3 ms·

It always puzzles me when experienced media pros don't recognise that they are going to be shut down abruptly by an approaching hour boundary. Sometimes this ha

It always puzzles me when experienced media pros don't recognise that they are going to be shut down abruptly by an approaching hour boundary. Sometimes this happens every week on a regularly scheduled gig! Surely it can't be that difficult to wear a watch and keep it accurate.

dredmorbius 10y ago
It's not the approaching hour, but the 3-6 minutes allocated to a given interview. I've come to recognise that "in the few seconds we have left" is the cue for "wrap this up in 60 seconds". But with the very wide range of people interviewed, ranging from seasoned professionals (politicians and PR flacks) to complete novices (hey, news happens to random people), and especially given both language and technical barriers (it's really hard to formulate your thoughts and be cognisant of studio realities when you're trying to catch what's being said over a scratchy long-distance link), the awkward cut happens very frequently. I'd notice it on commercial broadcasts if I listened to those more. I am very well aware of it on NPR and BBC broadcasts. Somewhat less so on CBC.
- billforsternz 10y ago
  Well that might be so, but the syndrome I was addressing really is the approaching hour. It might happen for example if there is a regular slot for "our Australian correspondent" at the end of an hour. It's supposed to be at 8:55(ish) but sometimes it's delayed or advanced. Either way, the Australian correspondent should be aware the news at 9:00.00 is a hard boundary that is going to cut him off, but surprisingly often he doesn't seem cognisant of that at all. It doesn't matter what the time zone differences are - hour boundaries are hour boundaries! (okay there are exceptions - but the Australian correspondent is not reporting out of South Australia which has a half hour shift).

3 ms·

It always puzzles me when experienced media pros don't recognise that they are going to be shut down abruptly by an approaching hour boundary. Sometimes this ha

by billforsternz 10y ago

dredmorbius 10y ago
It's not the approaching hour, but the 3-6 minutes allocated to a given interview. I've come to recognise that "in the few seconds we have left" is the cue for "wrap this up in 60 seconds". But with the very wide range of people interviewed, ranging from seasoned professionals (politicians and PR flacks) to complete novices (hey, news happens to random people), and especially given both language and technical barriers (it's really hard to formulate your thoughts and be cognisant of studio realities when you're trying to catch what's being said over a scratchy long-distance link), the awkward cut happens very frequently. I'd notice it on commercial broadcasts if I listened to those more. I am very well aware of it on NPR and BBC broadcasts. Somewhat less so on CBC.
- billforsternz 10y ago
  Well that might be so, but the syndrome I was addressing really is the approaching hour. It might happen for example if there is a regular slot for "our Australian correspondent" at the end of an hour. It's supposed to be at 8:55(ish) but sometimes it's delayed or advanced. Either way, the Australian correspondent should be aware the news at 9:00.00 is a hard boundary that is going to cut him off, but surprisingly often he doesn't seem cognisant of that at all. It doesn't matter what the time zone differences are - hour boundaries are hour boundaries! (okay there are exceptions - but the Australian correspondent is not reporting out of South Australia which has a half hour shift).