0/5

“They are about pushing emotional buttons.”

A former TV news boss says hot topics are about ratings, but there should still be room for balanced debate.

2016-08-08_2140

After attracting headlines for saying Australia’s borders should be closed to Muslim immigrants, Sonia Kruger conceded complex discussions cannot be discussed adequately in a Live televised moment.

A week later she said scholarships should not be based on sexuality, and ignited a further media storm.

So it begs the question: should Live television panels really be raising such complex issues if they don’t have the time to discuss them at length? One producer told TV Tonight such shows are under increasing pressure to keep segments short, to stop viewers drifting.

But Steve Carey, founding partner of Newsflash Media, and a Director of Seven News for a decade, says Kruger’s comments brought Today and Today Extra plenty of chatter.

“Commercial TV –let’s not make any mistake about it– it’s about ratings. It’s a business and it’s about getting eyeballs on sets. The more controversial, emotional buttons you can push, the more people who talk about it the better,” he says.

“In terms of advertising dollars that’s exactly what TV execs want from those morning shows. They are big money spinners.

“A lot of copy, a lot of print and airtime has now been devoted to what she said and that debate continues.”

“Rightly or wrongly if you get a certain hashtag happening everybody just piles onto it.”

But Carey believes social media has added significantly to both a knock-on effect as well as the speed to turn current trends into television.

60 Minutes used to be watercooler talk. The next day people would say ‘Did you see that story?’ and if you hadn’t seen it you weren’t part of the conversation. Soź the game-changer to all of these shows –not just breakfast television– but all TV has been this explosion of social media. Now everybody has a voice, and I hate this term but depending on whether you lean to the ‘left’ or the ‘right’ ….that viewpoint is amplified,” he explains.

“Rightly or wrongly if you get a certain hashtag happening everybody just piles onto it. The danger is they are piling on sometimes without even knowing what they’re talking about.”

Such “hot topics” are common across Breakfast TV shows such as Today, Sunrise, The Morning Show and Studio 10, but even The Project has segments devoted to national issues. According to Carey, those involved at Today would have known Muslim immigration was to be discussed, but may not have been across the finer points Kruger was about to make.

“You always have your production meeting, so you know what you’re going to be talking about. So she would have had the opportunity to have a little bit of thought around it,” Carey suggests.

“In simplistic terms, they are about pushing emotional buttons. Can you still (bring) a tempered, reasoned add to the debate? That’s really up to the people producing the show. I would argue yes you can. You have ample time to do it, if you have the will-power, the talent and the producers with the nous to do it.

“The real challenge I see at the moment is how you have a reasoned debate where people are allowed to express an opinion, without a social media storm which becomes meaningless.”

2016-08-08_2148

One of the other lessons from Today’s “Mixed Grill” segment was in allowing the host to air an opinion -instead of an expert guest- which risks getting half the audience offside.

“I was always taught that you were not to have an opinion,” Carey recalls. “As a reporter you were there to get both sides of the story, present it as factually, accurately and informatively as you possibly could.

“For the last 5 years it has accelerated largely due to the impact of social media and our appetite for celebrity and scandal, which has been amplified. Now we have people who would not normally have an extreme –for want of a better word- ‘left’ or ‘right’ position which is presented as part of the brief.

“I suspect she would have wanted to phrase it differently”

“It can be very polarising and what you risk is people saying what you ‘think’ people want. I like commentators who say what they think, not what they think people want to hear.

“And it takes (away) the ability of the viewer to listen to the information and dissect it themselves.

“But Sonia is not some kid who has been slotted into the presenter role. She has been around media, she understands media.

“I can’t speak for her but I suspect she would have wanted to phrase it differently. She may have that view but I think she probably would have (liked to) moderate what she said.

“I think there is some truth that you can’t cover everything. But should you apologise for it? I mean, you’re not going to dedicate an entire hour of breakfast TV to one thing.”

“This is going to become the norm”

Another growing trend amongst media is in having young segment producers overseeing debates, watched by young online journalists ready to turn the next comment from Karl, Sam and Sonia into clickbait headlines.

“This is going to become the norm. This is where the older hands who are in the newsrooms, and producing slots and there are some fantastic ones, should help these people grow and make sure they get the right advice,” Carey notes.

“I worry we’re getting a group of people who think the sum total of knowledge can be gleaned from a 140-character tweet or Wikipedia. There is no substitute for getting on the blower and calling the person and having a conversation rather than an email chain.

“There are so many people now purporting to be ‘experts’ that you have to be careful the people you are getting on are credible. That’s why so many producers have a reasonably ‘fat’ contact book.

“That’s why Michael Carr-Gregg is used all the time in Child Psychology. He is good talent. He nails it. He knows what people want to hear and he can impart that information in an entertaining way.”

At Newsflash Media Carey now trains corporate leaders on how to make their point effectively in the media.

“News is basically information wrapped up as entertainment. That doesn’t mean it has to be all-singing, all-dancing,” he insists.

“Talent needs to be compelling enough and entertaining enough to get the point across.

“People have to be passionate enough, with enough nous and knowledge to present their argument on a persuasive and engaging manner.”

So how can TV producers do it better? Is there still room to be raising complex topics if producers are under time-constraints and social media is ready to pounce?

“3 minutes is better than nothing in my view, so long as it is tackled with intelligence and the presenters and talent who can make it happen,” Carey explains.

“But with the speed of news these days, you need (a producer) who is courageous to say ‘We need more time’ or ‘This person isn’t the right person so we should cut this segment.’

“Unless you have the right mix, the right talent, the right topic it might sometimes be best left for another day.

“But that’s a very brave call.”

7 Responses

  1. The problem is all the “hot topics ” across the networks are taken from news limited articles. Allowing them to set the agenda on the days media topics. Shame of it is that here we have “news” shows with their own reporting staff and they need to lift stories from the printed media, and only one source of it at that.

  2. It seems reasoned debate is no longer possible, because as soon as someone expresses a non-PC opinion, they are attacked from all sides. Debate is only allowed as long as all viewpoints agree with each other.

  3. For me the hot topics segment has destroyed sonia krugers reputation and thd todays shows rep as well .sonia comments stopped me from watching the show altogether now .those comennts by sonia lead me to beileve she is a racist and i can not support racists.to be controversial for the sake of it can also backfire.viewers want balanced views not extremist views .

    1. Isn’t it presenting a “balanced view” to allow someone like Kruger to present their views? Then someone with the opposing view speaks, and you have a balanced argument. It seems that people want to gag anyone who presents the “wrong” side of the argument, instead of taking that viewpoint and analysing it alongside all other opinions.

      I have no opinion on Kruger, and did not hear the segment, however I am getting very tired of the modern trend for viewers to call for the axing of any person on tv who offends them. Let’s discuss issues by allowing all viewpoints to be heard and assessed.

      1. But are they discussing it or just poking a stick? The article looks deeper into the question, acknowledged by Kruger herself, that they don’t have time to discuss complex issues. Yet another happened a week later. Also where are we going if the presenters are giving opinions, not experts in the field? Or are we now saying these presenters are opinion makers like Bolt, Jones, Mitchell?

Leave a Reply