View Full Version : Charles Gibson leaving ABC at year's end, Diane Sawyer to take over
ewolfr
09-02-2009, 02:16 PM
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ABC_GIBSON?SITE=KGO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Charles Gibson is retiring at the end of the year and Diane Sawyer will replace him in January as anchor of ABC's "World News," the network said Wednesday.
Bierboy
09-02-2009, 02:33 PM
Whoop-dee-freakin-doo. I never watch ABC (or any of the other "big 3" networks) for news. I rely on the National Enquirer.
TIVO_GUY_HERE
09-02-2009, 02:33 PM
and, thanks for posting.
TiVo'Brien
09-02-2009, 04:06 PM
Well, I like Diane and call me sexist when it comes to anchors, but I like my 6:30 news coming from a man. It seems to have more authority then. I don't know why.
From a business perspective, I'm surprised at this choice. It's not like CBS is doing gangbusters with Katie Couric.
call me sexistI don't think we can.
I think it would be against forum rules to call a member who finds men more authoritative than women sexist.
realityboy
09-02-2009, 04:20 PM
I like Charlie, but I like Diane just as well. I wonder who will replace her on GMA. I am shocked that Diane is 63 as she really doesn't look like it. I guess I never really thought of her as having an age before.
TiVo'Brien
09-02-2009, 04:24 PM
I don't think we can.
I think it would be against forum rules to call a member who finds men more authoritative than women sexist.Oh gw'on. It's fun! :p;)
Jesda
09-02-2009, 05:19 PM
Nobody watches evening news anymore. 'Minus whale' let a woman try.
sieglinde
09-02-2009, 06:50 PM
I watch the ABC news and I remember Diane Sawyer from 60 Minutes. I hope she can pronounce California city names better than Gibson. I was watching the news last night and Gibson mentioned a town in California where his reporter would be reporting from about the nearby fires. I had never heard of it. Tyejunga or something like that. The reporter comes on and the title under him says Tijunga. Oh. Teehunga. Gibson said it OK later.
I don't really care. I watch the World News as a summary.
The demographic for the show is old sick people since all they advertise is prescription drugs.
Bob_Newhart
09-02-2009, 07:51 PM
When they get her:
http://www.strangecelebrities.com/images/content/115204.JPG
then I'll care.
.
LoadStar
09-02-2009, 08:00 PM
I personally would rather see Bob Woodruff get the desk instead of Diane Sawyer, although I'm not sure if he's recovered sufficiently from his brain injuries to anchor the news on a nightly basis. If not Woodruff, I'd love to see them try and get Shepard Smith back from FOX News.
Regarding Diane, I just do not like her cadence and tone; something about it just bugs the heck out of me. I watch ABC News, but I don't know if I could with her as the full-time anchor.
IJustLikeTivo
09-02-2009, 09:01 PM
I like Charlie, but I like Diane just as well. I wonder who will replace her on GMA. I am shocked that Diane is 63 as she really doesn't look like it. I guess I never really thought of her as having an age before.
She may be the second worst famous woman journalist after Meredith Viera. I can't begin to understand how either became successful. Diane's biggest problem is that she gets too emotional when reporting. Completely inappropriate.
LoadStar
09-02-2009, 10:30 PM
She may be the second worst famous woman journalist after Meredith Viera. I can't begin to understand how either became successful. Diane's biggest problem is that she gets too emotional when reporting. Completely inappropriate.
I think that's another thing that I don't like about Sawyer. She has too much of a "touchy-feely" style of reporting, not one that seems to suit a national news broadcast.
Jayjoans
09-02-2009, 10:49 PM
Who watches network news? It's like watching a movie again that you JUST WATCHED. So much news is available in real time throughout the day that the evening news is the epitome of redundancy.
I think it was a Fox guy that said Couric and Sawyer are like Corn Flakes, people like them alright in the morning but people expect something much better for dinner.
mattack
09-02-2009, 10:50 PM
Nobody watches evening news anymore.
[citation needed]
That's a load of <beep>.
The evening newscasts get higher ratings than cable news networks.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/evening_news_ratings/evening_news_ratings_week_of_august_24_129976.asp
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/08/05/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-august-4-2009/24258
mattack
09-02-2009, 10:51 PM
She may be the second worst famous woman journalist after Meredith Viera. I can't begin to understand how either became successful. Diane's biggest problem is that she gets too emotional when reporting. Completely inappropriate.
I'd say she's above Viera.. and I'd say Couric is above Viera... and Barbara Walters is probably above all of them...
MickeS
09-02-2009, 11:18 PM
Charlie Gibson was so bland they could have replaced him with a cardboard cutout. Diane Sawyer is probably better for them.
LoadStar
09-03-2009, 12:52 AM
Charlie Gibson was so bland they could have replaced him with a cardboard cutout. Diane Sawyer is probably better for them.
Bland = good... as far as delivering the news is concerned. The less I'm paying attention to the person delivering the news, the more I can actually pay attention to the news itself.
Attempts to make the news more flashy and less bland are how we ended up with the utter filth that is passed off as "news" on MSNBC, CNN, and FOX News.
MickeS
09-03-2009, 01:13 AM
Bland = good... as far as delivering the news is concerned. The less I'm paying attention to the person delivering the news, the more I can actually pay attention to the news itself.
Attempts to make the news more flashy and less bland are how we ended up with the utter filth that is passed off as "news" on MSNBC, CNN, and FOX News.
I agree completely. But we're not watching anyway.
Jayjoans
09-03-2009, 01:34 AM
[citation needed]
That's a load of <beep>.
The evening newscasts get higher ratings than cable news networks.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/evening_news_ratings/evening_news_ratings_week_of_august_24_129976.asp
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/08/05/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-august-4-2009/24258
Improper use of the information.
During that HOUR of evening news, the network viewership is higher than that of cable news. But overall, more people get their news from cable than from network. You're looking at a snapshot, not the total.
And look at these graphs, it doesn't look too good for network news.
http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2009/narrative_networktv_audience.php?cat=2&media=6
Jesda
09-03-2009, 02:35 AM
[citation needed]
That's a load of <beep>.
The evening newscasts get higher ratings than cable news networks.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/evening_news_ratings/evening_news_ratings_week_of_august_24_129976.asp
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/08/05/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-august-4-2009/24258
Pardon me for being unclear:
Ignorant old people who can't figure out the internet watch evening news.
TiVo Steve
09-03-2009, 04:39 AM
Diane vs Katie @ 5:30? Or wait for Brian @ 6:00! yes...
Pardon me for being unclear:
Ignorant old people who can't figure out the internet watch evening news.
A lot of people prefer watching video (TV), including the news on their TV set and not on their computer. Not everyone has broadband. An increasing number of people use netbook computers. Watching a show on a TV set is a far superior experience to watching it on a netbook.
Your point was clear, just not intelligent.
Ratings for all network shows are declining. People have a lot more choices.
LoadStar
09-03-2009, 10:27 AM
Pardon me for being unclear:
Ignorant old people who can't figure out the internet watch evening news.
I am neither old nor ignorant, and I'm a college-educated IT professional with 10 years of professional experience, and I watch the evening news.
zalusky
09-03-2009, 11:31 AM
I get news from a variety of sources including TV network and local and an online version of our local newspaper and the internet.
The thing that make news great was the diversity of places that report it. Why are the whiners trying to reduce it.
I would not be surprised if there are more old people on the internet these days than young whippersnappers.
Snappa77
09-03-2009, 03:58 PM
I'd say she's above Viera.. and I'd say Couric is above Viera... and Barbara Walters is probably above all of them...
And I'd say I concur.
MickeS
09-03-2009, 04:10 PM
Pardon me for being unclear:
Ignorant old people who can't figure out the internet watch evening news.
I think they are more likely to watch cable "news" too.
IJustLikeTivo
09-03-2009, 09:25 PM
I'd say she's above Viera.. and I'd say Couric is above Viera... and Barbara Walters is probably above all of them...
Which is what I was trying to say. They both suck, but Diane sucks marginally less than Viera. Not much less, but less.
mattack
09-03-2009, 11:00 PM
Pardon me for being unclear:
Ignorant old people who can't figure out the internet watch evening news.
1) I may be "old" by your estimation, but by many people's, I am not.
2) I have watched the evening news regularly throughout my life.. Probably close to daily since I got out of college.
3) I read the newspaper very thoroughly (several hours) at least 2 times a week (weekends), more on holidays.
4) I also read some internet news... and after having done #4, it is interesting to see how much stuff I see in #3 was the same stuff I saw the day earlier on the web..
But I still think that the nightly news is my PRIMARY source of news. (A *long* time ago I watched local news, but haven't watched that regularly in probably 15 years.. I will sometimes FF through it if it's in the Tivo buffer, or if there's a teaser for an interesting story I will record it.)
mattack
09-03-2009, 11:01 PM
Which is what I was trying to say. They both suck, but Diane sucks marginally less than Viera. Not much less, but less.
Actually, my response was wrong. I misread.. I was actually incorrectly ranking their 'fame'. I somehow skipped the 'worst journalist' part.
Bierboy
09-03-2009, 11:33 PM
...the nightly news is my PRIMARY source of news....
And I'd venture to guess you are in the VAST minority...especially among the demographic group(s) that are most influential in this country.
rmassey
09-04-2009, 12:40 AM
Reading some of these replies, I have to ask... why do so many people consider is so important to watch the News/Read a newspaper/...'be informed'?
For me I consider most of it garbage and of little real value. I used to watch the news and then realized it just stresses me out and I can't do anything about it. Then along came Tivo... and I took conscious steps to NOT WATCH THE NEWS and only watch programs that entertain me and add some value to my life.
Honestly I just don't care which middle eastern county is killing it's neighbor and the beauty of Tivo allows me to not care with great efficiency.
BTW, who is this Diane and Charlie that you speak of ?
zalusky
09-04-2009, 01:17 AM
So when its time to vote in an election, do you just throw a dart?
ncsercs
09-04-2009, 07:13 AM
So when its time to vote in an election, do you just throw a dart?
Considering the results of the last one, yes :D
rmassey
09-04-2009, 09:56 AM
So when its time to vote in an election, do you just throw a dart?
There's plenty of ways to get this information without watching a talking head at 6 PM every evening:D.
zalusky
09-04-2009, 10:05 AM
There's plenty of ways to get this information without watching a talking head at 6 PM every evening:D.
Except your statement was you don't care whats what middle eastern country is doing what which would could extend you don't care what interest rates are and you don't care what what little boy just got kidnapped and you dont' care top know a lot of things you just want to watch fun shows.
So even if there are alternative ways to get information your statement said your interested in fun shows. Hell why even go to school.
TiVo'Brien
09-04-2009, 10:11 AM
Except your statement was you don't care whats what middle eastern country is doing what which would could extend you don't care what interest rates are and you don't care what what little boy just got kidnapped and you dont' care top know a lot of things you just want to watch fun shows.
So even if there are alternative ways to get information your statement said your interested in fun shows. Hell why even go to school.To learn spelling, punctuation, and grammar. :D
BWINKLER92
09-04-2009, 11:03 AM
I always thought Diane was made of rubber and hydraulics and operated remotely, such kind of savings may be why she will be the anchor now in bad economic times. They did that on the Ananova news in europe till parts wore out. Robot technology is the in thing now.
busyba
09-04-2009, 11:08 AM
She may be the second worst famous woman journalist after Meredith Viera.
Meredith Viera is a journalist?
zalusky
09-04-2009, 11:09 AM
To learn spelling, punctuation, and grammar. :D
Sometimes you need to speak in your opponents language so they can understand you.
TiVo'Brien
09-04-2009, 11:58 AM
Sometimes you need to speak in your opponents language so they can understand you.:up::up:
rmassey
09-04-2009, 04:58 PM
Except your statement was you don't care whats what middle eastern country is...
Well at least ya got the first part right...
I guess I'll cut to the chase, since common sense seems to elude you.... there are certainly more effective ways to gain information of real value, watching the evening news is not one of them IMO. sitting thru a batch of stories that have absolutely no impact on me personally and having these read to me by another human being is just a total waste of time... but if you prefer to have the 'important' news delivered in this fashion, feel free.
DevdogAZ
09-04-2009, 05:29 PM
1) I may be "old" by your estimation, but by many people's, I am not.
2) I have watched the evening news regularly throughout my life.. Probably close to daily since I got out of college.
3) I read the newspaper very thoroughly (several hours) at least 2 times a week (weekends), more on holidays.
4) I also read some internet news... and after having done #4, it is interesting to see how much stuff I see in #3 was the same stuff I saw the day earlier on the web..
But I still think that the nightly news is my PRIMARY source of news. (A *long* time ago I watched local news, but haven't watched that regularly in probably 15 years.. I will sometimes FF through it if it's in the Tivo buffer, or if there's a teaser for an interesting story I will record it.)
How can anyone legitimately claim that the network evening news is their PRIMARY source of news? There's simply not enough there to actually inform anyone of anything. They spend a couple of minutes each on a couple of real news stories, being very selective about which things they actually cover, and then there are a couple of pre-packaged pieces about some story that may be interesting, but only really qualify as "news" because they're being shown on the news. I just can't figure out why the networks even go through the motions of producing a nightly newscast anymore when there is simply no possible way for them to give adequate coverage of anything.
zalusky
09-04-2009, 06:44 PM
To me the news today has morphed from being news to being news and comment.
Whether it be Air America or Fox news or Huffington Post or Drudge, the news is full of opinion designed to manipulate your opinion.
It seems the only way today to get a "FAIR and Balanced view" is to watch many providers view on the same story and essentially average it out.
Far too many people watch or read only the news provider that generally align with their political beliefs and as a result get only a part of the story that incites craziness like we see at the town halls lately or even the conspiracy stuff we where people accused Bush of orchestrating 9/11.
So to dovetail back to the evening news, I am not saying only watch the evening news , but make sure you get your news from multiple sources from both sides of the aisle.
And by the way that middle eastern country attitude has taken away a lot of your money be it in gas prices or military spending so you might want be informed when you lobby your congressman or vote. If you don't vote they will pay attention to people who do.
mattack
09-04-2009, 10:18 PM
How can anyone legitimately claim that the network evening news is their PRIMARY source of news? There's simply not enough there to actually inform anyone of anything. They spend a couple of minutes each on a couple of real news stories, being very selective about which things they actually cover, and then there are a couple of pre-packaged pieces about some story that may be interesting, but only really qualify as "news" because they're being shown on the news. I just can't figure out why the networks even go through the motions of producing a nightly newscast anymore when there is simply no possible way for them to give adequate coverage of anything.
"being very selective about which things they actually cover". That's called them being a filter, and as journalists, they hopefully cover the important stories of the day.
Oh, and I also listen to the Nightline podcast (at 2x speed), so that's another ~19.5 minutes (at real time speed) of news a day. Do you consider Nightline useless too? It has gotten more like a newsmagazine since Koppel left, but it's still informative and entertaining.
Heck, do you consider 60 minutes worthless? Don Hewitt realized they'd always cover stories about entertainers, but also have real news stories.
Since I can't read the newspaper in depth every day (too much other Tivoed stuff to watch, heh heh), I get my news from the nightly news. You don't have to watch it.. I find it informative.
DevdogAZ
09-05-2009, 12:35 AM
"being very selective about which things they actually cover". That's called them being a filter, and as journalists, they hopefully cover the important stories of the day.
Oh, and I also listen to the Nightline podcast (at 2x speed), so that's another ~19.5 minutes (at real time speed) of news a day. Do you consider Nightline useless too? It has gotten more like a newsmagazine since Koppel left, but it's still informative and entertaining.
Heck, do you consider 60 minutes worthless? Don Hewitt realized they'd always cover stories about entertainers, but also have real news stories.
Since I can't read the newspaper in depth every day (too much other Tivoed stuff to watch, heh heh), I get my news from the nightly news. You don't have to watch it.. I find it informative.
You're more than welcome to watch it and I'm glad you enjoy it. The few times I've actually watched it, I've found it extremely annoying that they have so little time to cover everything that happened in the world that day, yet instead of spending the entire time on that day's events, they devote at least half of it to package pieces that could be shown virtually any day and are more worthy of news magazine shows like 60 Minutes or Dateline.
Nightline - Never watched it. Could never understand why ABC felt the need to air news during the comedy block after the local news is over. And since Jimmy Kimmel began airing, I'm pissed at Nightline because I think Jimmy is the best of the late night hosts, yet he's not being given a fair shot to compete because of Nightline and most people have already settled into one of the other shows by the time Kimmel comes on.
60 Minutes - I've seen a couple of segments, but I've probably only seen a grand total of 60 minutes in my entire life. Just not the type of show that interests me.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.