Backstage at CNBC: a day on the set
Beyond collecting my ten minutes of fame, the real thrill for me of being on TV was learning about how television shows are made. One of the big points of my book Making things happen was how the core challenges of making anything are the same (decision making, leadership and communication) and I love visiting different kinds of businesses just to see how they handle these things.
One of the big things the folks at CNBC were excited about was their virtual set – I’m surprised they haven’t mentioned it anywhere, as it is, for them, an innovation in how to produce these types of shows. Take a look at these two pictures.
On the left you can see the set as it looked in real life: it’s a blue screen. On the right you can see what the set looked like for the broadcast. All of the graphics, backgrounds, and talking heads were placed virtually, and designed in post production.
If you’ve watched any of the first or second episodes (follow the respective link to watch online), what do you think? Was the set a plus, or a distraction?
I thought it was 15 minutes of fame.
About the set? Way too bright and demanding. We should be focused on the people and conversation and not on the BG. It’s also very awkward to have people seated like that without a table. The women are all legs. The extreme wide shots that push in are the only time it looks good.
15 minutes, 10 minutes… when it comes to fame why split hairs? :) Ten minutes seems like more than enough.
I think the set is too noticeable – it is a distraction. It reminds me of CGI in some movies – – because of how expensive and fun it must be to work on, its easy to give undue attention to it. Instead of the CGI in say, Saving Private Ryan or Panic Room, where it supports the story being told, here it definitely draws a lot of attention to itself.
I enjoyed the show but felt it was a bit ‘twitchy’ going from Satelite, to live, to clips to the host. It didn’t feel like a conversation between people but rather fast cuts between sound bites. (Perhaps too much technology?)
I saw the Colbert report taped once and for the most part the set was low tech (low budget?.) The Colbert interview felt more like a conversation and that made the technology fade into the background.
Congrats.
The pace is fast – From what I watched of episode 2 its better. The segments are still very short – I’m more of a Charlie Rose pace kind of person, which is why I don’t watch much TV at all I guess.
I found the show somewhat flashy with the substance primarily in the comments made by the people on the set.
I liked the fact that the episode transcripts are available. They are easier to skim for the interesting comments.
Hi Scott,
It’s Shawn from Microsoft back in the Summer of ’95. Congrats on your part in the CNBC show! I enjoyed your comments. Thanks for your work on your blog which I enjoy as well.
All the best,
-Shawn