Olympics Glass Half Full for Me

I could remember when I watched the Olympics full of anger.

Gimpy, nauseating athlete feature stories. Sitting through events about which I could care less. Enduring jaunty patter from a score of empty anchor suits.

Fast forward to 2006, and I'm a much happier camper. Want to know whether Shani Davis become the first African American to win a gold medal in skating in Turin? Call up NBCOLympics.com (or, even, Sptimes.com, to make a blatant plug) and watch the video well before the network gets around to broadcasting it.

Want an alert when the U.S. men's hockey team takes on Finland? A replay of the tense press conference where Davis and American rival Chad Hedrick sat at opposite ends of a long table and eventually dissed each other mercilessly? An opinion from Project Runway expert Tim Gunn on which figure skating outfits look good? (okay, probably not that)

This is why I'm digging the digital media universe. For folks like me, who just want to know enough to look smart around the watercooler, NBC's move to spread coverage all over cable-land and the Internet is way cool. I can see what i want when I want and bypass -- or enjoy -- all the nonsense.

Which is why I never really understood all the to-do this year about NBC's prime time Olympics broadcasts slumping in the ratings. In this new digital media universe, of course the Olympics ratings will fall in prime time: prime time TV viewership is down in general, the events have happened hours ago and are available online or on cable, and people have more on demand attitude than ever.

The other thing I don't get, however, is the Today show's seeming ratings boost from its deluge of Turin coverage. I'm been starting my day with Good Morning America for the past 12 days because it's nailed just the right amount of Olympics vs. real news coverage for me. It's not really news to me that pidgeons like to poop on Katie Couric or Al Roker looks awful in speed skating pants. Some of us would prefer to leave that to our imaginations.

I'm probably maladjusted, but I've always dreamed of a media universe where you could consume just as much (or as little) of a candy-coated hype fest like the Winter Olympics as you could stand. Now that its a reality, why are people complaining so much?

Did You Hear the One About the Vanishing Newscast?

Why won't anyone at Sinclair or WTTA-Ch. 38 talk about the station's newscast?

As I noted in a post a while ago, rumors have run rampant for weeks locally that Tampa's WB affiliate is about to drop its ill-fated 10 p.m. newscast. Originally cobbled together as part of Sinclair's wobbly attempt to clone Fox News Channel on its station group -- and to help WTTA sell ads to customers who don't advertise on stations without a newscast -- the local broadcast has always seemed a little starved for resources and visibility.

The latest rumor is that executives have notified the staff that the weekend broadcast is history in a week or so. But calls to the station's news director, general manager and Sinclar corporate types have yielded a big goose egg for weeks. Not even a "no comment." Just nothing.

It is always ironic when people who spend their workdays trying to get others to comment on the day's news refuse to speak up when they are in the crosshairs (reminds me of recent news on a certain local tabloid going five days weekly. But I digress).

Sure, you could probably count their viewers for that weekend newscast on Captain Hook's fingers, but doesn't the community deserve to know if one of its newscasts is going away?

PUNDIT Alert:

Looks like CBS' Public Eye blog has accepted a new idea I pitched them for one of their Outside Voices essays. If all goes as usual, I expect the essay to be published Friday. Between these guys and the Huffington Post, I may end up writing as much for other blogs as my own.

Comments

[Eric Deggans]

Not to nitpick, but if NBC was thinking in the old ways, they wouln't have scheduled 418 hours of coverage over seven different TV channels. If they were thinking in old ways, they would embargo video and results data until after it was shown on TV, as they have in past Olympics.Right now, networks know they need to get their brand into as many different digital media platforms as possible, to prepare for the time when those platforms will become a major part of their profit stream. it's just like the early days of cable, when Discovery Channel established five different channels -- despite lacking the material to adequately fill all of them -- because they knew the needed to get the slots on digital cable lineups across the country.And the word is fait accompli. And you may be right.

[Anonymous]

thing is eric, the networks think in the old ways. and bill in the old ways. the effect of primetime ratings on networks for ad revenue isn't likely to change soon.to say network suits are obsessed with ratings, well, that's being polite. there really isn't another widely-used method of gauging what is popular and what isn't on tv, as imperfect as ratings may be.per the confirmation: i didn't mean to say you should run with that wb news story in tomorrow's paper. but if the suit over there won't even pick up the phone to deny the rumor, it's a (pardon my french) "fate' accompli" (or is that latin?).

[Eric Deggans]

Unfortunately, as a journalist who hates using annymous sources or uncomfirmed reports, that's not really all the confirmation I need for the newspaper (but rumor rules the blogosphere, so i have no such worries here).And regarding the Olympics, my point is this: we are in a new media universe. You can only see American Idol on your local fox station; Olympics images, footage and scores are available on close to 10 different official platforms -- not counting the coverage from outlets such as ESPN, Sports illustrated online, etc.So assuming the games are not as impactful as they once were because their prime time network TV ratings are down is old media thinking in a new media world. That's all I'm saying (sorry, Ernest).

[Anonymous]

eric: some of the reaction to the olympics imploding is that in years past, the olympics ruled the ratings. it was a virtual guarentee for the network broadcasting them -- winter or summer -- that it was a ratings bonanza. but this year, idol and desperate housewives beat the olympics. even the daytona 500 pulled in double-digit ratings (not in primetime) on sunday. as a result, the olympics has lost the luster. i kinda agree with "formerly mr anonymous," i can see either shelton or romano going to italy, but both? especially with the daytona 500 and the opening of spring training happening on this spot of the new world. per the wb's newcast, hey, if you can't get a suit on the phone to pimp a newscast (or even deny rumors of the newscast's demise), that's about all the confirmation you need.

[Eric Deggans]

Well, I don't know if we're spending vast sums to send people to Turin. I think we have two columnists there now. Near as I can tell, even our photos have come from associated press and other news agencies. But since Gary Shelton is particular has been voted best sports columnst in the country many times, it makes sense to send him to Turin. Why would we keep one of the best commentators in sports away from one of the biggest sports stories of the year?When journalists cover news events from their desks they make themselves prisoner of the observatinos and reporting skills of others. So i don't blame news prgnizations for sending their own reporters. I blame people for automatically concluding that shrinking viewership numbers means shrinking interest....

[formerly mr anonymous]

your comments re the taped olympics also serve as a perfect explanation of why the print media is losing readers, i.e., a lack of immediacy when those who care already know what happened hours, or a full day, ago from online sources.one also wonders why the two local print outlets continue to spend vast sums to send staff to the olympics when what they send back could just as easily be crafted from their chairs in their newsrooms. maybe all that money could be better spent digging up local news unavailable elsewhere?