23 Comments Add your own

• 1. Safran  |  May 1st, 2007 at 3:41 am

  Look for something big.

• 2. mel taylor  |  May 1st, 2007 at 4:06 am

  I would suggest that Mike is “stepping up” from his ground breaking and successful stint at WKRN. ( I just read Rosenblum’s blog ) hint…hint
  :)

• 3. 5w50  |  May 1st, 2007 at 5:34 am

  He drank the Kool-Aid. Good luck!

• 4. Z  |  May 1st, 2007 at 5:46 am

  It’d be downright funny if the new GM chucked the VJ model out the window.

  I don’t expect it, mind you. I’d just laugh if it did, though.

• 5. invitedmedia  |  May 1st, 2007 at 6:08 am

  Z,

  i wouldn’t be surprised if they “chucked”. i would argue had mike done this in LA or NY (or both) you’d see vj’s everywhere these days.

  nothing against the fine folks in nashville.

  i think it would be a mistake to brand mike as solely the pioneer of “the vj model” although those who just want this all to go away will try.

• 6. warren reid  |  May 1st, 2007 at 6:55 am

  In the spirit of openness and honesty, has anyone figured out where WKRN.com ranks in the Nashville media landscape?

  Just 6 months ago it was in fourth place….

  Not sure when the new numbers are due out, but it’s hard for me to believe a site that only does blogs and video (and THATS IT) would jump to #1….

  As great and earth-shattering as Mike and WKRN *might be* (and they just might), where are all of the numbers and figures to back it all up?

  What kind of profit are we talking about?

  If we’re going to sit here and be told the Honorable Profit is great can someone please back it up with some numbers? Isnt that what this business is all about?

  No offense meant to any one — really — but some reality would help before everyone jumps off a bridge to do what Nashville did… please?

• 7. Allen  |  May 1st, 2007 at 7:20 am

  Warren,

  If you go to Rosenblum’s blog you will see this quote:

  “And at WKRN he (Sechrist) made it work, and showed massive profits from his website.”

  No mention is made of any success for the TV side of things because there is none, at least as far as ratings are concerned.

• 8. Z  |  May 1st, 2007 at 7:40 am

  I suspect that the gains in Web revenue don’t quite make up for the lack of money made on the TV side at the station…which might be another reason he’s leaving.

• 9. Sothruwith2  |  May 1st, 2007 at 8:16 am

  To Z: The current and soon to be former GM had already effectively dumped th4 VJ model. What 2 puts on now is news out of the paper covered by 2 man crews, followed by novelty beats, such as Real Estate and Religion covered by VJ’s. It didn’t work. Mike himself said the quality of the stories dipped when the vj system was implemented. He’ll deny it, because he’s joining forces with Rosenblum, but he knows that’s the case. This is coming from someone who works there, and had no problem being a vj, other than we were getting killed on a daily basis because the system didn’t allow us to compete.

• 10. Chip Mahaney  |  May 1st, 2007 at 9:52 am

  When I was moderating a VJ session with Michael and Mike at RTNDA last month, I could tell they had that look in their eyes!

  Best of luck to both of you in this new venture.

• 11. Safran  |  May 1st, 2007 at 11:09 am

  Sothru: Feel free to criticize the model, as we’re all about debate here. But understand - KRN has not “dumped” the VJ model. It has, indeed, modified it when it found a 2-person crew worked better. No surprise there. That’s the wonderful thing about trying new models - you never know where they may lead you.

  We should absolutely salute those in our business willing to try new things. It’s a time of enormous upheaval when the only sure thing is that staying the course will end in doom.

• 12. warren reid  |  May 1st, 2007 at 12:17 pm

  still waiting on answers to my question….

  The Media Audit report from Nashville’s web scene was just completed and is due out in a month — that should tell us a lot…

• 13. Jon J  |  May 1st, 2007 at 2:46 pm

  Mike said from the beginning that 2-person crews would continue to be used when required…a fact continually forgotton by the anti-VJ contingent.

• 14. Allen  |  May 1st, 2007 at 3:45 pm

  Except it seems the two person crews are required more often than not.

• 15. Josh  |  May 1st, 2007 at 6:34 pm

  Very interesting development. But is Mike really joining up with Rosenblum? I’ve heard nothing about it from Mike

• 16. Cory  |  May 1st, 2007 at 6:43 pm

  I don’t have revenue numbers for WKRN, yet some stats mentioned in his presentation at NAB-RTNDA:

  600,000 video views/month, and most of the site’s revenue is based on selling prerolls to those clips.

  40% of total pageviews originate from the 23 blogs.

• 17. Allen  |  May 1st, 2007 at 9:13 pm

  Josh,

  Rosenblum mentions it on his blog.

• 18. Dan  |  May 1st, 2007 at 9:42 pm

  I’m curious…..
  Has it been shown a one person crew is a good way of reporting a story with video/audio, that has to be
  written as well as edited? Who does this benefit?
  Is it the reporter…. the station news director…. the station manager…. the shareholders… the viewer? I see how the consultant benefits, but who else does?

  I’m trying to figure out why this has been
  deemed a good idea to replace covering a story
  where one person talks to people and gets the story
  while another person documents what’s happening.
  Has it been shown very clearly, that one person can
  do a better job than two in this situation, or can do
  at least as good a job? And if so, do you kill the
  reporter/shooter/audio person/story editor/video editor
  and do they get disillusioned of the business quicker
  and quit sooner?

  Can you see Andrea Mitchell covering the Cuba May Day celebration today while shooting the parade?
  Sure she could do it, but at what cost to both the story
  and the pictures?

  Dan

• 19. Stephen Warley  |  May 2nd, 2007 at 3:27 am

  Good luck Mike!

• 20. Michael Rosenblum  |  May 2nd, 2007 at 3:51 am

  Just to answer Dan’s question above: what is the value of having one person ‘talk to people and get the story’, if they don’t have a camera to shoot it while they’re talking to people and getting the story. Why drag the cameraman back and then have to say - the thing you told me before… say it again. Why not just give that person a camera also? And whatsa matter, Andrea Mitchell too good to carry a camera? Find someone who can!

• 21. invitedmedia  |  May 2nd, 2007 at 5:43 am

  unlike the headline would suggest (’sechrist out at wkrn’) broadcasting and cable give mike a nice send off.

  it’s worth a read… near the bottom of the homepage.

  mike needs to work on that “websites” quote though.

  it’s web “channels”, mike!!! FGS!!!

• 22. aidian  |  May 2nd, 2007 at 5:02 pm

  The two years KRN has been VJ isn’t enough time to really see if the VJ model will work. It’s not even enough time to really develop a VJ model.

  I’m long way from nashville, and don’t work for Young anymore, but from what i hear they haven’t, at least not yet, delivered on the promise of VJs — double the crews, real beats, time for every reporter to develop enterprise every day (not just on sweeps). But, from what little I’ve seen, they’ve got the problems everyone predicted — bad video, weak spot news coverage, etc.

  I’m still agnostic (as a producer I’ll be overworked and underpaid no matter what happens), but I would have liked to see someone capable and dedicated like Seachrist stick around for another couple years to see if he could make it really work.

• 23. Dan  |  May 2nd, 2007 at 6:13 pm

  Yeah, I’m not saying I don’t want to see this work
  or that I know one way or the other it does or doesn’t work. I was just asking for some real info as to how it’s worked
  so far with regard to quality of reports, how the staff
  reacts to doing it, how the viewership is impacted, etc.
  But no one has responded so far.

  Dan

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed