Tabulating votes on TV election coverage
Refreshed after a hearty post-election meal -- two Alka Seltzer tablets, a handful of Rolaids, half a bottle of Excedrin Migraine, a Pepto Bismol Big Gulp and a shot of Prozac with a Xanax chaser -- this media critic looks back on election night 2010, Vegas station-style:
Tuesday was a two-station race: KLAS-TV, Channel 8 vs. KSNV-TV, Channel 3. Victor: Channel 8 -- by a landslide. Election coverage isn't just journalism. It's A TV show. They combined the two the best.
Hijacking their airwaves from around 6 p.m. through the meat of the night as results were forming, both relegated competitors to afterthoughts. Not daring to pre-empt the 200th episode of "Dancing with the Stars" (though in a remote-flipping frenzy, this critic did stop for Rod Stewart crooning Cole Porter), KTNV-TV, Channel 13 dropped in at 9:30 just as suspense was deflating. Following brief cut-ins through "Dancing," Steve Wolford and Nina Radetich anchored with analyst Elizabeth Crum. Yet appearing as national news outlets called the Senate race for Harry Reid and Brian Sandoval emerged as governor-elect was anticlimactic. Ditto KVVU-TV, Channel 5, with John Huck and Olivia Fierro riding in on the other side of the news wave in their normal 10 p.m. slot.
Devoting more hours however, didn't make channels 3 and 8 coverage twins, as Channel 8's well-produced newscast projected a smooth, no-sweat authority, while Channel 3's spotty producing made for a hiccup-y, aggravating broadcast.
Wild card: Jon Ralston. Never an easy sell as a TV personality, the ferocious "Face to Face" interrogator nonetheless had his card punched as a national go-to pundit this campaign season, and his gravitas was their big gun. Yet J.R.'s big drawback mirrored our buzzy/beepy culture from living rooms to restaurants to movie theaters: tech distractions.
Given his multimedia enterprises -- blogs, columns, telegrams, carrier pigeons, message in a bottle -- Ralston relentlessly consulted his cell phone and clacked away on his computer keyboard, juggling tweets, texts and website browsing, as those annoying tones indicating incoming messages went off indiscriminately while his colleagues spoke.
Though attempting to remain fully engaged with Jim Snyder, Sue Manteris and Jeff Gillan, Ralston sometimes seemed annoyed by interruptions, eyes darting from one screen to another, only partially involved with those around him, a sadly familiar scene in 2010 America.
Except that most Americans aren't TV commentators addressing a mass audience. Ralston is. Being on camera but not looking it -- i.e., viewers -- in the eye is, frankly, rude. Even in the info age, TV demands complete engagement.
Engagement was complete on Channel 8, Ralston's ex-election night home, which scored coups as Steve Sebelius and George Knapp interviewed political consultant Sig Rogich and, for part of the night, ex-senator/governor Richard Bryan. Fronted by computers as well, Sebelius and Knapp kept their eyes on their guests, which kept our eyes on them.
Registering strongest in the postmortem after races were called, no longer furiously calculating numbers, Ralston's considerable insights on Sandoval, Sharron Angle and the Reids, Harry and Rory, were finally delivered with full attention, landing with maximum impact.
By then, though, News-3's minuses were painfully obvious, especially compared to the pluses of the 8 News Now-ers.
Channel 8's Dave Courvoisier and Paula Francis inhabited their anchor chairs with a friendly calm. Snyder and Manteris inhabited theirs with a nervous energy, particularly when voting numbers were delayed and there was nowhere to channel that energy except into regurgitated small talk.
During that info-parched 7-8 p.m. hour, Channel 8 didn't sweat the small stuff -- even if it wasn't small stuff -- providing perspective from Bryan, Rogich and Sen. John Ensign, while News-3 seemed to be idling in neutral, no politico interviewees to lean on, onsite reporters recapping that there wasn't much to report or recap.
While News-3 later dealt with graphics failure, early postings were pointless, displaying races with zero percent of votes based on zero precincts reporting. Visuals were equally anemic when News-3 went split-screen, a flier map of the districts too small to easily decipher, squeezed next to a boxed-off shot of the panelists, who were scrunched into four little figures.
Presentation felt as if it had space to breathe at Channel 8 -- Knapp, Sebelius, Bryan and Rogich in a cozy circle, Courvoisier and Francis at a separate anchor desk, framed by their crisp, colorful set. Subdued bordering on dull -- despite recent upgrades -- News-3's set does no favors to its personalities, and the static camerawork had little maneuvering room, focused on the row of four hosts -- bland visual sameness.
Balanced as a package, Channel 8 blended race totals with varied insight. News-3 -- despite Ralston and commentator colleague Gillan -- still came across like anxious, numbers-crunching math nerds.
However, the spot for self-deprecating quotes was definitely News-3:
"After 67 minutes of tap-dancing, we really could use an a-ha! moment." -- Snyder. "If you're wondering why numbers are not coming up on your screen, we paid good money for software to make that happen and so far that is not working." -- Snyder. "Truly, it is a momentous evening, not to state the obvious, which I just did, obviously." -- Gillan. (Responding to a comment about the blessed end of voters' negative ad fatigue): "What about political reporter fatigue?" -- Ralston. ... Indeed.
And a personal favorite, as she assessed the international media on-hand: "I just learned Al-Jazeera is next to us." -- Hetty Chang.
That wraps an abbreviated analysis by an inebriated critic. You don't believe I watched it sober, do you?
Contact reporter Steve Bornfeld at sbornfeld@ reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0256.
