Frustrated by KOCO's constant interruptions

I'm not going to "deal" with it by ignoring it. That doesn't solve squat.

Every time they do it, I send an email to them.

Same with the overcovering the weather, placing a 14" wide graphic on my TV screen during a show, and killing the HD feed 50% of the time they do it.

Stations should welcome our feedback and complaints; it gives them a chance to consider what we've said and make the product more enjoyable to more people.

Here's the KOCO feedback page, so you won't have to wade through all the links on their website. I use this page quite often.

Comments? Questions? Contact KOCO-TV - KOCO-TV News Story - KOCO Oklahoma City

I criticize many stations, but KOCO remains one of my favorites. That doesn't mean I wouldn't change several things they do that annoy me.

I don't send complaints to KWTV anymore. I gave up completely and just stopped watching them. Lack of feedback from viewers should be the one thing stations fear the most, because it means we just don't care enough anymore to even try to watch.

It is crap. Task yourself with finding ANY television news broadcast that is critical of ANY of their sponsors. Reporters only report what the sponsors want them to report, and the agency will report anything in any manner that gets them more sponsors. There you have it. News agencies are sellouts, and what you're watching is crap.

__________________
...this shortest straw has been pulled for you

That's why the now-defunct relationship between the Oklahoman's and News9 websites was such an unholy alliance. They advertised it as the "combined" power of both newsgathering sources when, in reality, it has to end up as the lowest common denominator of both - for precisely the same reasons.

Sadly, the same reasons go back to why you won't find anything adverse about cars, automotive dealers, or the broader industry in the newspapers, because auto advertisements make up the overwhelming portion of such papers' classifieds.

rwood, yes, you are missing the point. You were diminishing the validity of the complaint about interruptions on the basis of what was being watched at the time, eg it was just "The View," or "All My Children," or whatever. The point is that's a lousy basis on which to argue the relative "validity" of an interruption. You and I and everyone else have distinct tastes in what we watch; the point isn't finding shows that "merit" interruption, its about ceasing the practice altogether.

About the only respite from commercials and interruptions is on pay movie services, I guess...I remember that cable - many years ago - was pushed as an "advertising-free" alternative to "regular" TV....pretty laughable now...

-sd

You know what, you're right. TV News is a sellout. It's a business. In reality, all businesses are sellouts.

But I watch the news...I must be a sellout, too.

I'm totally okay with that.

Missing 30 seconds of what I believe is a terrible TV show has you all up in arms? That just makes the cyclone in Myanmar look like a baby wind storm. Give me a break.

And another thing -- you really must not watch the news if you think reporters only report what the sponsors want them to report. That is completely ludicrous and undermines the ethics of journalists everywhere.

Believe it or not, journalists do have standards...very high standards, in fact.

You just have it all figured out, don't you? And yet...news stations still cut-in. Interesting how that works...

What?

I don't mind a "we interrupt this program" cut every now and then so long as it's necessary, just like I don't mind having my sleep interrupted by the sound of emergency responders' sirens during an emergency. However, I'd have a problem if the firemen and police sounded their sirens while racing to the scene of a papercut accident, and I think you'd have issues with this also.

Now, imagine this happening frequently over a period of time and you'll start to see where we're coming from. Whether or not YOU appreciate the show that's being interrupted is completely irrelevant because the person who is watching the show is tuning in for a reason. Everyone has different tastes. I just get frustrated with a "Breaking News" report over trivial things.


I'll be waiting to see a news report critical of an agency's sponsor. When that happens, your statement might have some credibility.

__________________
...this shortest straw has been pulled for you

Yes, yes I do have it all figured out. And thanks for noticing!

-sd

27 of rwood8's 31 posts are related to news coverage. I just thought I'd point out that.

__________________
...this shortest straw has been pulled for you

lets not attack someone for posting about what they clearly have knowledge of. Just agree to disagree and we can smile and have a group hug now.
P.S. No news station has any credibility left in OKC, standards or not.

Note the part where "journalists have standards" too....

Standards of what? Ineptitude?

Every single time I've had first-hand knowledge of something that is covered by the press, they've screwed up around 50% of the facts. That's from local to national news, across the board. They're incompetent and they have an overdeveloped sense of entitlement.

What the reasons behind that are, I have no idea. Could be a consipiracy having something to do with advertising dollars and the government wanting to maintain the status quo of the the "sheeple"...But I just usually chalk it up to the part where it's a business and not a public service...So it's all about pandering at both ends of the product line.

All I'm saying is this:

It happens. It's going to happen. Suck it up like everyone else has to and move on. Believe it or not, a majority of people LIKE the breaking news.

Also, those of you with skepticism about the ethics/standards of a journalist -- you should do more research before jumping to conclusions. They're probably the most ethical people you'll ever meet.

Think about it. Ever heard of libel/slander? Those are just a couple examples of how journalists are constantly maintaining their standards so they don't end up in a courtroom.

On another subject, someone researched the content of my posts? Creepy, much?

In response to it -- big deal. I enjoy TV news. Other people enjoy The View, All My Children, etc... I happen to like the news.

I'm not going to "suck it up". It's retarded and it should stop. And while the responses in this thread are hardly representative of society at large, I think they're a good indication that the "majority" don't like their shows being interrupted by a story that doesn't impact their lives in any way.

How about this...How about your beloved newscast gets interrupted with American Idol updates and constant teasers for tomorrow's episode of The View? You like the news. Fine. You go right ahead and watch it. But don't make people that don't want to watch it be subjected to it. Last I checked, it's not a requirement of TV viewership.

Journalists being ethical? That's probably the most laughable thing I've read all week...And I read a lot of funny sh*t. Libel and slander are very easy to avoid by oblique inferences and ambiguous statements, it's very easy to call somebody a liar without actually saying it in order to lean towards the legal side of things. Politicians and internet trolls do it on a daily basis.

As for the creepy factor of researching your posts...It's about two clicks and they're all grouped together for easy parsing. You having relatively few posts makes it even easier.

The golden age of OKC TV news journalism put Molly Murphy's out of business.

__________________
Keep away from Miss Margarita Mean...

But, waitaminute. It's been stated here that news stations don't report stories against their advertisers?! Surely, Molly Murphy's advertised with KFOR. So I guess that whole incident never took place.

The fact of the matter is I can point out numerous times that stations have reported stories on people that buy their advertising time. Hell, Braums' refused to buy time with one of them for years because of a story that ran. And furthermore, that station was warned by Braum's that if the story aired then they would pull their business. The story aired, they pulled their ads, the station found someone else to buy time (that is always an option, you know).

Before Brad Edwards passed away a couple of years ago, he did a story on 1-800-2Sell Homes (You know, the woman with the most annoying voice since Linda Soundtrack) and the racket she and her husband were running and they advertised all over KFOR. More recently, Amanda Taylor did an expose on KWTV on a local contractor who advertised with all the stations and how he allegedly screwed a poor woman out of her money.

Plenty more, but alas, I know it will fall on deaf ears. Everyone in the business is totally aware that journalists are looked at, by the general public, just as cops and lawyers are looked at: You refuse to appreciate them until you need them. I can, however, offer a little insight into the constant weather cut-ins in that all stations believe if they've helped one person (be it warning them to take cover or allowing a viewer to contact a family member that might be in danger to take cover), then cutting into program is worth it. So for all of you who are annoyed by these interruptions, you really should count yourself lucky that you've never needed it.

There's a difference between a weather interruption and interrupting a show to air a teaser, in the guise of "breaking news." That's what started this whole thread, and I agree, somewhat, that they need to save the interruptions for real breaking news. I'm torn whether the emergency landing of that plane constituted breaking news, since it landed safely, albeit in a wheat field.

Teasers belong with the commercials, not on top of your TV programs.

Agreed. If they broke in for a teaser, that was out of line(although, I've never heard of anyone doing that). And as far as the plane landing goes, I agree it's borderline. I can say from past experiences that when something like that goes down, the usual status quo (at least in my experiences) is to break in during a commercial break to show that we are on the scene gathering details. You have to keep in mind that when something like that breaks, there are literally hundreds of people calling the station to find out whats going on. So really it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation; if you break in you get phone calls from angry viewers wanting to know why you're interrupting their show and if you don't break in you get phone calls from viewers wanting to know why we're not reporting on the situation.

I will say that I've noticed KOCO breaking in a lot more than they used to. I would be willing to bet it's due in large part to cancelling their noon broadcast.

I was just thinking the same thing.

It's not unique to OKC either...