Comments on: Super Tuesday coverage open thread

By: Joe - fourhman.com

Joe - fourhman.com — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:23:39 +0000

You are when you use the phrase “for the nets to reach out to the local affiliates”.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:48:21 +0000

I didn’t see any synergy between the networks and local affiliates online.

As the polls started closing the nation was in primetime which meant you either went to the cable nets or online for news updates.

Would it have made sense for the nets to reach out to the local affiliates and say we’re going to have live streaming that you can either link to or embed in your own player to enhance your / our coverage of this news event? Or am I way off-base here?

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:16:49 +0000

Come back Ross… I’m in the mood for some nostalgia.

By: R.Perot

R.Perot — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 08:41:00 +0000

Now lemme tell you something… Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, can do a good job without some easels and posterboard, and little bitty troll feet. America, if you really want change then send me a text.

Thanks, I’ll never forget you…

By: Kerry

Kerry — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 04:36:48 +0000

It’s close to call which channel has the ‘best’ of anything. CNN has a great touch-screen map (very quick response) but the Fox screen is larger and easier to see on tv.
NBC has great full-screen graphics, but I like CNN’s lower-thirds.

By: Fair & Balanced

Fair & Balanced — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 03:24:01 +0000

NBC’s graphics of the candidates seems to have them pictured in reverse. For example, John McCain’s hair was parted on the left, not the right. He parts his hair on his right. Huckabee’s image looked as if it was reversed, too. And Mitt Romeny’s stylish hair also appeared to be mirror imaged. What is all this about? To make this a fair and balanced image post, Clinton’s hair looked slightly different, but you could see blotches on her neck.

By: Jason Salas

Jason Salas — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 02:21:39 +0000

Technically, but not so much on the content side, I’m amazed. I just caught NBC’s camera-tracked studio graphics, which Anne Curry talked over. It’s a transparent space that loads animated graphs, giving the impression of plexiglass. The thing that blew me away was that the trajectory and angle of the graphic dynamically adjusted to the angle of the camera, which was beyond cool.

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 01:58:43 +0000

CNN called a projection for Arkansas literally the second the polls closed (according to CNN’s clock, not some clock in Ft. Smith, which makes you wonder…) with NO precincts reporting!

I don’t know about others, but I think I’d prefer they wait until some significant percentage of precincts had reported.

By: Kerry

Kerry — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 01:14:05 +0000

I like CNN’s studio. Graphically, they are doing a superior job, and the atmos noise gives a feeling of action. However they are making some giant directorial blunders, perhaps because of all the cameras they’ve crammed in there (including a wobbly steadicam).
Fox is ‘quieter’ (despite noisy graphics) and their lower-third is constantly stacking up to the point where it might fall over. But they’re linking to more places across the US, CNN hasn’t done a live link in a while.
Aljazeera is doing a good jobm they have very easy-to-read graphics and a nice independant perspective. BBC World is also good for plenty of unbiased opinions, however they aren’t giving us as much data as the American networks.

By: discreet_chaos

discreet_chaos — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 01:03:08 +0000

Whoops - Now there’s audio, but no video.

By: discreet_chaos

discreet_chaos — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 01:01:29 +0000

MSNBC was streaming their coverage via a “dashboard”, but the coverage suddenly stopped and though the “dashboard” link remains on the header of MSNBC.com, the “video” is a card advertising their archive library.

(It’s been down for at least ten minutes)