★★★★★ 0/5

TV loves the Live cross

News and current affairs have been increasing their use of the "live cross" as a way of giving news the effect of immediacy.

19
Leave a comment

News and current affairs have been increasing their use of the “live cross” as a way of giving news the effect of immediacy.

An interesting article in today’s Sun Herald notes that sometimes the crosses see reporters at the location of a news story that actually happened hours earlier.

Nine News director Mark Calvert says: ”The days of everything being prepackaged are long gone. News is – or should be – happening now. [Live crosses] have an energy and an immediacy which add pace to a bulletin. And with any developing story, the best way to cover it is often to be there live.”

Charles Sturt University journalism lecturer Kay Nankervis says cost might be a factor. ”A live cross doesn’t require as many resources as a prerecorded package so it’s less expensive.

”As media scales back on resources, it’s a cost-effective way of covering a story.”

It also sees the bulletin offering something unique to the many radio and online reports that inform us throughout the day.

You can read more at Sun Herald

19 Responses

  1. I notice this a lot with TEN. They tend to do a “live” delayed cross to a reporter in the Eastern States. Yet a couple of hours later watching 7pm Project same reporter same time of day reporting on the same thing.

    I agree with the cross to the newsroom …. what’s the point.

  2. Agreed. Live crosses are meaningless if the event has already happened. A packaged story is far more detailed and insightful. Most journalists fumble and bumble their way through the live crosses to the point of embarrassment. It would be nice to see some balance here, but I fear we are just going down the American path. Shame. A real shame.

  3. I would challenge the assertion from the lecturer who says that a live cross costs less than a package. A live cross van is a major expense as is any live satellite/link back to the station. There is a lot more set up and waiting time in a cross than a location shoot. Editors and edit suites are part of the station infrastructure, already.

  5. Seven Adelaide got busted the other day when they said they were going to a live cross. John Riddell hadn’t finished the intro yet, when the reporter started talking and the story began. It obviously wasn’t live, but pre-recorded. Which made it funny when at the end he thanked her for the “live” story.

  7. TV news in LA does plenty of live crosses, and have been doing so for some time. Basically the newsreader reads the intro, crosses to the reporter who reads another intro to throw to a packaged story, then the reporter makes a conclusive statement before handing it back to the newsreader in the studio.
    2.5 hours of news and now abundant live crosses – is Australian TV news about to go down the same path as US TV news?

  8. @Kenny, Kay does know a fair bit about tv news – I worked with her in the Sydney ABC newsroom years ago, and she was a reporter, a producer and a chief of staff during her tenure. I was a production assistant, then director. Yes, a package requires a crew, an editor, the reporter – but also more man hours for research, lining up the talent for the piece, getting to locations for each shoot – then logging the tapes, editing the story….perhaps, she means the logistics of just one piece to camera, from the location crews is cheaper than the research and labour time to flesh out the two minute tape piece. Unless a live cross adds something to the piece, it feels like lazy television to me.

  9. When I was a kid I watched commercial news, mostly Brian Henderson. Now that I am an adult, either I’ve grown up or the quality has fallen but I can’t stand to watch it now. It’s too soft.

  10. When Julia Gillard toppled Kevin Rudd, Seven News did a live cross to the town in Wales where Gillard was born.

    The Chaser boys did a send up of this, announcing that a plaque was being placed in the town to commemerate “the most pointless live cross ever”.

  11. Ooops, I attributed that quote incorrectly. It should have been Charles Sturt University journalism lecturer Kay Nankervis, who I guess knows everything about running a television news service.

  12. But a “live cross” to where? The GTV9 roof? The QTQ9 car park? The 7 Sydney newsroom a few steps from the studio?
    How can a “live cross” (unless it’s one of the above Mark Calvert’s thinking of) be cheaper than a pre-recorded package. Both require the same number of people, the “live cross” taking longer to set up. Then again, a “live cross” to the roof or the car park or the newsroom is not so costly I guess.

  14. interestingly a hell of a lot of those “live” crosses aren’t live at all… watch 7 in Melbourne – a lot of theirs look like they are recorded mid-afternoon (which obviously won’t be acceptable when daylight savings ends) – you should also do a story in Melbourne on the ridiculous “first on 9” – “only on 7” war breaking out at 6pm… it’s all getting a bit islly – both news services are seeking out crap stories straight out of leader newspapers and ignoring the main news of the day just so they can claim a story as an “exclusive” when it’s already been in a suburban paper days before. So silly – but a reflection of what happens when you put an ACA person in charge of the news.

  15. It might be less expensive (i’m not convinced on that) – but it adds very little to the story itself. The ones i’ve noticed are with Peter Overton’s Sydney 6pm Nine news. The cross to the reporter is often just a one question and answer and says nothing new to what has already been said. The package and cross seems like overkill and hardly budget conscious. The cross on its own seems rare – unless it is truly a breaking story. Not all of the reporters can cope with a live cross, altho the more they experience it, the better they get. Personally a package featuring a piece to camera by the reporter is still the best way to tell the story.

  16. Just shows how much uni lecturers know. So lets do a count. A package takes three people. Reporter, cammo, editor. A live cross takes, ah, three people. A reporter, cammo, and sat truck operator who usually has to get there an our early to set up the truck. It usually takes less than an hour to cut a pkg together.
    If he was talking about studio guests I’d agree. They are cheaper than a pkg. Because the guest is coming to you instead of reporter and cammo wasting a few hours chasing the talent. Plus the IV gets cut live to air by the studio switcher.
    I think lives are great when the reporter doesn’t have enough pics, or when the story has broken too late for a pkg to be put together.
    But it’s hard to beat a good pkg which has grabs from every angle and great pics. It’s pretty hard to run a smooth 2way if you’re throwing to half a dozen grabs.
    That’s my thoughts anyway.

  17. You can tell 7 news ‘pre-record’ their live crosses. The reporter nods a couple of times and then start talking after a few seconds. It is affective, but obvious. Also the lack of a “Live” graphic gives it away. For what I have seen, Ten news still appear to be live.

Leave a Reply