention to a lot the competition? Is it important to be real differentiated? Do you see Scripps as competition? Maybe the new Oprah channel with Discovery?ABBOTT: Certainly, Food Network and HGTV are the leaders in this category. They&rsquo;ve done a great job of branding themselves and really being consistent. That would be competition.Some of what Discovery has done would be competition. The Oprah channel is clearly undefined at this point, so it&rsquo;s really hard to view that as surely as competition.We can compete from day one with a personality and profile like Martha Stewart. We don&rsquo;t have to take a backseat to anyone in this lifestyle category. We feel that we will be competitive, if not better, quite frankly, right out of the gate than those channels who don&rsquo;t have a profile like Martha on their air. We still feel there&rsquo;s a lot of room in this area to navigate, and with our brand and our heritage and our ability to really represent so much of how people connect and people live day-to-day, we think we have a great opportunity to be highly, highly successful here.TVWEEK: Can you talk a little bit about how you&rsquo;d like to see advertising integrated in your vision?ABBOTT: There&rsquo;s no question as technology changes and changes the way viewers watch TV, we&rsquo;re all going to have to be a lot more responsive to the needs of advertisers. And I think you&rsquo;re seeing that on an evolutionary basis.I would say the death of the :30 has long since been overblown. But, the reality is we do need to be more responsive, we do need to look for unique ways in which we can embed an advertiser&rsquo;s message seamlessly into our product and into the development process. It&rsquo;ll make TV, I think, more valuable and certainly more appreciated. And it&rsquo;s creative, innovative ideas like that that we struggle with and work toward developing everyday.The lifestyle block is one that is particularly conducive to that type of activity. It&rsquo;s easier, I think, in lifestyle to place products seamlessly into the content. But certainly, we need to be true to our brand and we need to be carefully that we don&rsquo;t over do it and that we be sensitive to the value that we&rsquo;re creating for others when we do do it.TVWEEK: Can you talk a little bit about social media? That&rsquo;s obviously become a buzzword in the last year. Where you see Hallmark fitting with that phenomenon?ABBOTT: It&rsquo;s certainly real in terms of it being a phenomenon, but the real question is: What&rsquo;s the business model? We haven&rsquo;t certainly figured it out here, and that&rsquo;s one we&rsquo;re staying attuned to.Martha and Omnimedia have done a great job about being on the forefront of technology and having different applications around decorating and cooking and things that are really very, very relevant. As we develop our lifestyle area, we&rsquo;ll certainly play more in that space and whole digital arena as a rule. But, right now, it&rsquo;s not necessarily something we can point to as being a leader in.TVWEEK: Do you see the digital platforms as being more promotionally oriented and pointing viewers to the on-air products that you offer, or will they have a life of their own?ABBOTT: I see that as being a big change for us. That&rsquo;s one of the beauties as we move more towards this different side of the brand and are less focused and reliant on off-network acquisitions.When you&rsquo;re 100% reliant on scripted series that you acquire from a distributor, you have very little opportunity to play in the digital space. Here, we&rsquo;re going to have reasons to drive people to the Internet more than just information around what&rsquo;s on our air.We will have different opportunities to develop content that will speak to viewers&rsquo; interests in whatever we have on our network. And we&rsquo;ll make that a legitimate, vibrant business for us moving forward. It&rsquo;s something that we&rsquo;re thinking about everyday. It&rsquo;s something that we are very, very focused on.TVWEEK: As an independent channel, does it make sense in any way to do some sort of alliance?ABBOTT: We&rsquo;re open to forming relationships and partnerships, and you look at our partnership with Omnimedia, I would certainly put that in the alliance category, whether formal or informal.But, I think that the real issue there is that as our competitors get bigger and bigger and more complicated, ultimately some of what they have bought comes into question and they have to use their own leverage to leverage their own weaker sisters. You look at how big NBC is, and how big that whole organization will be with Comcast. There will be networks that they&rsquo;ll have to leverage to get favors in other cases. So there isn&rsquo;t an awful lot of room.You know, size cuts both ways. Too big, and you&rsquo;re in a position to have to protect your weaker properties. In a down market, being too big can be problematic, in that you&rsquo;ve got a lot of money to place on the agency side of the perspective, or you&rsquo;ve got a lot of different masters to satisfy.I&rsquo;m not so sure that that is necessarily, within the big companies, the way we want to go. With smaller organizations, certainly if we could develop some alliance that pullstogether some of those that aren&rsquo;t under big corporate umbrellas, that might be something smart to do. Overall, the big conglomerates probably are looking for alliances because they&rsquo;ve got an awful lot to leverage themselves. We wouldn&rsquo;t want to be part of anything where we would be the leveragee.TVWEEK: As we move closer toward the upfront, are there particular categories that you hope you&rsquo;ll do better in than you have in the past because of this new strategy?ABBOTT: We have already had an extremely high interest level from a number of categories, everything from automotives to financials to travel categories, that we have had a very difficult time playing in before.And there are many reasons for that. One is certainly the nature of the product is more geared toward potentially having different elements that could be incorporated within our actual content. And that our viewership will migrate much more towards a top 20 market, upper income level than we have been historically. So we are seeing a lot of activity from those clients that happen to target a more upscale adult 25-54 demographic than we have historically delivered. We are optimistic that we are going to have a robust upfront.TVWEEK: How important do you think measurement is going forward? How granular do we need to be?ABBOTT: It&rsquo;s critical. Speaking candidly, it&rsquo;s very frustrating to see so much fluctuation in the numbers and so much instability in the sample sizes where it&rsquo;s at.The question is what the right metric is. I don&rsquo;t think it&rsquo;s second-by-second or anything that extreme. But, I do think there&rsquo;s got to be a better way given where technology is. And frankly to compete with the Internet, I think it&rsquo;s very important that television develop some type of system that is more scientific and is more reliable, quite frankly, that what we have.This is very, very important. We&rsquo;re lucky we have people who are as brilliant as Reno [Scanzoni at Group M and TVWeek&rsquo;s 2010 Media Buyer of the Year] in the process who are on it. I&rsquo;m sure everyday, when he sees the numbers, it drives him as crazy as it does the rest us in the business. To be competitive moving forward as a medium, television needs to step up and figure out ways to gain a better understanding of what actually is going on out there.TVWEEK: Anything you want to add?ABBOTT: I think at the end of the day, we are in a great position with not only our lifestyle content but with our original movies. We&rsquo;re producing 24 original movies in 2010 with two of those on our movie channel. It&rsquo;s a big commitment to the Hallmark Movie Channel, which became measured in the second quarter and that is a growing and vibrant and viable property. Our holiday effort will continue here moving forward. We had our highest rated holiday in our history recently, and our Countdown to Christmas and Countdown to Holidays have been remarkably successful. We have a lot going on here other than just that lifestyle, Martha Stewart area. That&rsquo;s all very, very exciting and we&rsquo;re all optimistic about our future. #]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Chuck Ross</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Advertising" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Business" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Syndication" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="16893" label="Abbott" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="2090" label="Ad Sales" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="410" label="advertising" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="16894" label="Branding" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="1049" label="Hallmark" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="16895" label="integration" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="9481" label="Martha Stewart" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="16896" label="re-branding" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[Clearly, over the past two decades, one of the smartest, yet unsung,&nbsp;ad sales executives in the TV business has been Bill Abbott, first at Fox Family and Fox Kids, and then at Hallmark. One of the hallmarks of his career, if you'll excuse the pun, has been his ability to mesh the brands he's been selling with the brands of his client in win-win situations that not not only make sense for those on both sides of the negotiating table, but for&nbsp;viewers and consumers as well.With Abbott's ascension to the top spot at Hallmark, as its President and CEO, TVWeek's Chuck Ross caught up with&nbsp;him to talk about brand stategy, particularly that of the Hallmark Channel, and its importance on the eve of the Upfront marketplace. An edited transcript follows.TVWEEK: Having covered the advertising and media and TV businesses for more than three decades, I&rsquo;ve always been struck that there are not more heads of networks who have come up on the ad sales side of the business. I was fairly close to Larry Divney, who came up from ad sales and eventually ran Comedy Central. Has the fact it doesn&rsquo;t happen more often struck you as well?BILL ABBOTT: You&rsquo;re right. It&rsquo;s odd to me why it doesn&rsquo;t happen more often. Ad sales provides such a great platform on how to learn the business. There&rsquo;s no business that ad sales really doesn&rsquo;t touch.TVWEEK: Absolutely.ABBOTT: You&rsquo;re intimately involved in the finances and economics. You&rsquo;re intimately involved in the ratings and the programming decisions that get made, and why certain things are scheduled and why they work. And certainly from a marketing point of view, there&rsquo;s no one better qualified to think about marketing than people who are out selling the product.So it&rsquo;s odd to me that more ad sales people aren&rsquo;t tapped to&nbsp;run networks.&nbsp;But then you look at history, and while there aren&rsquo;t that many&nbsp;out of ad sales, certainly some of the ones that have been the most successful in the business were out of ad sales. From Mark Lazarus, who used to be at Turner, to David Levy, who&rsquo;s there now, to Charlie Collier, who runs AMC, all remarkably successful in their own right.TVWEEK: Absolutely.ABBOTT: But that makes it all the more interesting why ad sales isn&rsquo;t a bigger breeding ground. I could not ask for a better area to have been trained within and have grown up within than ad sales and research, which is the better part of my background. The learning that you get from those areas is really critical to how you run the business.TVWEEK: Is running a network something in the back of your mind you&rsquo;d hope your career path would lead to at some point?ABBOTT: I think so. I think that I&rsquo;ve always felt like a research background certainly, along with the strategy and financial understanding of the business that ad sales provides, puts you in a position where you hope to gain more responsibility and take it to a new level. I&rsquo;ve been fortunate in that I&rsquo;ve been in management for a long part of my career, for almost 20 years.TVWEEK: How long exactly have you been at Hallmark now?ABBOTT: Just over 10 years, at this point, at Hallmark. I was at what was a combination of Family Channel, Fox Family and ABC Family over a 12-year period before being at Hallmark.TVWEEK: As you&rsquo;ve looked at how Hallmark has evolved, how did you decide where you wanted to take it and how are you going about taking it where you want it to go?ABBOTT: I think if you look at the channel we&rsquo;ve had remarkable success: a very highly-rated property that&rsquo;s grown distribution to be fully distributed over the years. We had a lot of product that was highly-rated, but wasn&rsquo;t necessarily tied as much to the brand as we would like.So, when I took over in May, we developed a new mission statement and vision around how we can celebrate life&rsquo;s special moments everyday, which we feel is very much is in line with what the essence of Hallmark really is.You look at the Hallmark television business and there&rsquo;s certainly their heritage and legacy and award-winning Hallmark Hall of Fame&mdash;the quality and the high ratings there, and that&rsquo;s a very important part of who we are that will ultimately be our Hallmark Movie Channel. It&rsquo;s in 35 million homes, on its way to 40 million pretty quickly here. It&rsquo;s becoming a strong service in its own right.And then we look at the Hallmark Channel, and we thought about what direction that might go. We came to the conclusion that, in terms of helping celebrate life&rsquo;s special moments everyday, we could really tap into that part of the Hallmark brand that up until now has not been reflected on TV.That would be holidays and events and cooking and decorating and different things people do everyday to celebrate life and that lifestyle category area. And so the direction we have gone in is really beginning to develop the channel towards more of that lifestyle celebration mood.TVWEEK: Can you tell me how that evolution led you to get Martha Stewart involved? I&rsquo;m assuming that as you were sitting there brainstorming about this lifestyle direction you wanted to move the channel towards that getting somehow involved with Stewart was high on your wish list.ABBOTT: We were fortunate that the stars were really aligned. If you sat for two weeks, you couldn&rsquo;t come up with a better name than Martha Stewart in terms of helping celebrate life&rsquo;s special moments everyday. She is the ultimate banner ad for that type of product.Fortunately, they also had been thinking about a little bit of a different business model in that syndication [which is the TV business Stewart was in] doesn&rsquo;t provide that consistent day and date opportunity that cable does. And as we developed our definition of who we wanted to be and we started having conversations with them, we started to make it a bigger proposition. And they started to see a bigger opportunity with Omnimedia and across the different talent that Martha has at Omnimedia and had really vested so well.So you begin to see that it&rsquo;s more than just &lsquo;The Martha Stewart Show&rsquo; and that you have the opportunity to develop a fully integrated lifestyle block on multiple platforms. And that lifestyle block speaks to the strengths of both Hallmark and Martha Stewart. That&rsquo;s really where the conversation went, actually very, very quickly once we got in the same room and we started to brainstorm about Martha.It wasn&rsquo;t &lsquo;Let&rsquo;s just take &lsquo;The Martha Stewart Show&rsquo; and move it from syndication to cable&rsquo; but, &lsquo;How can we make this a bigger, better partnership.&rsquo; And I give [Omnimedia Chairman] Charles Koppleman and Martha full credit for recognizing the opportunity and the value of what a 24/7 cable platform can do to help them develop their properties and products and how they can help us develop our channel.TVWEEK: Makes a lot of sense. As you look across the landscape, is something you pay attention to a lot the competition? Is it important to be real differentiated? Do you see Scripps as competition? Maybe the new Oprah channel with Discovery?ABBOTT: Certainly, Food Network and HGTV are the leaders in this category. They&rsquo;ve done a great job of branding themselves and really being consistent. That would be competition.Some of what Discovery has done would be competition. The Oprah channel is clearly undefined at this point, so it&rsquo;s really hard to view that as surely as competition.We can compete from day one with a personality and profile like Martha Stewart. We don&rsquo;t have to take a backseat to anyone in this lifestyle category. We feel that we will be competitive, if not better, quite frankly, right out of the gate than those channels who don&rsquo;t have a profile like Martha on their air. We still feel there&rsquo;s a lot of room in this area to navigate, and with our brand and our heritage and our ability to really represent so much of how people connect and people live day-to-day, we think we have a great opportunity to be highly, highly successful here.TVWEEK: Can you talk a little bit about how you&rsquo;d like to see advertising integrated in your vision?ABBOTT: There&rsquo;s no question as technology changes and changes the way viewers watch TV, we&rsquo;re all going to have to be a lot more responsive to the needs of advertisers. And I think you&rsquo;re seeing that on an evolutionary basis.I would say the death of the :30 has long since been overblown. But, the reality is we do need to be more responsive, we do need to look for unique ways in which we can embed an advertiser&rsquo;s message seamlessly into our product and into the development process. It&rsquo;ll make TV, I think, more valuable and certainly more appreciated. And it&rsquo;s creative, innovative ideas like that that we struggle with and work toward developing everyday.The lifestyle block is one that is particularly conducive to that type of activity. It&rsquo;s easier, I think, in lifestyle to place products seamlessly into the content. But certainly, we need to be true to our brand and we need to be carefully that we don&rsquo;t over do it and that we be sensitive to the value that we&rsquo;re creating for others when we do do it.TVWEEK: Can you talk a little bit about social media? That&rsquo;s obviously become a buzzword in the last year. Where you see Hallmark fitting with that phenomenon?ABBOTT: It&rsquo;s certainly real in terms of it being a phenomenon, but the real question is: What&rsquo;s the business model? We haven&rsquo;t certainly figured it out here, and that&rsquo;s one we&rsquo;re staying attuned to.Martha and Omnimedia have done a great job about being on the forefront of technology and having different applications around decorating and cooking and things that are really very, very relevant. As we develop our lifestyle area, we&rsquo;ll certainly play more in that space and whole digital arena as a rule. But, right now, it&rsquo;s not necessarily something we can point to as being a leader in.TVWEEK: Do you see the digital platforms as being more promotionally oriented and pointing viewers to the on-air products that you offer, or will they have a life of their own?ABBOTT: I see that as being a big change for us. That&rsquo;s one of the beauties as we move more towards this different side of the brand and are less focused and reliant on off-network acquisitions.When you&rsquo;re 100% reliant on scripted series that you acquire from a distributor, you have very little opportunity to play in the digital space. Here, we&rsquo;re going to have reasons to drive people to the Internet more than just information around what&rsquo;s on our air.We will have different opportunities to develop content that will speak to viewers&rsquo; interests in whatever we have on our network. And we&rsquo;ll make that a legitimate, vibrant business for us moving forward. It&rsquo;s something that we&rsquo;re thinking about everyday. It&rsquo;s something that we are very, very focused on.TVWEEK: As an independent channel, does it make sense in any way to do some sort of alliance?ABBOTT: We&rsquo;re open to forming relationships and partnerships, and you look at our partnership with Omnimedia, I would certainly put that in the alliance category, whether formal or informal.But, I think that the real issue there is that as our competitors get bigger and bigger and more complicated, ultimately some of what they have bought comes into question and they have to use their own leverage to leverage their own weaker sisters. You look at how big NBC is, and how big that whole organization will be with Comcast. There will be networks that they&rsquo;ll have to leverage to get favors in other cases. So there isn&rsquo;t an awful lot of room.You know, size cuts both ways. Too big, and you&rsquo;re in a position to have to protect your weaker properties. In a down market, being too big can be problematic, in that you&rsquo;ve got a lot of money to place on the agency side of the perspective, or you&rsquo;ve got a lot of different masters to satisfy.I&rsquo;m not so sure that that is necessarily, within the big companies, the way we want to go. With smaller organizations, certainly if we could develop some alliance that pullstogether some of those that aren&rsquo;t under big corporate umbrellas, that might be something smart to do. Overall, the big conglomerates probably are looking for alliances because they&rsquo;ve got an awful lot to leverage themselves. We wouldn&rsquo;t want to be part of anything where we would be the leveragee.TVWEEK: As we move closer toward the upfront, are there particular categories that you hope you&rsquo;ll do better in than you have in the past because of this new strategy?ABBOTT: We have already had an extremely high interest level from a number of categories, everything from automotives to financials to travel categories, that we have had a very difficult time playing in before.And there are many reasons for that. One is certainly the nature of the product is more geared toward potentially having different elements that could be incorporated within our actual content. And that our viewership will migrate much more towards a top 20 market, upper income level than we have been historically. So we are seeing a lot of activity from those clients that happen to target a more upscale adult 25-54 demographic than we have historically delivered. We are optimistic that we are going to have a robust upfront.TVWEEK: How important do you think measurement is going forward? How granular do we need to be?ABBOTT: It&rsquo;s critical. Speaking candidly, it&rsquo;s very frustrating to see so much fluctuation in the numbers and so much instability in the sample sizes where it&rsquo;s at.The question is what the right metric is. I don&rsquo;t think it&rsquo;s second-by-second or anything that extreme. But, I do think there&rsquo;s got to be a better way given where technology is. And frankly to compete with the Internet, I think it&rsquo;s very important that television develop some type of system that is more scientific and is more reliable, quite frankly, that what we have.This is very, very important. We&rsquo;re lucky we have people who are as brilliant as Reno [Scanzoni at Group M and TVWeek&rsquo;s 2010 Media Buyer of the Year] in the process who are on it. I&rsquo;m sure everyday, when he sees the numbers, it drives him as crazy as it does the rest us in the business. To be competitive moving forward as a medium, television needs to step up and figure out ways to gain a better understanding of what actually is going on out there.TVWEEK: Anything you want to add?ABBOTT: I think at the end of the day, we are in a great position with not only our lifestyle content but with our original movies. We&rsquo;re producing 24 original movies in 2010 with two of those on our movie channel. It&rsquo;s a big commitment to the Hallmark Movie Channel, which became measured in the second quarter and that is a growing and vibrant and viable property. Our holiday effort will continue here moving forward. We had our highest rated holiday in our history recently, and our Countdown to Christmas and Countdown to Holidays have been remarkably successful. We have a lot going on here other than just that lifestyle, Martha Stewart area. That&rsquo;s all very, very exciting and we&rsquo;re all optimistic about our future. #]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Sports Journalism: Time for a Change-Up</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/sports_journalism_time_for_a_c.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41558</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-28T21:58:57Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-28T22:02:16Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Jon LafayetteHoly cow, these are tough time for traditional sportscasters. But new technology and social media may be creating opportunities for people who want a career in sports journalism.Despite record ratings for big events like the Super Bowl, the recession has hit broadcast outlets like a blitzing linebacker, and on-air talent are feeling the pain in their paychecks. Also taking a toll on broadcast jobs is the growth of cable, where outlets led by ESPN are acquiring rights to more and more games and aggressively pushing into local markets.Jobs are being created on cable, but they&rsquo;re mostly for less experienced sportscasters, or for people who can create content for the Web.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s an ever-changing world, an ever-changing industry, an ever-changing landscape,&rdquo; said Dave Goren, executive director of the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association and Hall of Fame.While new media is creating opportunities for those smart enough to change with it, Goren said, &ldquo;I think there&rsquo;s probably more of a contraction to come before there&rsquo;s an expansion.&rdquo;Things are tough for sports writers in the troubled newspaper industry as well.&ldquo;Anecdotally, all you have to do is be able to read and you can tell,&rdquo; Goren said. &ldquo;Every day there&rsquo;s another paper either dropping sports or cutting a bunch of sports people.&rdquo;But because most employers are looking to do things more cheaply to make up for lost revenue, &ldquo;in some ways that might be good for younger kids coming into the business,&rdquo; Goren said.Expansion seems to be going on at ESPN, which is adding events and pushing into new media, which is creating a need for more sportscasters.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s certainly creating more opportunities for younger broadcasters, especially on the digital side,&rdquo; said Laurie Orlando, senior VP for talent planning and development at ESPN.She suggested that digital media might be replacing local stations as the training ground for young sportscasters.&ldquo;No longer are we just a broadcaster. If there&rsquo;s any place in our industry that is full-service and multimedia, it&rsquo;s ESPN. We expect that our talent, within reason, are going to contribute to all of those platforms,&rdquo; she said, adding that the expectations are just as high online as on television to deliver credible information and deep knowledge to the ESPN fan base.Orlando said that channels like ESPNU and ESPN Regional Television are two places where sportscasters with just five years in the business can gain big-time experience.&ldquo;As long as they show promise and they&rsquo;re people we see potential in for down the road, it&rsquo;s a great training ground.&rdquo;Regional cable sports network Comcast SportsNet Chicago is also expanding.&ldquo;We&rsquo;re adding people and our business is still in a growth mode,&rdquo; said Jim Corno, president of Comcast SportsNet.Much of the hiring is for network&rsquo;s website.&ldquo;We&rsquo;ve got people who go out and cover the teams from a digital standpoint,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;They&rsquo;re hired for the digital department, but they do have some on-air exposure as well.&rdquo;For example, John Mullin, who covers the Bears for chicago.comcastsportsnet.com, also appears on the network&rsquo;s &ldquo;Chicago Tribune Live&rdquo; show and its &ldquo;Bears Postgame Live.&rdquo;At the same time, the network&rsquo;s veteran sportscasters are becoming switch-hitters.&ldquo;Our on-air people are learning the digital side,&rdquo; Corno said.Online reporting and social media are creating new expectations for sportscasters.&ldquo;The guy can no longer just sit there, call the game and go home. Or if you&rsquo;re an anchor, you can&rsquo;t just go on, &lsquo;here&rsquo;s the news of the day,&rsquo; and go home,&rdquo; he said. People expect you to be visible on all the different platforms. They expect to see you and have access to you through the Web space.&rdquo;Corno said some of his on-air talent have been very aggressive about blogging and social media.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not like we&rsquo;re twisting arms here,&rdquo; he said.The activity is good for both the network and the anchors.&ldquo;You hope that the Comcast SportsNet brand is getting more exposure and more people have access to it,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;As far as the talent goes, all the exposure they get helps them too. It&rsquo;s a win-win.&rdquo;Eventually, Corno said, his on-air and digital sportscasters will have nearly interchangeable skills.&ldquo;I think the on-air personality is always going to be the higher priority. But I think you&rsquo;re going to expect those on-air personalities to participate in our Web and digital components.&rdquo;While cable outlets are expanding, many stations are thinking about cutting back on sportscasts and sportscasters.&ldquo;I would say that it is something that a lot of stations are talking about,&rdquo; said Stacey Woelfel, chairman of the Radio Television Digital News Association and news director of KOMU-TV. The reason is that studies have shown that only 20 percent of the audience cares about sports, and that it&rsquo;s often an expensive area to cover.But Woelfel said there&rsquo;s more talk than action.&ldquo;The problem is none of us wants to give up 20 percent to the other guy. And that 20 percent goes up when the local team goes to the NCAA Tournament or Super Bowl,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s not to say there haven&rsquo;t been cutbacks.&rdquo;Many sports departments are down to one or two people. Travel has also been reduced sharply; instead of sending anchors, reporters, sportscasters, a cameraman and producers to an event, these days a station may send just two people.One survey suggests that recent cutbacks have been more anecdotal than systematic. According to the latest RTDNA/Hofstra University study, about 2,000 people work in TV sports as an anchor, reporter or both, or about 2.7 per station. That number has held steady over the past five years.Some stations are taking a one-man-band approach to sporting events.&ldquo;Now it&rsquo;s shoot your story, cut it, send it back by FTP and then set up your Skype and do a live shot for us,&rdquo; Woelfel said.In fact, that may provide a scouting report for what stations will be looking for in a sportscaster.&ldquo;The local or regional sports journalist of the future is a one-man band, and is somebody who moves easily between sports, and is a person who has an interest in important local and regional sports,&rdquo; Woelfel said.Of course, there are some optimists.&ldquo;Sports is a staple of television. There&rsquo;s an ebb and a flow, but sports is going to stay important, and hiring is going to increase in the future,&rdquo; said Richard Leibner, president of top talent agency N.S. Bienstock. &ldquo;Maybe you won&rsquo;t have five-person or 10-person departments, but you&rsquo;ll have two- or three-person sports departments. These days, sports crimes and scandals become a lead story, and whether that&rsquo;s covered by news or sports remains to be seen.&rdquo;Goren, who was in sportscasting for 24 years, said he&rsquo;d still recommend it as a profession.&ldquo;You&rsquo;d better know there&rsquo;s a shrunken pool out there. You better know how to shoot video. You better know how to do everything is the bottom line,&rdquo; said Goren. &ldquo;I always said as I was coming up, if you love it enough you&rsquo;ll do whatever it takes. But anybody who paints it with a rosy picture and said everything is wine and roses is selling you a bill of goods.&rdquo;]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Jon LafayetteHoly cow, these are tough time for traditional sportscasters. But new technology and social media may be creating opportunities for people who want a career in sports journalism.Despite record ratings for big events like the Super Bowl, the recession has hit broadcast outlets like a blitzing linebacker, and on-air talent are feeling the pain in their paychecks. Also taking a toll on broadcast jobs is the growth of cable, where outlets led by ESPN are acquiring rights to more and more games and aggressively pushing into local markets.Jobs are being created on cable, but they&rsquo;re mostly for less experienced sportscasters, or for people who can create content for the Web.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s an ever-changing world, an ever-changing industry, an ever-changing landscape,&rdquo; said Dave Goren, executive director of the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association and Hall of Fame.While new media is creating opportunities for those smart enough to change with it, Goren said, &ldquo;I think there&rsquo;s probably more of a contraction to come before there&rsquo;s an expansion.&rdquo;Things are tough for sports writers in the troubled newspaper industry as well.&ldquo;Anecdotally, all you have to do is be able to read and you can tell,&rdquo; Goren said. &ldquo;Every day there&rsquo;s another paper either dropping sports or cutting a bunch of sports people.&rdquo;But because most employers are looking to do things more cheaply to make up for lost revenue, &ldquo;in some ways that might be good for younger kids coming into the business,&rdquo; Goren said.Expansion seems to be going on at ESPN, which is adding events and pushing into new media, which is creating a need for more sportscasters.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s certainly creating more opportunities for younger broadcasters, especially on the digital side,&rdquo; said Laurie Orlando, senior VP for talent planning and development at ESPN.She suggested that digital media might be replacing local stations as the training ground for young sportscasters.&ldquo;No longer are we just a broadcaster. If there&rsquo;s any place in our industry that is full-service and multimedia, it&rsquo;s ESPN. We expect that our talent, within reason, are going to contribute to all of those platforms,&rdquo; she said, adding that the expectations are just as high online as on television to deliver credible information and deep knowledge to the ESPN fan base.Orlando said that channels like ESPNU and ESPN Regional Television are two places where sportscasters with just five years in the business can gain big-time experience.&ldquo;As long as they show promise and they&rsquo;re people we see potential in for down the road, it&rsquo;s a great training ground.&rdquo;Regional cable sports network Comcast SportsNet Chicago is also expanding.&ldquo;We&rsquo;re adding people and our business is still in a growth mode,&rdquo; said Jim Corno, president of Comcast SportsNet.Much of the hiring is for network&rsquo;s website.&ldquo;We&rsquo;ve got people who go out and cover the teams from a digital standpoint,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;They&rsquo;re hired for the digital department, but they do have some on-air exposure as well.&rdquo;For example, John Mullin, who covers the Bears for chicago.comcastsportsnet.com, also appears on the network&rsquo;s &ldquo;Chicago Tribune Live&rdquo; show and its &ldquo;Bears Postgame Live.&rdquo;At the same time, the network&rsquo;s veteran sportscasters are becoming switch-hitters.&ldquo;Our on-air people are learning the digital side,&rdquo; Corno said.Online reporting and social media are creating new expectations for sportscasters.&ldquo;The guy can no longer just sit there, call the game and go home. Or if you&rsquo;re an anchor, you can&rsquo;t just go on, &lsquo;here&rsquo;s the news of the day,&rsquo; and go home,&rdquo; he said. People expect you to be visible on all the different platforms. They expect to see you and have access to you through the Web space.&rdquo;Corno said some of his on-air talent have been very aggressive about blogging and social media.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not like we&rsquo;re twisting arms here,&rdquo; he said.The activity is good for both the network and the anchors.&ldquo;You hope that the Comcast SportsNet brand is getting more exposure and more people have access to it,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;As far as the talent goes, all the exposure they get helps them too. It&rsquo;s a win-win.&rdquo;Eventually, Corno said, his on-air and digital sportscasters will have nearly interchangeable skills.&ldquo;I think the on-air personality is always going to be the higher priority. But I think you&rsquo;re going to expect those on-air personalities to participate in our Web and digital components.&rdquo;While cable outlets are expanding, many stations are thinking about cutting back on sportscasts and sportscasters.&ldquo;I would say that it is something that a lot of stations are talking about,&rdquo; said Stacey Woelfel, chairman of the Radio Television Digital News Association and news director of KOMU-TV. The reason is that studies have shown that only 20 percent of the audience cares about sports, and that it&rsquo;s often an expensive area to cover.But Woelfel said there&rsquo;s more talk than action.&ldquo;The problem is none of us wants to give up 20 percent to the other guy. And that 20 percent goes up when the local team goes to the NCAA Tournament or Super Bowl,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s not to say there haven&rsquo;t been cutbacks.&rdquo;Many sports departments are down to one or two people. Travel has also been reduced sharply; instead of sending anchors, reporters, sportscasters, a cameraman and producers to an event, these days a station may send just two people.One survey suggests that recent cutbacks have been more anecdotal than systematic. According to the latest RTDNA/Hofstra University study, about 2,000 people work in TV sports as an anchor, reporter or both, or about 2.7 per station. That number has held steady over the past five years.Some stations are taking a one-man-band approach to sporting events.&ldquo;Now it&rsquo;s shoot your story, cut it, send it back by FTP and then set up your Skype and do a live shot for us,&rdquo; Woelfel said.In fact, that may provide a scouting report for what stations will be looking for in a sportscaster.&ldquo;The local or regional sports journalist of the future is a one-man band, and is somebody who moves easily between sports, and is a person who has an interest in important local and regional sports,&rdquo; Woelfel said.Of course, there are some optimists.&ldquo;Sports is a staple of television. There&rsquo;s an ebb and a flow, but sports is going to stay important, and hiring is going to increase in the future,&rdquo; said Richard Leibner, president of top talent agency N.S. Bienstock. &ldquo;Maybe you won&rsquo;t have five-person or 10-person departments, but you&rsquo;ll have two- or three-person sports departments. These days, sports crimes and scandals become a lead story, and whether that&rsquo;s covered by news or sports remains to be seen.&rdquo;Goren, who was in sportscasting for 24 years, said he&rsquo;d still recommend it as a profession.&ldquo;You&rsquo;d better know there&rsquo;s a shrunken pool out there. You better know how to shoot video. You better know how to do everything is the bottom line,&rdquo; said Goren. &ldquo;I always said as I was coming up, if you love it enough you&rsquo;ll do whatever it takes. But anybody who paints it with a rosy picture and said everything is wine and roses is selling you a bill of goods.&rdquo;]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Sportscasters and Sportswriters Honor Their Own</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/sportscasters_and_sportswriter.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41557</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-28T21:54:08Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-28T21:57:56Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Jarre FeesSeeking to honor the best sports journalists in the nation, the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association will induct football&rsquo;s John Madden and baseball&rsquo;s Peter Gammons into the NSSA Hall of Fame at its annual awards ceremony on May 3 in Salisbury, N.C.Along with Madden and Gammons, Jim Nantz of CBS Sports will be honored for the fifth time as National Sportscaster of the Year, and Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe will be honored for the fourth time as National Sportswriter of the Year.Dave Goren, NSSA executive director and former State Sportscaster of the Year for North Carolina, said, &ldquo;You couldn&rsquo;t ask for two better hall-of-famers. John Madden re-defined the role of TV football analyst with his simple, conversational approach. And as a Boston Globe reader growing up, I&rsquo;ve been reading Gammons for years. He and Bob Ryan are two of the reasons I went into a sports journalism career.&ldquo;We&rsquo;re thrilled to have Jim Nantz and Ryan as our national winners for the third straight year,&rdquo; he added. &ldquo;Jim is as talented and smooth a play-by-play man as there is, and Bob has a knack for selling his opinions by painting a perfect picture. Even better, they are both classy men who love NSSA.&rdquo;Madden&rsquo;s career as an NFL coach included a Super Bowl win and a regular-season record of 103-32-7, and provided the impetus for a 30-year television career as football analyst for CBS, Fox, ABC and ESPN. He won 13 Emmy awards for outstanding sports personality/analyst during that stretch, and was named NSSA Sportscaster of the Year in 1984.Madden is also revered by a generation of video gamers for the wildly successful game series Madden NFL. He retired in 2009.Gammons&rsquo; Sunday Notes baseball column for the Globe set a new standard for baseball coverage. He followed the Boston stint with a career at Sports Illustrated and joined ESPN in 1988 as an in-studio analyst, in addition to writing for ESPN.com and ESPN The Magazine. Gammons can now be seen on the New England Sports Network and the MLB Network, in addition to writing for MLB.com and other online entities.&ldquo;The first 40 years of my career I only had three employers &mdash; the Boston Globe, Sports Illustrated and ESPN,&rdquo; Gammons said. &ldquo;Now I have five at the same time, and I&rsquo;m grateful for every one of them.&rdquo;Gammons and Ryan both started as interns at the Boston Globe on June 10, 1968. Gammons, who graduated a year later from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said he still refers to himself &ldquo;as an ink-stained wretch,&rdquo; although he admitted he does more television than writing at this point.&ldquo;A lot of things have become Internet-oriented,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;Everything changes constantly, but it&rsquo;s still about reporting the news.&rdquo;&ldquo;We had no idea of the paths we would wind up taking,&rdquo; Ryan said, &ldquo;because the things we would end up doing weren&rsquo;t even available to us when we started.&ldquo;No one thought about the crossover business of TV, or had any idea [sports writing] would lead us all over the world. All I cared about was writing and covering the games.&rdquo;Ryan has spent his career at the Boston Globe, covering the Boston Celtics for 15 years before branching out to become a general columnist. He also appears frequently on ESPN&rsquo;s &ldquo;The Sports Reporters&rdquo; and other TV and radio shows.Ryan said his &ldquo;so-called reputation&rdquo; was based on his association with the Boston Celtics, but he admitted that baseball was actually his first love. He regrets he was &ldquo;never able to slip away to the College World Series&rdquo; because it conflicted with the NBA playoffs. But in general, Ryan said, he had few regrets about the direction his career had taken.&ldquo;I&rsquo;m still associated with the Celtics and I&rsquo;m very proud of it,&rdquo; Ryan said. &ldquo;Basketball has been very, very good to me.&rdquo;Nantz started at CBS in 1985 and has become the network&rsquo;s lead play-by-play announcer for golf, the NFL and college basketball.&ldquo;This is what I wanted to do even as a young boy,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;Now I look at the talent that&rsquo;s in that room every year &mdash; the state winners and the national winners and the hall-of-famers &mdash; and it just amazes me to be part of it.&rdquo;Nantz said his &ldquo;biggest thrill&rdquo; this year will be in the person of &ldquo;one of his boyhood heroes&rdquo; who will be presenting his award. &ldquo;I got Arnold Palmer,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;I was too timid to ask him to fly any more than he has to, but then I decided I&rsquo;d never be able to live with myself if I didn&rsquo;t ask him to come.&rdquo;In addition to the national winners, the NSSA will honor 106 recipients of the State Sportscaster and Sportswriter of the Year awards.]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Jarre FeesSeeking to honor the best sports journalists in the nation, the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association will induct football&rsquo;s John Madden and baseball&rsquo;s Peter Gammons into the NSSA Hall of Fame at its annual awards ceremony on May 3 in Salisbury, N.C.Along with Madden and Gammons, Jim Nantz of CBS Sports will be honored for the fifth time as National Sportscaster of the Year, and Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe will be honored for the fourth time as National Sportswriter of the Year.Dave Goren, NSSA executive director and former State Sportscaster of the Year for North Carolina, said, &ldquo;You couldn&rsquo;t ask for two better hall-of-famers. John Madden re-defined the role of TV football analyst with his simple, conversational approach. And as a Boston Globe reader growing up, I&rsquo;ve been reading Gammons for years. He and Bob Ryan are two of the reasons I went into a sports journalism career.&ldquo;We&rsquo;re thrilled to have Jim Nantz and Ryan as our national winners for the third straight year,&rdquo; he added. &ldquo;Jim is as talented and smooth a play-by-play man as there is, and Bob has a knack for selling his opinions by painting a perfect picture. Even better, they are both classy men who love NSSA.&rdquo;Madden&rsquo;s career as an NFL coach included a Super Bowl win and a regular-season record of 103-32-7, and provided the impetus for a 30-year television career as football analyst for CBS, Fox, ABC and ESPN. He won 13 Emmy awards for outstanding sports personality/analyst during that stretch, and was named NSSA Sportscaster of the Year in 1984.Madden is also revered by a generation of video gamers for the wildly successful game series Madden NFL. He retired in 2009.Gammons&rsquo; Sunday Notes baseball column for the Globe set a new standard for baseball coverage. He followed the Boston stint with a career at Sports Illustrated and joined ESPN in 1988 as an in-studio analyst, in addition to writing for ESPN.com and ESPN The Magazine. Gammons can now be seen on the New England Sports Network and the MLB Network, in addition to writing for MLB.com and other online entities.&ldquo;The first 40 years of my career I only had three employers &mdash; the Boston Globe, Sports Illustrated and ESPN,&rdquo; Gammons said. &ldquo;Now I have five at the same time, and I&rsquo;m grateful for every one of them.&rdquo;Gammons and Ryan both started as interns at the Boston Globe on June 10, 1968. Gammons, who graduated a year later from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said he still refers to himself &ldquo;as an ink-stained wretch,&rdquo; although he admitted he does more television than writing at this point.&ldquo;A lot of things have become Internet-oriented,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;Everything changes constantly, but it&rsquo;s still about reporting the news.&rdquo;&ldquo;We had no idea of the paths we would wind up taking,&rdquo; Ryan said, &ldquo;because the things we would end up doing weren&rsquo;t even available to us when we started.&ldquo;No one thought about the crossover business of TV, or had any idea [sports writing] would lead us all over the world. All I cared about was writing and covering the games.&rdquo;Ryan has spent his career at the Boston Globe, covering the Boston Celtics for 15 years before branching out to become a general columnist. He also appears frequently on ESPN&rsquo;s &ldquo;The Sports Reporters&rdquo; and other TV and radio shows.Ryan said his &ldquo;so-called reputation&rdquo; was based on his association with the Boston Celtics, but he admitted that baseball was actually his first love. He regrets he was &ldquo;never able to slip away to the College World Series&rdquo; because it conflicted with the NBA playoffs. But in general, Ryan said, he had few regrets about the direction his career had taken.&ldquo;I&rsquo;m still associated with the Celtics and I&rsquo;m very proud of it,&rdquo; Ryan said. &ldquo;Basketball has been very, very good to me.&rdquo;Nantz started at CBS in 1985 and has become the network&rsquo;s lead play-by-play announcer for golf, the NFL and college basketball.&ldquo;This is what I wanted to do even as a young boy,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;Now I look at the talent that&rsquo;s in that room every year &mdash; the state winners and the national winners and the hall-of-famers &mdash; and it just amazes me to be part of it.&rdquo;Nantz said his &ldquo;biggest thrill&rdquo; this year will be in the person of &ldquo;one of his boyhood heroes&rdquo; who will be presenting his award. &ldquo;I got Arnold Palmer,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;I was too timid to ask him to fly any more than he has to, but then I decided I&rsquo;d never be able to live with myself if I didn&rsquo;t ask him to come.&rdquo;In addition to the national winners, the NSSA will honor 106 recipients of the State Sportscaster and Sportswriter of the Year awards.]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>NBC Sports Will Give Comcast a Needed Broadcast Edge</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/comcasts_acquisition_of_nbc_sp.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41551</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-28T21:32:23Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-28T21:38:03Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Jon LafayetteThe sports world will be lining up against a new giant when Comcast&rsquo;s $30 billion acquisition of NBC Universal finally pushes into the end zone.Like Walt Disney Co., which owns 80 percent of ESPN, a leader in cable and online sports, as well as a broadcast network in ABC, Comcast will boast a formidable roster of broadcast, cable and online properties.That muscle should mean that Comcast, which tried and failed to land an NFL package five years ago, now will have the count more in its favor when it comes to bidding for the most prominent and prestigious sports properties.&ldquo;Comcast will likely downplay the impact of the combining of the sports business because they don&rsquo;t want to make it seem as though they&rsquo;re going to be in control of so many assets,&rdquo; said Thomas Eagan, analyst at investment company Collins Stewart.At first it will be a reverse image of Disney. &ldquo;More strong in broadcast than strong in cable,&rdquo; Eagan said. But Comcast&rsquo;s new brawn in broadcast with NBC &ldquo;will help them in terms of being able to get eyeballs. In the broadcast business today it&rsquo;s about getting eyeballs that are real-time eyeballs.&rdquo;Comcast tried to acquire Disney &mdash; and with it ESPN &mdash; in 2004. Now no company puts more money into ESPN&rsquo;s coffers than Comcast. SNL Kagan estimates Comcast pays $5.8 billion a year to carry ESPN&rsquo;s domestic networks.Like a golf score, Comcast would love to see that number come down.By taking properties away from ESPN, Comcast would be building its own business while at the same time intercepting rationales ESPN could use to justify more increases in the subscriber fee it charges cable operators.&ldquo;Comcast probably at some point would like to at least hold down future payments, maybe even seek a reduction. One way to do that is to render ESPN not quite as exciting a network as it is today,&rdquo; said Neal Pilson, former CBS Sports president and now chief of Pilson Communications, a consultancy specializing in sports and media. &ldquo;And the way to do that is to take some of the sports properties that have up till now been controlled by ESPN and perhaps taking them on yourself.&rdquo;&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not going to happen overnight, but over the long term, I&rsquo;m sure Comcast would like nothing more than to be able to turn [its national cable sports network] Versus into a viable competitor to ESPN, which would give it at least some negotiating leverage,&rdquo; said Derek Baine, senior analyst at SNL Kagan.&ldquo;ESPN has this love-hate relationship with cable operators. It&rsquo;s a must-have, but every time the negotiations come up, they&rsquo;re just horrendous,&rdquo; Baine said.Comcast declined to comment. Executives there are discouraged from talking about their plans for NBC Universal while the merger awaits government approval.Last month, the Federal Communications Commission extended its review of the deal for as much as six weeks, giving Comcast time to prepare two reports on whether the combination is in the public interest. The deadline for comments on the deal will be a month after the reports are filed.ESPN executives, while noting they&rsquo;ve always operated in a very competitive environment, also declined to comment.All by itself, NBC is a powerful player in sports. Among the events NBC telecasts are the NFL on Sunday nights, the Olympics on broadcast and cable, the NHL and the Stanley Cup Finals, Notre Dame football, Wimbledon and some top professional golf tournaments.Comcast airs the NHL, the Tour de France and professional bull riding on Versus. It also owns the Golf Channel and array of regional sports networks. After a long feud, Comcast finally reached a deal with the NFL to provide wide distribution of the NFL Network on its cable systems. With NBC on board, Comcast becomes an important media partner with the league.Baine said that Versus has been an underperformer for Comcast, and the merger could help shore it up.&ldquo;They&rsquo;ve just had all of these problems getting carriage, and the ratings have not been good and the programming is not that great. There are big synergies in being able to take existing sports rights like that and slam them in there,&rdquo; he said.Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports, appears likely to be put in charge of the combined companies&rsquo; sports assets, according to Pilson.Jeff Shell, president of Comcast Programming Group, has been leading Comcast&rsquo;s push into sports.Having Comcast in his corner might give Ebersol more latitude in pursuing big-ticket items.&ldquo;I think the next Olympic negotiations are going to be an example of where NBC is a stronger contender for rights with Comcast that it would have been with GE, which is much more concerned about the P&amp;L of the games themselves, even though the games have tremendous supplemental value or ancillary value that no one ever seems to account for,&rdquo; Pilson said.The NCAA&rsquo;s decision last month to award rights to its annual men&rsquo;s basketball tournament to CBS and Turner Sports for $10.8 billion over 14 years shows the power of combining the reach of broadcast and business model of cable for major sports properties. CBS also puts tourney games online with March Madness on Demand.Turner expects to be able to recoup some of its new March Madness costs by raising subscriber fees it charges operators, led by Comcast.As rights fees go up, televising sports becomes a tougher business on which to make a profit.&ldquo;There&rsquo;s nothing written in the constitution of the United States that says every sports event, or even the sports network has to be profitable,&rdquo; Pilson said.&ldquo;The fact is that sports is clearly an enormous platform for launching and sustaining your entertainment and news programming. The most recent example was that NBC used the Olympics, basically, to restart its entire prime-time schedule.&rdquo;And where does that leave ESPN?&ldquo;They can decide strategically what&rsquo;s important to them and what isn&rsquo;t, which they&rsquo;re in the process of doing right now,&rdquo; said Pilson.He said ESPN advised the Atlantic Coast Conference that they&rsquo;re not prepared to bid up to levels it pays for the Southeastern Conference for college sports It also apparently decided not to bid as much as CBS and Turner did to secure the NCAA basketball tournament.ESPN is a smart well-managed company. I&rsquo;m sure they can deal with some added competition,&rdquo; Pilson said.]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Jon LafayetteThe sports world will be lining up against a new giant when Comcast&rsquo;s $30 billion acquisition of NBC Universal finally pushes into the end zone.Like Walt Disney Co., which owns 80 percent of ESPN, a leader in cable and online sports, as well as a broadcast network in ABC, Comcast will boast a formidable roster of broadcast, cable and online properties.That muscle should mean that Comcast, which tried and failed to land an NFL package five years ago, now will have the count more in its favor when it comes to bidding for the most prominent and prestigious sports properties.&ldquo;Comcast will likely downplay the impact of the combining of the sports business because they don&rsquo;t want to make it seem as though they&rsquo;re going to be in control of so many assets,&rdquo; said Thomas Eagan, analyst at investment company Collins Stewart.At first it will be a reverse image of Disney. &ldquo;More strong in broadcast than strong in cable,&rdquo; Eagan said. But Comcast&rsquo;s new brawn in broadcast with NBC &ldquo;will help them in terms of being able to get eyeballs. In the broadcast business today it&rsquo;s about getting eyeballs that are real-time eyeballs.&rdquo;Comcast tried to acquire Disney &mdash; and with it ESPN &mdash; in 2004. Now no company puts more money into ESPN&rsquo;s coffers than Comcast. SNL Kagan estimates Comcast pays $5.8 billion a year to carry ESPN&rsquo;s domestic networks.Like a golf score, Comcast would love to see that number come down.By taking properties away from ESPN, Comcast would be building its own business while at the same time intercepting rationales ESPN could use to justify more increases in the subscriber fee it charges cable operators.&ldquo;Comcast probably at some point would like to at least hold down future payments, maybe even seek a reduction. One way to do that is to render ESPN not quite as exciting a network as it is today,&rdquo; said Neal Pilson, former CBS Sports president and now chief of Pilson Communications, a consultancy specializing in sports and media. &ldquo;And the way to do that is to take some of the sports properties that have up till now been controlled by ESPN and perhaps taking them on yourself.&rdquo;&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not going to happen overnight, but over the long term, I&rsquo;m sure Comcast would like nothing more than to be able to turn [its national cable sports network] Versus into a viable competitor to ESPN, which would give it at least some negotiating leverage,&rdquo; said Derek Baine, senior analyst at SNL Kagan.&ldquo;ESPN has this love-hate relationship with cable operators. It&rsquo;s a must-have, but every time the negotiations come up, they&rsquo;re just horrendous,&rdquo; Baine said.Comcast declined to comment. Executives there are discouraged from talking about their plans for NBC Universal while the merger awaits government approval.Last month, the Federal Communications Commission extended its review of the deal for as much as six weeks, giving Comcast time to prepare two reports on whether the combination is in the public interest. The deadline for comments on the deal will be a month after the reports are filed.ESPN executives, while noting they&rsquo;ve always operated in a very competitive environment, also declined to comment.All by itself, NBC is a powerful player in sports. Among the events NBC telecasts are the NFL on Sunday nights, the Olympics on broadcast and cable, the NHL and the Stanley Cup Finals, Notre Dame football, Wimbledon and some top professional golf tournaments.Comcast airs the NHL, the Tour de France and professional bull riding on Versus. It also owns the Golf Channel and array of regional sports networks. After a long feud, Comcast finally reached a deal with the NFL to provide wide distribution of the NFL Network on its cable systems. With NBC on board, Comcast becomes an important media partner with the league.Baine said that Versus has been an underperformer for Comcast, and the merger could help shore it up.&ldquo;They&rsquo;ve just had all of these problems getting carriage, and the ratings have not been good and the programming is not that great. There are big synergies in being able to take existing sports rights like that and slam them in there,&rdquo; he said.Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports, appears likely to be put in charge of the combined companies&rsquo; sports assets, according to Pilson.Jeff Shell, president of Comcast Programming Group, has been leading Comcast&rsquo;s push into sports.Having Comcast in his corner might give Ebersol more latitude in pursuing big-ticket items.&ldquo;I think the next Olympic negotiations are going to be an example of where NBC is a stronger contender for rights with Comcast that it would have been with GE, which is much more concerned about the P&amp;L of the games themselves, even though the games have tremendous supplemental value or ancillary value that no one ever seems to account for,&rdquo; Pilson said.The NCAA&rsquo;s decision last month to award rights to its annual men&rsquo;s basketball tournament to CBS and Turner Sports for $10.8 billion over 14 years shows the power of combining the reach of broadcast and business model of cable for major sports properties. CBS also puts tourney games online with March Madness on Demand.Turner expects to be able to recoup some of its new March Madness costs by raising subscriber fees it charges operators, led by Comcast.As rights fees go up, televising sports becomes a tougher business on which to make a profit.&ldquo;There&rsquo;s nothing written in the constitution of the United States that says every sports event, or even the sports network has to be profitable,&rdquo; Pilson said.&ldquo;The fact is that sports is clearly an enormous platform for launching and sustaining your entertainment and news programming. The most recent example was that NBC used the Olympics, basically, to restart its entire prime-time schedule.&rdquo;And where does that leave ESPN?&ldquo;They can decide strategically what&rsquo;s important to them and what isn&rsquo;t, which they&rsquo;re in the process of doing right now,&rdquo; said Pilson.He said ESPN advised the Atlantic Coast Conference that they&rsquo;re not prepared to bid up to levels it pays for the Southeastern Conference for college sports It also apparently decided not to bid as much as CBS and Turner did to secure the NCAA basketball tournament.ESPN is a smart well-managed company. I&rsquo;m sure they can deal with some added competition,&rdquo; Pilson said.]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Business: Stations Plunge Into Mobile</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/stations_plunge_into_mobile.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41549</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-28T21:20:04Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-28T21:22:13Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Debra KaufmanAt NAB 2010, new president Gordon Smith declared that broadcasters wouldn&rsquo;t readily give up spectrum that the FCC &mdash; and telephone carriers &mdash; wants for mobile broadband. But behind the scenes, broadcasters intending to exercise that spectrum with Mobile DTV services are at least toying with the idea that they might partner with those same carriers.&nbsp;With the debut of Pearl Mobile DTV, the joint venture cobbled together by 12 major station groups, all attention is on the business plan that will accompany the new media launch. Just as Mobile DTV has made partners out of competing station groups, so more than one station group executive hinted at some kind of collaboration with the carriers for a subscription model.&ldquo;This isn&rsquo;t a surprising move,&rdquo; said Allison Dollar, CEO, Interactive TV Alliance and executive director, Mobile Excellence Awards, referring to Pearl. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s strategically sensible, and in a very general sense similar to why Canoe [the cable operators advertising joint venture] was created. The rub is going to be &mdash; as always &mdash; tactics. We&rsquo;ll see what model they choose, and if they can be flexible enough as a group to make it work.&rdquo;Prior to the broadcasters&rsquo; entry into the mobile space, existing distributors of mobile video have butted heads over whether the subscription or advertising models are the answer to making money. Broadcasters appear to be poised to try both.&ldquo;I don&rsquo;t think anyone is projecting money out of the gate,&rdquo; said John Lawson, a founding board member of the Open Mobile Video Coalition, former executive VP of Ion Media Networks and currently principal of digital media consulting company Convergence Services. &ldquo;It will take a number of years to really go positive. But it seems to me that there will be a lot of exploration; there are a lot of different scenarios to work with.&rdquo;In numerous discussions about the revenue prospects of Mobile DTV, broadcasters have said that offering free mobile content is crucial to the business model. But they are already contemplating an up-sell with premium content. &ldquo;I think you&rsquo;ll see a hybrid implementation along the idea that broadcasters would provide a lot of free content, which would drive consumer device penetration,&rdquo; said Lawson. &ldquo;Which would in turn create a base from which you could market premium or other pay services.&rdquo;Premium services would likely include the kind of programming seen on cable channels, such as sporting events or even a sports channel and high-end video, including long-form content. Both experience in Europe and Asia, and research data closer to home, has shown that, contrary to common belief, long-form content can work on the mobile platform.&ldquo;We know that people watch Mobile DTV at least 30 minutes a day and that number is increasing,&rdquo; said Lawson, who believes that a DVR built into the mobile device will be a winning technology. &ldquo;Above all, the user wants control,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;They may start out watching as they&rsquo;re getting ready for work, and then want to pause it, take it with them and watch the rest later.&rdquo;Advertising on Mobile DTV channels is getting a tryout over the July 4 holiday, when the Ad Council will run its &ldquo;Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving&rdquo; campaign. But, with regard to advertising, the ultimate goal is to enable interactive ads targeted to individuals. &ldquo;The best thing for all platforms would be not only attaching addressable, contextual ads, but enabling sales transactions for those brands,&rdquo; said Dollar.But Advertising 2.0, as it&rsquo;s called, isn&rsquo;t as easy as it sounds. In between the 30-second spot and the addressable ad, Lawson is hopeful that mobile GPS will make geo-targeting &mdash; for example, ads aimed at people in the airport &mdash; an intermediary step toward that goal.Not everyone is so sanguine. Frank Barbieri, founder-CEO of Transpera, a mobile video advertising network that already works with numerous media companies from CBS Sports to Showtime, notes that Mobile DTV&rsquo;s one-to-many broadcast model is a weakness when it comes to targeted advertising. &ldquo;Broadcast advertising is a spray-and-pray method of hoping you hit the target, whereas IP-based ads are targeted and efficient,&rdquo; he said.Whether broadcasters turn to IP infrastructure or some sort of back channel in addition to the ATSC-M/H over-the-air signal to make interactive personalized advertising work, it reinforces the idea that a full panoply of revenue-creation ideas will require partnerships. And some of those partners might just be the same carriers jockeying for more spectrum for mobile broadband.]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Debra KaufmanAt NAB 2010, new president Gordon Smith declared that broadcasters wouldn&rsquo;t readily give up spectrum that the FCC &mdash; and telephone carriers &mdash; wants for mobile broadband. But behind the scenes, broadcasters intending to exercise that spectrum with Mobile DTV services are at least toying with the idea that they might partner with those same carriers.&nbsp;With the debut of Pearl Mobile DTV, the joint venture cobbled together by 12 major station groups, all attention is on the business plan that will accompany the new media launch. Just as Mobile DTV has made partners out of competing station groups, so more than one station group executive hinted at some kind of collaboration with the carriers for a subscription model.&ldquo;This isn&rsquo;t a surprising move,&rdquo; said Allison Dollar, CEO, Interactive TV Alliance and executive director, Mobile Excellence Awards, referring to Pearl. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s strategically sensible, and in a very general sense similar to why Canoe [the cable operators advertising joint venture] was created. The rub is going to be &mdash; as always &mdash; tactics. We&rsquo;ll see what model they choose, and if they can be flexible enough as a group to make it work.&rdquo;Prior to the broadcasters&rsquo; entry into the mobile space, existing distributors of mobile video have butted heads over whether the subscription or advertising models are the answer to making money. Broadcasters appear to be poised to try both.&ldquo;I don&rsquo;t think anyone is projecting money out of the gate,&rdquo; said John Lawson, a founding board member of the Open Mobile Video Coalition, former executive VP of Ion Media Networks and currently principal of digital media consulting company Convergence Services. &ldquo;It will take a number of years to really go positive. But it seems to me that there will be a lot of exploration; there are a lot of different scenarios to work with.&rdquo;In numerous discussions about the revenue prospects of Mobile DTV, broadcasters have said that offering free mobile content is crucial to the business model. But they are already contemplating an up-sell with premium content. &ldquo;I think you&rsquo;ll see a hybrid implementation along the idea that broadcasters would provide a lot of free content, which would drive consumer device penetration,&rdquo; said Lawson. &ldquo;Which would in turn create a base from which you could market premium or other pay services.&rdquo;Premium services would likely include the kind of programming seen on cable channels, such as sporting events or even a sports channel and high-end video, including long-form content. Both experience in Europe and Asia, and research data closer to home, has shown that, contrary to common belief, long-form content can work on the mobile platform.&ldquo;We know that people watch Mobile DTV at least 30 minutes a day and that number is increasing,&rdquo; said Lawson, who believes that a DVR built into the mobile device will be a winning technology. &ldquo;Above all, the user wants control,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;They may start out watching as they&rsquo;re getting ready for work, and then want to pause it, take it with them and watch the rest later.&rdquo;Advertising on Mobile DTV channels is getting a tryout over the July 4 holiday, when the Ad Council will run its &ldquo;Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving&rdquo; campaign. But, with regard to advertising, the ultimate goal is to enable interactive ads targeted to individuals. &ldquo;The best thing for all platforms would be not only attaching addressable, contextual ads, but enabling sales transactions for those brands,&rdquo; said Dollar.But Advertising 2.0, as it&rsquo;s called, isn&rsquo;t as easy as it sounds. In between the 30-second spot and the addressable ad, Lawson is hopeful that mobile GPS will make geo-targeting &mdash; for example, ads aimed at people in the airport &mdash; an intermediary step toward that goal.Not everyone is so sanguine. Frank Barbieri, founder-CEO of Transpera, a mobile video advertising network that already works with numerous media companies from CBS Sports to Showtime, notes that Mobile DTV&rsquo;s one-to-many broadcast model is a weakness when it comes to targeted advertising. &ldquo;Broadcast advertising is a spray-and-pray method of hoping you hit the target, whereas IP-based ads are targeted and efficient,&rdquo; he said.Whether broadcasters turn to IP infrastructure or some sort of back channel in addition to the ATSC-M/H over-the-air signal to make interactive personalized advertising work, it reinforces the idea that a full panoply of revenue-creation ideas will require partnerships. And some of those partners might just be the same carriers jockeying for more spectrum for mobile broadband.]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Poynter to Expand Its 'Sense-Making' Initiative</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/poynter_to_expand_its_sense-ma.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41395</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-19T23:15:09Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-19T23:16:45Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Jarre FeesThe Poynter Institute will use a recent $750,000 grant from the Ford Foundation to expand its Sense-Making program and other initiatives that focus on how the public consumes information, how journalists collect and disseminate news and how to increase responsibility and sustainability, particularly in the nontraditional news sector.Poynter, which started the Sense-Making initiative in 2009 with an earlier grant from the Ford Foundation, will work with several outside organizations, including the News Literacy Project, a program that pairs experienced journalists with middle school and junior high students to show them how to discern fact from fiction when listening to or reading the news.&ldquo;We want to provide people with tools to make the news transparent,&rdquo; said Kelly McBride, ethics group leader and lead faculty for the Sense-Making program, &ldquo;and create a place where people can have conversations about what&rsquo;s being reported.&ldquo;We want citizens to ask, &lsquo;Who funded this? What&rsquo;s their motive?&rsquo;&rdquo;In addition to educating the public, Poynter will continue to collaborate with and nurture freelancers, bloggers and other nontraditional entrepreneurs and journalists, educating them about accuracy and ethics in reporting.&ldquo;In the old system of journalism in the U.S., a certain amount of information was generated every day,&rdquo; said McBride, &ldquo;and the facts were reported every day, mostly by newspaper reporters and local TV news.&ldquo;A small number of people dealt in opinion and repurposing,&rdquo; she said. But since the advent of cable TV and the explosion of digital publishing, &ldquo;the number of people collecting news has decreased significantly, and the number of people who are repurposing has exploded.&rdquo;Recognizing the problems inherent in the new digital arena, Poynter has set out to find a way both to increase the accuracy of the news and enable journalists to make a living.Bill Mitchell, who heads the News Transformation initiative, also funded by the Ford grant, said his project will focus on those members of the fifth estate who are without journalism experience but who are &ldquo;committing acts of journalism.&rdquo;&ldquo;We want to deal with the ethics of moment-by-moment publishing, and provide the tools for people who have digital-media ideas but lack journalism sourcing,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ll also be looking at emerging technologies, including new platforms like the iPad.&rdquo;Mitchell said the Institute would look at how existing news organizations &ldquo;are transforming themselves. Consumers need and want to move forward and sustain these organizations,&rdquo; he said, &ldquo;and we can provide some tools to get it done.&rdquo;Poynter plans to implement a model entrepreneurial startup to educate bloggers and freelancers. The Web site (www.poynter.org) already lists a position for a Ford Fellow who can teach entrepreneurial journalism, and also maintains employment listings for digital and traditional journalists.The Ford grant will allow &ldquo;one or more journalism startups to help journalists add sustainability to their toolbox,&rdquo; Mitchell said.While there are &ldquo;fewer resources in newsrooms,&rdquo; McBride said, &ldquo;we have every reason to believe that over the next 10 years, larger news companies will stabilize.&ldquo;Some of them will have partnerships. Some of them will come to work with an agenda or an advocacy role. Some will come with a political approach, and some will come with a more traditional, nonpartisan approach.&rdquo;The Sense-Making initiative, she said, will help &ldquo;the smaller companies and individuals who will fill in the gaps.&rdquo;]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Jarre FeesThe Poynter Institute will use a recent $750,000 grant from the Ford Foundation to expand its Sense-Making program and other initiatives that focus on how the public consumes information, how journalists collect and disseminate news and how to increase responsibility and sustainability, particularly in the nontraditional news sector.Poynter, which started the Sense-Making initiative in 2009 with an earlier grant from the Ford Foundation, will work with several outside organizations, including the News Literacy Project, a program that pairs experienced journalists with middle school and junior high students to show them how to discern fact from fiction when listening to or reading the news.&ldquo;We want to provide people with tools to make the news transparent,&rdquo; said Kelly McBride, ethics group leader and lead faculty for the Sense-Making program, &ldquo;and create a place where people can have conversations about what&rsquo;s being reported.&ldquo;We want citizens to ask, &lsquo;Who funded this? What&rsquo;s their motive?&rsquo;&rdquo;In addition to educating the public, Poynter will continue to collaborate with and nurture freelancers, bloggers and other nontraditional entrepreneurs and journalists, educating them about accuracy and ethics in reporting.&ldquo;In the old system of journalism in the U.S., a certain amount of information was generated every day,&rdquo; said McBride, &ldquo;and the facts were reported every day, mostly by newspaper reporters and local TV news.&ldquo;A small number of people dealt in opinion and repurposing,&rdquo; she said. But since the advent of cable TV and the explosion of digital publishing, &ldquo;the number of people collecting news has decreased significantly, and the number of people who are repurposing has exploded.&rdquo;Recognizing the problems inherent in the new digital arena, Poynter has set out to find a way both to increase the accuracy of the news and enable journalists to make a living.Bill Mitchell, who heads the News Transformation initiative, also funded by the Ford grant, said his project will focus on those members of the fifth estate who are without journalism experience but who are &ldquo;committing acts of journalism.&rdquo;&ldquo;We want to deal with the ethics of moment-by-moment publishing, and provide the tools for people who have digital-media ideas but lack journalism sourcing,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ll also be looking at emerging technologies, including new platforms like the iPad.&rdquo;Mitchell said the Institute would look at how existing news organizations &ldquo;are transforming themselves. Consumers need and want to move forward and sustain these organizations,&rdquo; he said, &ldquo;and we can provide some tools to get it done.&rdquo;Poynter plans to implement a model entrepreneurial startup to educate bloggers and freelancers. The Web site (www.poynter.org) already lists a position for a Ford Fellow who can teach entrepreneurial journalism, and also maintains employment listings for digital and traditional journalists.The Ford grant will allow &ldquo;one or more journalism startups to help journalists add sustainability to their toolbox,&rdquo; Mitchell said.While there are &ldquo;fewer resources in newsrooms,&rdquo; McBride said, &ldquo;we have every reason to believe that over the next 10 years, larger news companies will stabilize.&ldquo;Some of them will have partnerships. Some of them will come to work with an agenda or an advocacy role. Some will come with a political approach, and some will come with a more traditional, nonpartisan approach.&rdquo;The Sense-Making initiative, she said, will help &ldquo;the smaller companies and individuals who will fill in the gaps.&rdquo;]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Demand on the Rise for Health Care Apps</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/demand_on_the_rise_for_health.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41394</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-19T23:08:30Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-19T23:13:08Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Debra KaufmanAt Apple&rsquo;s 2009 worldwide developer&rsquo;s conference, Johnson &amp; Johnson company LifeScan demonstrated an app that lets diabetics upload glucose readings from their blood glucose monitors to their iPhone, send the readings and a message about how they&rsquo;re feeling to their physician, and use a meal builder and insulin schedule.&ldquo;That was a watershed moment,&rdquo; said Brian Dolan, who co-founded and edits MobiHealthNews.com, a Web site about the health care sector&rsquo;s adoption of mobile technology. &ldquo;In the last year, health care as a mobile sector really picked up steam.&rdquo;In the arena of iPhone apps, there is perhaps no division attracting as much attention as health care. MobiHealthNews.com did the research to quantify the momentum and came up with some astonishing figures. (The full report is available on the site for sale, but its findings were made available to NewsPro.)As of March 2010, upward of 5,820 apps are related to medical, health and fitness. Health- and medical-related apps aimed at consumers let people track chronic illnesses, sleep patterns, headaches and menstrual cycles. They allow users to store important medical information, research natural cures and figure out what their symptoms mean.How many people are downloading them? The vast majority of apps &mdash; more than 5,000 &mdash; are for the iPhone, but since Apple is not forthcoming on their download numbers, it&rsquo;s impossible to definitively quantify the number of downloads.That is changing as the number of apps written for other platforms &mdash; Blackberry, Palm, Android, Nokia and 3rd party apps &mdash; burgeons. Dolan reports that he investigated the approximately 500 Android-based health care apps.&ldquo;We were very conservative with our counting and, as of March 1, they&rsquo;d gotten 3.3 million downloads already,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s pretty amazing. When you consider that Apple has 5,000 apps, should we extrapolate out to 30 million downloads? I don&rsquo;t know what it is for sure, but it&rsquo;s a big figure.&rdquo;Despite the LifeScan app being demonstrated by a big corporation, the majority of apps are still written by individual developers, companies that produce apps and medical publishers with a Web presence online. &ldquo;These were the first established players,&rdquo; said Dolan. &ldquo;Pharma has just a couple. Medical device makers are slowly getting into it. And slowly we&rsquo;re seeing more and more coming from health care providers.&rdquo;On March 1, for example, the Mayo Clinic launched the free Mayo Clinic Symptom Checker, an iPhone/iTouch app that lets users enter symptoms and provides guidance on self-care as well as advice on when professional care is necessary. It also allows users to search the Mayo Clinic Web site on various health topics and gives information about Mayo Clinic care. Launched in January, the Mayo Clinic Meditation app, which costs $2.99 in the iTunes store, teaches mind-body techniques based on research by a physician.Some of the apps are aimed at doctors and other health care professionals, including Epocrates RX, a continually updated drug database; General Medical History, an app to assist medical students taking a patient&rsquo;s history; ReachMD CME, an app for doctors to earn continuing medical education credits; and numerous calculators, including MedCalc, for physicians to get access to medical formulas.Other medically oriented apps provide health care professionals with such tools as eye charts and medical dictionaries. Even The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy, is available, priced at $49.95. Most apps &mdash; aimed at consumers or physicians &mdash; are free or priced at 99 cents or $1.99.What kind of impact do these apps have on peoples&rsquo; medical decisions and knowledge? Very little is known, and the relatively limited penetration of iPhones/iTouch may make apps appear to be of little importance in providing information and tools about health care. But as smart phone penetration soars, health care apps are certain to become ubiquitous.&ldquo;It won&rsquo;t be long before we can easily get the information we want on demand,&rdquo; said MDiTV.com anchor-senior news editor Andrew Holtz, who notes that MDiTV will also be distributed to iPhone.&ldquo;We won&rsquo;t care if it&rsquo;s an iPhone app or an Internet-connected TV device. Just like we flip on the lights without paying attention to the local wiring and power grid, we&rsquo;ll just reach out for content and get it.&rdquo;]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Debra KaufmanAt Apple&rsquo;s 2009 worldwide developer&rsquo;s conference, Johnson &amp; Johnson company LifeScan demonstrated an app that lets diabetics upload glucose readings from their blood glucose monitors to their iPhone, send the readings and a message about how they&rsquo;re feeling to their physician, and use a meal builder and insulin schedule.&ldquo;That was a watershed moment,&rdquo; said Brian Dolan, who co-founded and edits MobiHealthNews.com, a Web site about the health care sector&rsquo;s adoption of mobile technology. &ldquo;In the last year, health care as a mobile sector really picked up steam.&rdquo;In the arena of iPhone apps, there is perhaps no division attracting as much attention as health care. MobiHealthNews.com did the research to quantify the momentum and came up with some astonishing figures. (The full report is available on the site for sale, but its findings were made available to NewsPro.)As of March 2010, upward of 5,820 apps are related to medical, health and fitness. Health- and medical-related apps aimed at consumers let people track chronic illnesses, sleep patterns, headaches and menstrual cycles. They allow users to store important medical information, research natural cures and figure out what their symptoms mean.How many people are downloading them? The vast majority of apps &mdash; more than 5,000 &mdash; are for the iPhone, but since Apple is not forthcoming on their download numbers, it&rsquo;s impossible to definitively quantify the number of downloads.That is changing as the number of apps written for other platforms &mdash; Blackberry, Palm, Android, Nokia and 3rd party apps &mdash; burgeons. Dolan reports that he investigated the approximately 500 Android-based health care apps.&ldquo;We were very conservative with our counting and, as of March 1, they&rsquo;d gotten 3.3 million downloads already,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s pretty amazing. When you consider that Apple has 5,000 apps, should we extrapolate out to 30 million downloads? I don&rsquo;t know what it is for sure, but it&rsquo;s a big figure.&rdquo;Despite the LifeScan app being demonstrated by a big corporation, the majority of apps are still written by individual developers, companies that produce apps and medical publishers with a Web presence online. &ldquo;These were the first established players,&rdquo; said Dolan. &ldquo;Pharma has just a couple. Medical device makers are slowly getting into it. And slowly we&rsquo;re seeing more and more coming from health care providers.&rdquo;On March 1, for example, the Mayo Clinic launched the free Mayo Clinic Symptom Checker, an iPhone/iTouch app that lets users enter symptoms and provides guidance on self-care as well as advice on when professional care is necessary. It also allows users to search the Mayo Clinic Web site on various health topics and gives information about Mayo Clinic care. Launched in January, the Mayo Clinic Meditation app, which costs $2.99 in the iTunes store, teaches mind-body techniques based on research by a physician.Some of the apps are aimed at doctors and other health care professionals, including Epocrates RX, a continually updated drug database; General Medical History, an app to assist medical students taking a patient&rsquo;s history; ReachMD CME, an app for doctors to earn continuing medical education credits; and numerous calculators, including MedCalc, for physicians to get access to medical formulas.Other medically oriented apps provide health care professionals with such tools as eye charts and medical dictionaries. Even The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy, is available, priced at $49.95. Most apps &mdash; aimed at consumers or physicians &mdash; are free or priced at 99 cents or $1.99.What kind of impact do these apps have on peoples&rsquo; medical decisions and knowledge? Very little is known, and the relatively limited penetration of iPhones/iTouch may make apps appear to be of little importance in providing information and tools about health care. But as smart phone penetration soars, health care apps are certain to become ubiquitous.&ldquo;It won&rsquo;t be long before we can easily get the information we want on demand,&rdquo; said MDiTV.com anchor-senior news editor Andrew Holtz, who notes that MDiTV will also be distributed to iPhone.&ldquo;We won&rsquo;t care if it&rsquo;s an iPhone app or an Internet-connected TV device. Just like we flip on the lights without paying attention to the local wiring and power grid, we&rsquo;ll just reach out for content and get it.&rdquo;]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Web Now 'Most Essential' Medium</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/web_now_most_essential_medium.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41393</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-19T23:02:56Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-19T23:08:16Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Hillary AtkinFor the first time, the Internet has squeaked past television as the most essential medium in the lives of Americans.That finding was part of Arbitron Inc. and Edison Research&rsquo;s recently released &ldquo;The Infinite Dial 2010: Digital Platforms and the Future of Radio&rdquo; national survey.This was the 12th such annual survey measuring media habits among people age 12 and older and included non-Internet and non-cell phone households in its polling of about 1,750 people across the country.The study showed that when given a choice along with television, radio and newspapers, 42 percent of Americans say the Internet is &ldquo;most essential&rdquo; to their lives, with 37 percent selecting television, 14 percent choosing radio, and 5 percent saying newspapers were the most important to them. While television still leads among those over the age of 45, the Internet dominates among people age 12 to 44.&ldquo;We also looked at different ways people are watching television shows to see what percentage are watching nonbroadcast television platforms,&rdquo; said Diane Williams, senior media research analyst at Arbitron.Twenty-eight percent of those surveyed had watched a full-length television episode streaming over the Internet at some point in their lives, and among the 12-24 age group, 41 percent had done so.&ldquo;I viewed it as a reality check on how many people are doing this,&rdquo; Williams said. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s something that&rsquo;s fairly in its infancy. As the experience improves, it&rsquo;s an experience that&rsquo;s growing. I read articles that imply that a lot more people are doing this. Should networks be preparing for additional shifts in this way? Our finding is that online is not taking over the world right now.&rdquo;Yet the research confirms that viewing habits are shifting and changing. Thirty-seven percent of those surveyed have watched TV shows through their cable provider&rsquo;s video-on-demand service. Thirty-two percent have bought or rented TV series on DVD, while 15 percent have downloaded an entire show episode from an online store like iTunes.As far as watching television shows online, a five-year trend shows that the big jump was between 2008 and 2009 and that the percentage of people doing it did not increase significantly in the first quarter of 2010, staying at about 22 percent. The average time spent viewing video online was nearly three hours per week.The study points out that while the rise of online video has been steady and persistent for the past 10 years, many more people still watch television in public places like doctors&rsquo; offices, gas stations and stores than online &mdash; and that online video still appeals to an audience that is young (12-44) and male.&ldquo;Online does not appear to be a replacement activity for broadcast,&rdquo; Williams said. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re not seeing enough volume. Watching online seems to be extra &mdash; catching up on episodes. There are two categories: full-length and watching any video online. A good deal of video that people are watching online is shorter form, like YouTube videos.&rdquo;The study showed that Americans still hold radio in high regard, with nearly 80 percent saying they plan to listen to as much AM/FM radio in the future as they do now &mdash; and it still beats the Internet as the main venue in which people find out about new music.&ldquo;Younger consumers show interest in radio on mobile phones,&rdquo; said Tom Webster, vice president of strategy and marketing at Edison Research. &ldquo;More than 4 in 10 mobile phone owners age 12 to 24 say they would listen more to FM radio if a tuner were built into those phones.&rdquo;Another growing trend that&rsquo;s important to watch: When more cars are equipped with seamless integration systems, more people will listen to an iPod or an MP3 player through a car stereo system. About 1 in 4 do so currently &mdash; even though many have to deal with adapters and other barriers that can make it cumbersome.The study also showed that online social networking has exploded, with the number of Americans age 12 and over who have a profile on a least one social networking Web site reaching 48 percent of the population, literally doubling in the past two years.]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Hillary AtkinFor the first time, the Internet has squeaked past television as the most essential medium in the lives of Americans.That finding was part of Arbitron Inc. and Edison Research&rsquo;s recently released &ldquo;The Infinite Dial 2010: Digital Platforms and the Future of Radio&rdquo; national survey.This was the 12th such annual survey measuring media habits among people age 12 and older and included non-Internet and non-cell phone households in its polling of about 1,750 people across the country.The study showed that when given a choice along with television, radio and newspapers, 42 percent of Americans say the Internet is &ldquo;most essential&rdquo; to their lives, with 37 percent selecting television, 14 percent choosing radio, and 5 percent saying newspapers were the most important to them. While television still leads among those over the age of 45, the Internet dominates among people age 12 to 44.&ldquo;We also looked at different ways people are watching television shows to see what percentage are watching nonbroadcast television platforms,&rdquo; said Diane Williams, senior media research analyst at Arbitron.Twenty-eight percent of those surveyed had watched a full-length television episode streaming over the Internet at some point in their lives, and among the 12-24 age group, 41 percent had done so.&ldquo;I viewed it as a reality check on how many people are doing this,&rdquo; Williams said. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s something that&rsquo;s fairly in its infancy. As the experience improves, it&rsquo;s an experience that&rsquo;s growing. I read articles that imply that a lot more people are doing this. Should networks be preparing for additional shifts in this way? Our finding is that online is not taking over the world right now.&rdquo;Yet the research confirms that viewing habits are shifting and changing. Thirty-seven percent of those surveyed have watched TV shows through their cable provider&rsquo;s video-on-demand service. Thirty-two percent have bought or rented TV series on DVD, while 15 percent have downloaded an entire show episode from an online store like iTunes.As far as watching television shows online, a five-year trend shows that the big jump was between 2008 and 2009 and that the percentage of people doing it did not increase significantly in the first quarter of 2010, staying at about 22 percent. The average time spent viewing video online was nearly three hours per week.The study points out that while the rise of online video has been steady and persistent for the past 10 years, many more people still watch television in public places like doctors&rsquo; offices, gas stations and stores than online &mdash; and that online video still appeals to an audience that is young (12-44) and male.&ldquo;Online does not appear to be a replacement activity for broadcast,&rdquo; Williams said. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re not seeing enough volume. Watching online seems to be extra &mdash; catching up on episodes. There are two categories: full-length and watching any video online. A good deal of video that people are watching online is shorter form, like YouTube videos.&rdquo;The study showed that Americans still hold radio in high regard, with nearly 80 percent saying they plan to listen to as much AM/FM radio in the future as they do now &mdash; and it still beats the Internet as the main venue in which people find out about new music.&ldquo;Younger consumers show interest in radio on mobile phones,&rdquo; said Tom Webster, vice president of strategy and marketing at Edison Research. &ldquo;More than 4 in 10 mobile phone owners age 12 to 24 say they would listen more to FM radio if a tuner were built into those phones.&rdquo;Another growing trend that&rsquo;s important to watch: When more cars are equipped with seamless integration systems, more people will listen to an iPod or an MP3 player through a car stereo system. About 1 in 4 do so currently &mdash; even though many have to deal with adapters and other barriers that can make it cumbersome.The study also showed that online social networking has exploded, with the number of Americans age 12 and over who have a profile on a least one social networking Web site reaching 48 percent of the population, literally doubling in the past two years.]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Health Care Journalism: The Quest for Coverage</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/by_debra_kaufmanits_impossible.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41391</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-19T22:51:24Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-19T22:57:25Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Debra KaufmanIt&rsquo;s impossible to talk about the state of health care journalism in the U.S. today without noticing the elephant &mdash; and the donkey &mdash; in the room: the debate over health care reform that dominated headlines, sound bites and Internet posts in 2009 and early 2010.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s the best of times and the worst of times in health care journalism,&rdquo; said Gary Schwitzer, who is leaving his post as associate professor at University of Minnesota School of Journalism and Mass Communication to devote full-time efforts to publish HealthNewsReview.org. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re talking about a spectrum of fantastic efforts by hard-working journalists who clarified the confusing picture out of Washington.&ldquo;At the other end of the spectrum, others chose to focus on the horse race of politics and did as great a disservice as any that I&rsquo;ve seen,&rdquo; continued Schwitzer, &ldquo;because journalists allowed such a polarized view to be presented &mdash; absolutely nonfactually based, ridiculous assertions, such as the &lsquo;death panels&rsquo; &mdash; without questioning them.&rdquo;Trudy Lieberman, immediate past president of the Association of Healthcare Journalists (AHCJ) and a contributing editor to the Columbia Journalism Review, notes the irony that &ldquo;we&rsquo;ve lost capacity in health care reporting at a time when its need is really great. What I&rsquo;ve seen is a lot less local reporting on the health care reform issues,&rdquo; she said. &ldquo;A lot of local news outlets rely on AP and other wire organizations.&rdquo;The launch of two nonprofit newsrooms that distribute stories to other news organizations was a serendipitous turn of events to ameliorate some of this loss of capacity: ProPublica, which began publishing in June 2008, and Kaiser Health News (KHN), which debuted June 2009, are continuing to build their relationships with major news organizations and in-depth stories.Laura McGinley, KHN executive editor, pointed out some of the upsides of the focus on health care reform for health care journalism. &ldquo;This is a time of intense interest in health care and even things that are incredibly wonky are getting attention,&rdquo; she said. &ldquo;I wouldn&rsquo;t be surprised if there was some health care fatigue for awhile. But I also think people are paying attention and have learned a lot about how the health care system works or doesn&rsquo;t. I would hope there would be continued interest.&rdquo;Schwitzer is concerned that the political skew in covering the health care reform debate has impacted coverage of other health care topics, in particular that of screenings and tests. When, in November 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force raised the recommended age for beginning mammograms from 40 to 50, based on the low risk of breast cancer between ages 40 to 50 and the risk of false positives and complications from biopsies, much of the coverage focused on the emotional reaction rather than the evidence-based results of the task force. &ldquo;This was a nonpolitical story that was made to look political and allowed this polarized frenzy to be whipped up,&rdquo; said Schwitzer. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a bad harbinger of things to come.&rdquo;Not everything is bleak when it comes to health care journalism. This past year also saw the Internet establish itself as a more important new medium for serious health care journalism, and not simply on the Web sites of ProPublica and KHN. &ldquo;The blogosphere is growing, much more than five years ago,&rdquo; said Lieberman.Andrew Holtz, a former CNN medical reporter who is now senior news editor at startup MDiTV.com, said he agrees. &ldquo;Everybody is trying to make sense of how you do journalism using the new technologies and also taking into account how those technologies have changed the business,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s sometimes happening by choice, other times by necessity as the old news organizations shrink.&rdquo;MDiTV.com is a for-profit venture that is video-based. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s like watching on-demand TV,&rdquo; explained Holtz. &ldquo;Health has always been big on the Internet, and video is catching on as more people have broadband.&rdquo;Online sites and blogs also allow for niche journalism and stories unhampered by the need to adhere to time or word limitations. Dr. Ivan Oransky, executive editor of Reuters Health at Thomson Reuters and AHCJ treasurer, also notes the rise of &ldquo;people doing things that are clearly journalistic who are not full-time journalists. This is an increasing trend partly because the barrier to entry for publishing is much lower,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;And because of the shortfall in the number of health care reporters due to layoffs.&rdquo;Although the quality of coverage varies, Oransky (who has his own blog) is enthusiastic about several bloggers, singling out Schwitzer&rsquo;s HealthNewsReview.org site, as well as Dr. Daniel Carlat, who is also an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine, and Dr. Val Jones&nbsp;who, in addition to her own blog, The Voice of Reason, also brought together a network of health care bloggers. Lieberman also blogs about health care for the Columbia Journalism Review at CJR.org.Currently, most serious bloggers have a day job, although other health care journalists are doing their best to create a business model that will replace jobs lost in traditional media. For now, however, the irony persists that, at a time that health care issues take center stage, the economy and the sea change in journalism both conspire to limit coverage.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s still tough out there,&rdquo; said Holtz. &ldquo;Health journalism isn&rsquo;t really different than what&rsquo;s happening in newsrooms in every part of journalism and the economy. We have to hope this is close to the bottom, and we&rsquo;ll climb on up from here.&rdquo;]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Debra KaufmanIt&rsquo;s impossible to talk about the state of health care journalism in the U.S. today without noticing the elephant &mdash; and the donkey &mdash; in the room: the debate over health care reform that dominated headlines, sound bites and Internet posts in 2009 and early 2010.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s the best of times and the worst of times in health care journalism,&rdquo; said Gary Schwitzer, who is leaving his post as associate professor at University of Minnesota School of Journalism and Mass Communication to devote full-time efforts to publish HealthNewsReview.org. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re talking about a spectrum of fantastic efforts by hard-working journalists who clarified the confusing picture out of Washington.&ldquo;At the other end of the spectrum, others chose to focus on the horse race of politics and did as great a disservice as any that I&rsquo;ve seen,&rdquo; continued Schwitzer, &ldquo;because journalists allowed such a polarized view to be presented &mdash; absolutely nonfactually based, ridiculous assertions, such as the &lsquo;death panels&rsquo; &mdash; without questioning them.&rdquo;Trudy Lieberman, immediate past president of the Association of Healthcare Journalists (AHCJ) and a contributing editor to the Columbia Journalism Review, notes the irony that &ldquo;we&rsquo;ve lost capacity in health care reporting at a time when its need is really great. What I&rsquo;ve seen is a lot less local reporting on the health care reform issues,&rdquo; she said. &ldquo;A lot of local news outlets rely on AP and other wire organizations.&rdquo;The launch of two nonprofit newsrooms that distribute stories to other news organizations was a serendipitous turn of events to ameliorate some of this loss of capacity: ProPublica, which began publishing in June 2008, and Kaiser Health News (KHN), which debuted June 2009, are continuing to build their relationships with major news organizations and in-depth stories.Laura McGinley, KHN executive editor, pointed out some of the upsides of the focus on health care reform for health care journalism. &ldquo;This is a time of intense interest in health care and even things that are incredibly wonky are getting attention,&rdquo; she said. &ldquo;I wouldn&rsquo;t be surprised if there was some health care fatigue for awhile. But I also think people are paying attention and have learned a lot about how the health care system works or doesn&rsquo;t. I would hope there would be continued interest.&rdquo;Schwitzer is concerned that the political skew in covering the health care reform debate has impacted coverage of other health care topics, in particular that of screenings and tests. When, in November 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force raised the recommended age for beginning mammograms from 40 to 50, based on the low risk of breast cancer between ages 40 to 50 and the risk of false positives and complications from biopsies, much of the coverage focused on the emotional reaction rather than the evidence-based results of the task force. &ldquo;This was a nonpolitical story that was made to look political and allowed this polarized frenzy to be whipped up,&rdquo; said Schwitzer. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a bad harbinger of things to come.&rdquo;Not everything is bleak when it comes to health care journalism. This past year also saw the Internet establish itself as a more important new medium for serious health care journalism, and not simply on the Web sites of ProPublica and KHN. &ldquo;The blogosphere is growing, much more than five years ago,&rdquo; said Lieberman.Andrew Holtz, a former CNN medical reporter who is now senior news editor at startup MDiTV.com, said he agrees. &ldquo;Everybody is trying to make sense of how you do journalism using the new technologies and also taking into account how those technologies have changed the business,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s sometimes happening by choice, other times by necessity as the old news organizations shrink.&rdquo;MDiTV.com is a for-profit venture that is video-based. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s like watching on-demand TV,&rdquo; explained Holtz. &ldquo;Health has always been big on the Internet, and video is catching on as more people have broadband.&rdquo;Online sites and blogs also allow for niche journalism and stories unhampered by the need to adhere to time or word limitations. Dr. Ivan Oransky, executive editor of Reuters Health at Thomson Reuters and AHCJ treasurer, also notes the rise of &ldquo;people doing things that are clearly journalistic who are not full-time journalists. This is an increasing trend partly because the barrier to entry for publishing is much lower,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;And because of the shortfall in the number of health care reporters due to layoffs.&rdquo;Although the quality of coverage varies, Oransky (who has his own blog) is enthusiastic about several bloggers, singling out Schwitzer&rsquo;s HealthNewsReview.org site, as well as Dr. Daniel Carlat, who is also an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine, and Dr. Val Jones&nbsp;who, in addition to her own blog, The Voice of Reason, also brought together a network of health care bloggers. Lieberman also blogs about health care for the Columbia Journalism Review at CJR.org.Currently, most serious bloggers have a day job, although other health care journalists are doing their best to create a business model that will replace jobs lost in traditional media. For now, however, the irony persists that, at a time that health care issues take center stage, the economy and the sea change in journalism both conspire to limit coverage.&ldquo;It&rsquo;s still tough out there,&rdquo; said Holtz. &ldquo;Health journalism isn&rsquo;t really different than what&rsquo;s happening in newsrooms in every part of journalism and the economy. We have to hope this is close to the bottom, and we&rsquo;ll climb on up from here.&rdquo;]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Health Care Journalists Look Ahead</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/health_care_journalists_look_a.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41390</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-19T22:47:52Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-19T22:49:26Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[By Elizabeth JensenAttendees at the Association of Health Care Journalists&rsquo; 2010 convention in Chicago may be coming to do the usual rounds of catching up with far-flung friends and making business contacts, but first they have to work.Even before the Thursday night welcome reception, the April 22-25 conference has scheduled back-to-back newsmaker briefings with Thomas Frieden, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.Friday morning, bright and early at 8 a.m., there&rsquo;s another briefing, this one from Jeffrey Shuren, director of the Food and Drug Administration&rsquo;s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Len Bruzzese, the executive director of the AHCJ, said via an e-mail interview that the group is &ldquo;excited to have three newsmaker briefings this year, which can generate breaking-news reports for those attending. The information shared in these sessions can usually be localized for almost any city or state.&rdquo;Attendance at the convention was down in 2009, but Bruzzese said he&rsquo;s expecting a crowd of close to 500 people this year for the event, well above last year. For one, Chicago, where the convention is being held, is easier to reach for the East Coast members than last year&rsquo;s venue, Seattle. Moreover, he said, AHCJ was able to work with more foundations this year to offer fellowship support for reporters who needed financial help in order to attend.As in the past, &ldquo;We wanted to once again put on a wide range of sessions to cover the core angles of health-related coverage,&rdquo; Bruzzese said, including medical research, health policy, the business of health care, consumer health and public health.And, he said, given the recently passed national health care overhaul, &ldquo;We particularly wanted to pay attention to what&rsquo;s next in health reform efforts. We have a track of health reform sessions that address topics that can be covered on the local scene &mdash; within our attendees&rsquo; own communities.&rdquo; Those topics include &ldquo;Does Comparative Effectiveness Research Work?&rdquo; as well as an outlook for hospitals, what&rsquo;s ahead for state and local governments, understanding health insurance and whether there is a looming doctor shortage.Another topic that is still fresh in reporters&rsquo; minds is swine flu, which appeared on the scene just one year ago. The Friday lunch &ldquo;spotlight&rdquo; panel, Bruzzese said, will bring together public health experts, including Jeffrey Levi, executive director of Trust for America&rsquo;s Health; Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC&rsquo;s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases; and Litjen Tan, director of medicine and public health at the American Medical Association and co-chair of the National Influenza Vaccine Summit, to assess how the government, media and the private sector reacted to the pandemic.The keynote speaker for Saturday&rsquo;s awards luncheon will be Dr. Peter Pronovost, an intensive care specialist who founded the Quality and Safety Research Group at Johns Hopkins University.Pronovost, a MacArthur Fellowship winner, has been in the news in recent weeks with the release of his book, &ldquo;Safe Patients, Smart Hospitals: How One Doctor&rsquo;s Checklist Can Help Us Change Health Care from the Inside Out.&rdquo; Atul Gawande wrote recently in The New Yorker that Pronovost&rsquo;s work &ldquo;has already saved more lives than that of any laboratory scientist in the past decade.&rdquo;Finally, Bruzzese noted, in recognition of the changing work circumstances of journalists, the conference has designed a couple of opportunities specifically aimed at freelancers, including a &ldquo;PitchFest,&rdquo; where freelancers get the chance to propose story assignments to editors. The Friday session will include editors from Self Magazine, The New York Times, WebMD, MSNBC.com and Kaiser Health News, among others. ]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[By Elizabeth JensenAttendees at the Association of Health Care Journalists&rsquo; 2010 convention in Chicago may be coming to do the usual rounds of catching up with far-flung friends and making business contacts, but first they have to work.Even before the Thursday night welcome reception, the April 22-25 conference has scheduled back-to-back newsmaker briefings with Thomas Frieden, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.Friday morning, bright and early at 8 a.m., there&rsquo;s another briefing, this one from Jeffrey Shuren, director of the Food and Drug Administration&rsquo;s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Len Bruzzese, the executive director of the AHCJ, said via an e-mail interview that the group is &ldquo;excited to have three newsmaker briefings this year, which can generate breaking-news reports for those attending. The information shared in these sessions can usually be localized for almost any city or state.&rdquo;Attendance at the convention was down in 2009, but Bruzzese said he&rsquo;s expecting a crowd of close to 500 people this year for the event, well above last year. For one, Chicago, where the convention is being held, is easier to reach for the East Coast members than last year&rsquo;s venue, Seattle. Moreover, he said, AHCJ was able to work with more foundations this year to offer fellowship support for reporters who needed financial help in order to attend.As in the past, &ldquo;We wanted to once again put on a wide range of sessions to cover the core angles of health-related coverage,&rdquo; Bruzzese said, including medical research, health policy, the business of health care, consumer health and public health.And, he said, given the recently passed national health care overhaul, &ldquo;We particularly wanted to pay attention to what&rsquo;s next in health reform efforts. We have a track of health reform sessions that address topics that can be covered on the local scene &mdash; within our attendees&rsquo; own communities.&rdquo; Those topics include &ldquo;Does Comparative Effectiveness Research Work?&rdquo; as well as an outlook for hospitals, what&rsquo;s ahead for state and local governments, understanding health insurance and whether there is a looming doctor shortage.Another topic that is still fresh in reporters&rsquo; minds is swine flu, which appeared on the scene just one year ago. The Friday lunch &ldquo;spotlight&rdquo; panel, Bruzzese said, will bring together public health experts, including Jeffrey Levi, executive director of Trust for America&rsquo;s Health; Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC&rsquo;s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases; and Litjen Tan, director of medicine and public health at the American Medical Association and co-chair of the National Influenza Vaccine Summit, to assess how the government, media and the private sector reacted to the pandemic.The keynote speaker for Saturday&rsquo;s awards luncheon will be Dr. Peter Pronovost, an intensive care specialist who founded the Quality and Safety Research Group at Johns Hopkins University.Pronovost, a MacArthur Fellowship winner, has been in the news in recent weeks with the release of his book, &ldquo;Safe Patients, Smart Hospitals: How One Doctor&rsquo;s Checklist Can Help Us Change Health Care from the Inside Out.&rdquo; Atul Gawande wrote recently in The New Yorker that Pronovost&rsquo;s work &ldquo;has already saved more lives than that of any laboratory scientist in the past decade.&rdquo;Finally, Bruzzese noted, in recognition of the changing work circumstances of journalists, the conference has designed a couple of opportunities specifically aimed at freelancers, including a &ldquo;PitchFest,&rdquo; where freelancers get the chance to propose story assignments to editors. The Friday session will include editors from Self Magazine, The New York Times, WebMD, MSNBC.com and Kaiser Health News, among others. ]]>
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>NAMC Survey: Questions of Ethics</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.tvweek.com/news/2010/04/namc_survey_questions_of_ethic.php" />
   <id>tag:www.tvweek.com,2010:/news//1.41388</id>
   
   <published>2010-04-19T22:22:27Z</published>
   <updated>2010-04-19T22:34:53Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[NewsPro, in association with the National Association of Medical Communicators, recently polled NAMC members about their attitudes toward the professional demands made on&nbsp;doctor-journalists, and the possibility of ethical conflicts when they are called upon to do both jobs at once. Their response ratios, and a sampling of their comments, follow.1: Must doctor-reporters choose between medicine and journalism when faced with a news story that encompasses a great medical need, such as the situation in Haiti? A: Yes, there is an inherent conflict -16.6%B: No, it is possible to do both - 83.3%Comments:&ldquo;Professional life requires trade-offs. The ethical principles that guide actions with patients are&nbsp;different than those that guide a reporter&rsquo;s with an audience.&rdquo;&ldquo;It would be difficult for a &lsquo;real&rsquo; doctor to ignore a medical emergency.&rdquo;&ldquo;Physicians have an ethical obligation to their patients, but if there is no patient present, thatspecific obligation can be overcome by journalistic ethical guidelines.&rdquo;&ldquo;The moral imperative is to help the injured. It is the oath we take as physicians.&rdquo;2: What are the biggest ethical conflicts for doctor-reporters covering a crisis such as that in Haiti?A: Ignoring countless people in medical need in order to report a story - 20.0%B: Treating selected cases that have to most potential to generate viewer interest - 35.0%C: Making themselves part of the story by getting involved in it - 35.0%D: Neglecting the need for dissemination of information by devoting themselves solely tomedical service - 5.0%E: Other - 5.0%Comments:&ldquo;A physician is never merely a reporter, the Hippocratic Oath still binds the physician, no matter his or her avocation.&rdquo;&ldquo;As an individual, there are many circumstances in which I do not treat the people around me. Theneed is infinite and my own time is limited. I divide my time between practice and nonpractice. I don&rsquo;t think there&rsquo;s any ethical conflict here if I decide to, for example, go to Haiti in a nonpractice role.&rdquo;&ldquo;I do not feel getting involved is an ethical conflict. To not get involved is the actual conflict.&rdquo;&ldquo;I don&rsquo;t think there is a conflict. We help while at the same time letting the world know of theproblem. In this way we are helping in another way by reaching many people and giving the &ldquo;real&rdquo; story of shortages, needs for continuity of care and a permanent medical presence, and speaking the truth about the situation from a medical, psychological and realistic perspective.&rdquo;3: Is a doctor-reporter ethically obligated to to assume the role of doctor if an immediate andurgent medical need presents itself in the midst of reporting a story?A: Yes - 100%Comments:&ldquo;Urgent medical need is a tricky thing: It can look one way on camera, and actually be somethingdifferent. But if the doctor perceives an urgent medical need, then the doctor&rsquo;s intercession canitself be the story: Sanjay Gupta in Haiti, for example, and New Orleans.&rdquo;&ldquo;It&rsquo;s part of professional DNA, not to mention codes of ethics, to intercede when immediate needrequires it. Whether we name this beneficence or fairness isn&rsquo;t relevant.&rdquo;&ldquo;It&rsquo;s the same obligation when we are out in public and a serious emergency occurs.&rdquo;&ldquo;If an individual to whom I am talking suddenly experiences a life-threatening emergency, myobligation would be to provide medical assistance. Short of that, my obligation would be whatever role I have taken on &mdash; journalism, for example.&rdquo;4: Does the public get better information and/or news from doctor-reporters vs. standardjournalists? Briefly, why or why not?&ldquo;Not necessarily. It depends on the story being covered. It may simply be easier, and require muchless work/research for a doctor-reporter to report on certain [topics] than it would a standard journalist.&rdquo;&ldquo;No, and because what the public requires is not what doctors are trained to offer. Doctors typicallycannot offer simple, clear, accurate short descriptions of diagnosis and treatment. But many learn to do so over time. Learning news is a different challenge altogether. Perspective and timing are everything.&rdquo;&ldquo;In some cases, yes, because the doctor has scientific evidence for the comments that are made and so the comments are grounded in research and not justopinion.&rdquo;&ldquo;Yes, because there is no way for a reporter to understand the complexities of the medicalsituations as efficiently as a practicing physician. The severity of an injury or disease is frequently not as it might appear to a layperson. The hope is that the medical physician reporter can quickly assess and explain complex issues without complex jargon.&rdquo;&ldquo;You want a journalist to have some areas of expertise on which he or she focuses. What betterfor a health reporter than a physician?&rdquo;&mdash;Tom Gilbert]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Tom Gilbert</name>
      <uri>http://www.tvweek.com/</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Broadcast" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Cable" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
      <category term="Digital" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tvweek.com/news/">
      <![CDATA[NewsPro, in association with the National Association of Medical Communicators, recently polled NAMC members about their attitudes toward the professional demands made on&nbsp;doctor-journalists, and the possibility of ethical conflicts when they are called upon to do both jobs at once. Their response ratios, and a sampling of their comments, follow.1: Must doctor-reporters choose between medicine and journalism when faced with a news story that encompasses a great medical need, such as the situation in Haiti? A: Yes, there is an inherent conflict -16.6%B: No, it is possible to do both - 83.3%Comments:&ldquo;Professional life requires trade-offs. The ethical principles that guide actions with patients are&nbsp;different than those that guide a reporter&rsquo;s with an audience.&rdquo;&ldquo;It would be difficult for a &lsquo;real&rsquo; doctor to ignore a medical emergency.&rdquo;&ldquo;Physicians have an ethical obligation to their patients, but if there is no patient present, thatspecific obligation can be overcome by journalistic ethical guidelines.&rdquo;&ldquo;The moral imperative is to help the injured. It is the oath we take as physicians.&rdquo;2: What are the biggest ethical conflicts for doctor-reporters covering a crisis such as that in Haiti?A: Ignoring countless people in medical need in order to report a story - 20.0%B: Treating selected cases that have to most potential to generate viewer interest - 35.0%C: Making themselves part of the story by getting involved in it - 35.0%D: Neglecting the need for dissemination of information by devoting themselves solely tomedical service - 5.0%E: Other - 5.0%Comments:&ldquo;A physician is never merely a reporter, the Hippocratic Oath still binds the physician, no matter his or her avocation.&rdquo;&ldquo;As an individual, there are many circumstances in which I do not treat the people around me. Theneed is infinite and my own time is limited. I divide my time between practice and nonpractice. I don&rsquo;t think there&rsquo;s any ethical conflict here if I decide to, for example, go to Haiti in a nonpractice role.&rdquo;&ldquo;I do not feel getting involved is an ethical conflict. To not get involved is the actual conflict.&rdquo;&ldquo;I don&rsquo;t think there is a conflict. We help while at the same time letting the world know of theproblem. In this way we are helping in another way by reaching many people and giving the &ldquo;real&rdquo; story of shortages, needs for continuity of care and a permanent medical presence, and speaking the truth about the situation from a medical, psychological and realistic perspective.&rdquo;3: Is a doctor-reporter ethically obligated to to assume the role of doctor if an immediate andurgent medical need presents itself in the midst of reporting a story?A: Yes - 100%Comments:&ldquo;Urgent medical need is a tricky thing: It can look one way on camera, and actually be somethingdifferent. But if the doctor perceives an urgent medical need, then the doctor&rsquo;s intercession canitself be the story: Sanjay Gupta in Haiti, for example, and New Orleans.&rdquo;&ldquo;It&rsquo;s part of professional DNA, not to mention codes of ethics, to intercede when immediate needrequires it. Whether we name this beneficence or fairness isn&rsquo;t relevant.&rdquo;&ldquo;It&rsquo;s the same obligation when we are out in public and a serious emergency occurs.&rdquo;&ldquo;If an individual to whom I am talking suddenly experiences a life-threatening emergency, myobligation would be to provide medical assistance. Short of that, my obligation would be whatever role I have taken on &mdash; journalism, for example.&rdquo;4: Does the public get better information and/or news from doctor-reporters vs. standardjournalists? Briefly, why or why not?&ldquo;Not necessarily. It depends on the story being covered. It may simply be easier, and require muchless work/research for a doctor-reporter to report on certain [topics] than it would a standard journalist.&rdquo;&ldquo;No, and because what the public requires is not what doctors are trained to offer. Doctors typicallycannot offer simple, clear, accurate short descriptions of diagnosis and treatment. But many learn to do so over time. Learning news is a different challenge altogether. Perspective and timing are everything.&rdquo;&ldquo;In some cases, yes, because the doctor has scientific evidence for the comments that are made and so the comments are grounded in research and not justopinion.&rdquo;&ldquo;Yes, because there is no way for a reporter to understand the complexities of the medicalsituations as efficiently as a practicing physician. The severity of an injury or disease is frequently not as it might appear to a layperson. The hope is that the medical physician reporter can quickly assess and explain complex issues without complex jargon.&rdquo;&ldquo;You want a journalist to have some areas of expertise on which he or she focuses. What betterfor a health reporter than a physician?&rdquo;&mdash;Tom Gilbert]]>
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>

