‘I Know We Can’t Go Back, but I Think We Would All Like to See Balance Created’

Veteran KNBC-TV Channel 4 news anchor Jess Marlow predicted almost six years ago that local newscasts would stop focusing on freeway chases and start dealing more with in-depth news.

“When we discover that the audience is not impressed with us going live, we won’t go live for the sake of going live as we do sometimes,” Marlow said in the September 1992 interview. “I don’t think we’ll be following too many more high-speed freeway chases. I see a greater concern in the newsroom for harder news, for dealing with issues.”

Today, Marlow is still waiting for the shift.

Since retiring last year from his anchor-commentator chair, he remains concerned about local stations’ continued emphasis on chases and “live” coverage of events that had happened hours before.

But Marlow also sees much to celebrate about local news coverage, and is grateful for his experiences during a 40-year career, which is still continuing with his hosting duties on “Channel 4 News Conference” each Sunday at 5:30 a.m.

“I can’t knock an industry that has been very good to me,” said Marlow. “It’s been an extraordinarily satisfying career, despite the complaints.”

During his 25 years at KNBC, Marlow served as a general assignment reporter, anchor and commentator. He has won numerous awards, including eight local Emmys, six Golden Mikes and the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Los Angeles Press Club.

Marlow will be honored today by the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, which is giving him its prestigious Governors Award at the Los Angeles Area Emmy Awards. During a recent break at the KNBC studios in Burbank, he reflected on his career and the state of local news.

Question: Since your retirement, have you been keeping track of trends in local news?

Answer: Yes, trying to. I have more time to watch other stations, which I didn’t have time to do before. There’s an awful lot of sameness. Everybody seems to be covering the same thing in the same way. There are nuances--anchor personalities, things like that--but it’s still the same.

*

Q: What specific things are you seeing?

A: Everybody wants to show off the technology. A lot of live shots. Everybody has a helicopter shot. Attractive, articulate reporters in the field. There is some evidence of acknowledging the makeup of the Southern California community, which is not what it was when I came here.

*

Q: One of the things that you said six years ago was that when stations got away from their infatuation with new technology, you wouldn’t see stations going live for live’s sakes. There would be more concentration on in-depth news, not so much focus on freeway chases.

A: I really thought that to be true. Part of the answer, I suppose, is that the technology has gotten even newer, and everybody has more of it. Also, the economic concerns that drive much of television, and much of television news, have led us to continue giving people what the research suggests they want. And it does sell.

*

Q: Is that a source of frustration for you?

A: Oh yes, and I’m not alone. It’s a chronic concern in newsrooms, in any newsroom I’ve been in. There are many of us, including some who are making decisions, who would like to see it different. But we recognize that if you’re in the business of communication and no one is watching, then you’re not in the business of communication--not in the business of broadcast communication.

We talk about our ownership or our management having a bottom-line mentality. We have a bottom-line mentality, too, and that is viewership. If I’ve got something important to say, I really want the largest audience I can get to hear it. The question is, how much of that do you use to get them into the tent, and once you get them into the tent, do you give them some substance, too? I think we’ve lost the sense of balance there.

*

Q: At what point must the audience accept responsibility?

A: The broader audience is getting what they want. I’m worried about the people who want something different and better. I’ve seen figures that 20% of people are not satisfied with what they’re getting on television or reading in their newspapers. As the audience becomes fractured, someone will find a way to pick up that disenchanted 20%, and that will produce a pretty good rating.

*

Q: Would it be better if station ownership did not require news operations to turn a profit?

A: In the early years of television news, we were not expected to turn a profit--and we didn’t disappoint, because we certainly didn’t. But TV news was considered community service. We tend to look back on those days as wonderful days, and they were. They allowed us to experiment, to go long form, to fail. Now if you try something and it doesn’t work, you’re dead. But you also have to remember that the budgets we had then would not have allowed us to have the equipment we have today, or the amount of time we have today.

In those days, we were doing 15-minute newscasts. I know we can’t go back, but I think we would all like to see balance created. I don’t think there’s anyone in our newsroom or our management who wouldn’t like us to spend more time covering the state Legislature or covering the campaign we’re going through. But you can’t make it work economically, and I’m not sure you can make the audience watch.

*

Q: As far as educating the audience, shouldn’t programs like “News Conference” further that goal? It’s on so early. Shouldn’t it get a better time slot?

A: We’ve tried to get a better time period. And there were other considerations. At one point, it looked like we were going to move and then came the requirement [from the Federal Communications Commission] for three hours of [educational] children’s programming, and that blocked the move that was anticipated then. The East Coast panel shows all air here at a very early hour, too. People who are really interested can and will tape it.

*

Q: Besides the emphasis on live coverage, how has television news evolved in ways you didn’t foresee when you first came into the business?

A: The requirement for short stories surprises me, especially when we’re all doing these very long newscasts. I’m also surprised that a story isn’t a story without visual material. Television is a visual medium, and the audience expects to see the video, [but] a lot of stories that don’t lend themselves to video don’t get covered like they used to. Also, there is less and less difference between the networks and the local stations. They’re covering lifestyle features, they’re concentrating on health issues. That’s fine, but in their half-hour broadcast, they’re sacrificing a lot of foreign news and a lot of Washington news that used to dominate all the network broadcasts. Occasionally one of them will pick up a Los Angeles freeway chase.

*

Q: What is your assessment on how local news, and in particular KNBC, handled the recent suicide on the freeway? Critics have said this was a situation that was bound to happen, given the focus on freeway chases.

A: I can defend the coverage of it. Had I been the news director, I would have wanted it covered, and covered live. Even when the man spread out the banner, meaning he was playing to the cameras and the helicopters, that doesn’t mean it’s an invalid story. I don’t think anyone could have predicted the outcome of that at all. A lot of people were offended by it, but I think it was appropriate to cover. And we all would have loved not to have that last shot. There were people in our newsroom crying.