Local TV News Project 1999

This year we seem to be closer to identifying a handful of key elements that help make quality sell. Keep in mind, content is not the only factor that might shape ratings. Anchors, set, lighting, lead-in, viewer history, all play a role.

Once again we split the stations into groups: At the high end are what the study defines as "master" stations, those with high quality (an A or B grade) and rising ratings (an up arrow). "Earnest" stations are those with high quality and declining ratings (a down arrow).

Some findings are supported two years running:

• Master stations cover less crime than earnest (also less trivial and less out-of-town crime). Master stations are more local (88% of stories were locally relevant versus 80% for earnest, a bigger differential than last year).
  Master stations show more enterprise. They are nearly twice as likely as earnest stations to do multi-part series, for instance, and rely less on out-of-town feeds.

• Master stations are 31% less likely to use anonymous sources. This not only reinforces last year's findings, it also reinforces our focus groups, where citizens repeatedly complained about unnamed sources. "Whenever the news tells me a source said,' I think ... somebody is dropping leaks or something. [It] seems sort of dirty, underhanded," said a viewer in Atlanta.
  Viewers still apparently like seeing everyday citizens in the news.
• Master stations remained the most likely to air person-on-the-street interviews. Yet there are signs this year that viewers turn off if they perceive tragedy being exploited. Master stations are 16% less likely than earnest stations to put victims and their family members on the air.

  Perhaps the most tantalizing new finding is that master stations are more likely to cover the core institutions and concerns that hold a community together. If one creates an index to measure how many stories a station is doing about major local institutions, businesses, economics, infrastructure, legislatures and social issues, master stations produce more of these stories -- 36% versus 27% -- than earnest stations. They also do more stories about substantive trends. This holds true for all rising stations this year, unlike last year. And when it comes to politics, horse race coverage is bad for ratings. Reporting on the legislature is not.