ANCHOR SPEAK EXPLAINED -- Ben Dobson
What on earth is "anchor speak, "happy talk," or "anchor
banter?" In this media-saturated digital age, it's a reference to the
conversations anchors have. Often, the talk is simply insincere emotion, or
an attempt to care about a story with a tragic twist that just ran on the
station. And these television personalities have happy talk with a lot of
people. With one another. With the sportscaster. With reporters corresponding
live in the newsroom, across the studio, or in a live remote across town or
the nation. And especially with the weathercaster (we can't use the term "meteorologist"
here since many stations prefer the cheap help of untrained, uncertified weather
presenters). Any time a newscast is running light on content, it's ever so
easy for a producer in the control room to whisper into the anchor's earpiece
"you've got time to happy-talk." That sends the anchors into babble-overdrive.
Some paraphrases I've heard over the years:
"Oh, those temperatures are going to help my garden so much!"
"Well, I know we're all Red Sox fans here, but you've got to feel for
the Baltimore Orioles, right Bob?"
"You know, they should really make names of hurricanes easier to pronounce..
I'll be sitting here all night trying to get that one right..."
I know how it works, because I've sat in the anchor seat trying to pass the
time with nothing to really talk about. The less time an anchor has to at
least think about something intelligent to strike up conversation about, the
more ridiculous the conversation is likely to become. And yes, the most skilled
anchors can ad-lib without missing a beat, but they're in the same boat
trying to construct a normal conversation where one really isn't needed or
wanted or in some cases, appropriate.
A columnist in Salon Magazine, Mark Hertsgaard, has labeled this phenomenon
"fluff-in-mouth disease" and only begins to scratch the surface
of the irony that he coined it in 1996 almost five years before the
current hysteria over the true cattle foot-and-mouth disease got anchor lips
flapping all across the country.
Consider Fred Graham, author of a book titled "Happy Talk: Confessions
of a TV Newsman." During an interview on C-Span's "Booknotes"
program, he explained that when he entered the local television newscast as
an anchorman, "I'd gone home to my hometown to try and be a local anchor.
And I was immersed in happy talk up to my ears and drowning in it. And it
seemed to me that it was an apt name for this book." And while it actually
doesn't spend nearly as much time chastising the practice as will be done
here, it's just another tiring example of how even the seasoned professionals
find it foolish.
How do we compare internationally? Media critic Brett Dellinger lives in
Finland and observed in his theoretical deconstruction of U.S. media that,
"To Finns, it seems, American television news is read with a gleeful
smile and interspersed with laughter, punctuated by frowning--as if ... emotions
were totally disconnected from the text. American audiences ... expect happy
talk' and banter during a news broadcast. Finns, on the other hand, associate
such behavior with clowns...'" Something to think about, anyway. (http://cnncritical.tripod.com/c82.htm)
Then there's the image that should remind all of us of the two-headed monster
on Sesame Street. Aren't anchor teams somewhat like that? Consider this observation
from Cincinnati Enquirer columnist John Kieswetter, who observed "I don't
need this two-headed monster alternating sentences. It's kind of creepy, two
people completing each other's thoughts like a couple celebrating their silver
anniversary."
In its condemnation of the state of local television news, the Project for
Excellence in Journalism cited comments from focus groups. One Atlanta viewer
is quoted in their study as having said "the happy talk between anchors
comical.... They discuss each others' ties.'" Or how about another
focus group cited in TVSurvey.com's online edition in which one viewer, noted
that "They're constantly saying each others' names. [And] this happy
talk stuff? I wish they would drop that...Eliminate all the happy talk, the
chitchat back and forth between each other, like we're all part of some happy
little family."
But perhaps we are part of some little family. If this seems so inane, and
case after case can be made to prove how ridiculous most anchor-banter is,
why keep it? In his Cincinnati Enquirer column, Kieswetter cited the statistic
that "TV news consultants say 85 percent of viewers prefer the Ken &
Barbie approach." And I'm sure that they are on to something. When people
turn on the television set, they literally invite these people into their
homes. Having experienced the phenomenon of "face recognition" myself,
I have had people strike up conversations about a story I did two years ago.
For whatever reason, that's what they remembered most about me and felt like
they knew me enough (and felt that the story was important enough to me) that
I could just delve straight into a conversation with them. And if it's the
happy-young couple anchoring the news alongside crazy-uncle Weatherman and
everybody's favorite brother-in-law Sportscaster, then this existing format
is likely to stick around for quite some time, for better or for worse. Time
to start using our innate ability to use selective hearing.
|