Networks Whining About "Cost" of Obama's Speech

Saw this on The Politico.

Seems Obama's thrown 'em a curveball by accepting at Mile High, and they're whining.

...all options are open as they look for savings to balance out the anticipated costs surrounding the stadium event. The acceptance event is an unexpected departure from the traditional convention hall format for which they have spent months planning.

Whine.  Our news division doesn't really do actual news coverage anymore.  We're so used to relying on photo-ops and press releases, and sitting in our comfy seats on the straight talk express, that if we have to actually cover something that's, well, unexpected, you know, real news, we'll have to cut back elsewhere.

Oh... and we'll punish the Democrats for it...in extended...

Whine.  We gave the Dems a budget, like this is some reality show, and if they choose to blow it all on a stadium, it'll cost 'em...

Among the options now being considered by broadcast executives is a reduction in staffing at the Democratic convention, with some news staff being asked to stay back in New York or Washington instead of traveling to Denver — though that is a measure the networks hope to avoid.

So let me get this straight.  They have to move across the street to cover an event in a stadium whose very purpose is to provide a playing venue for hi-def coverage of sporting events, using multiple camera angles, including multiple places from which to announce coverage, and its going to cause them "severe cost issues"?

"We're trying to figure out ways to cover what we need to cover and still stay in our budget," said Bob Murphy, a 30-year veteran of ABC News and the executive in charge of the network's convention coverage. "The change in the schedule clearly has put some very severe cost issues on the table and we are trying to figure out how to deal with that."

I'd think being in the big stadium would save them money.  What with all the existing cabling.

The latter possibility — anchoring from somewhere in Denver other than the Pepsi Center or Invesco Field — would save money for the networks on expensive cabling fees, large set costs, staging and staffing, and would allow the networks to plan for the convention with significantly more independence from the convention staff, a pleasing notion to the networks.

What cabling?  Your local news reports live from the site of today's liquor store robbery.  Sets? So, if I can't have a green screen and fancy graphics and lighting I'm gonna stay home and play with my own toys!

"I don’t think we are forced to cover both [conventions] equally," the network executive said. "The amount of resources we were willing to have committed to the first venue [at the Democratic convention] is now greatly diminished."

The staging turnabout and its anticipated costs come as network executives also feel the sting of record expenditures from covering the protracted Democratic primary election.

Aha! Methinks I finally uncover the culprit.  The networks, who couldn't do basic grade school math in reporting accurately on who won, or apparently have an inkling of understanding the nominating rules, and proceeded to do everything they could to prolong the Democratic nomination, are now complaining that Whine! I spent too much money on coverage.

Or... do they so badly a) want a horserace or b) want McCain to win or c) a little of both, that they have found their excuse to lavish whatever coverage they wish on the Republicans, and play cutaway on the Democrats?

Take the poll.

UPDATE:  Its a fucking football stadium.  Prewired for Hi Def.  And they can't cover Obama's speech because its "too expensive"?