It seems like a waste of money to have to pay an anchor and a co-anchor to sit and read the news from a monitor...Doesn't make sense fiscally to me...It certainly doesn't enhance my daily news experience...
2007-09-30 00:09:19 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
I'm guessing but it does add variety - often there is both a man and a woman. This allows a bit of chat and banter making the spot seem more informal. It also gives each one a short break when the other takes over.
Many things don't make sense fiscally. I would say this one is nowhere near the top of THAT heap!
2007-09-30 00:19:12 · answer #1 · answered by ianmcl17 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Conflict produces drama. And drama draws audiences. Especially those in the key demographic group which has been found to buy the products the TV stations advertise. Drama fills the airwaves, from daytime to evening shows.
As for the presence of people reading the news, nearly one in five native-born adults in America can't read or write at a functioning level. But, those same people buy things. So, they will become "informed" by watching and listening to anchors who belong to the same trade union as Jay Leno, David Letterman and Jimmy Kimmel.
Just be thankful that the TV news operations don't invite guests on as amateur dancers and singers.
2007-09-30 04:34:21 · answer #2 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hear what you are saying but from a purely psychological level it makes sense because a viewer is more likely to accept what is being said if it is being reported by more than one person. I find the sports pre game shows even more ridiculous because they have as many as 4 so called experts trying to convince me that they know who will win.
2007-09-30 00:20:16 · answer #3 · answered by crosseyedlemon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋