Ted was stingy, pompous and idiotic newscaster. He was obviously unqualified for his job and usually unpleasant, but there he was, week after week. Was There a reason explained for his employment?

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/easel/images/galleries/012545_tedbaxter.JPG

Not really, but I always assumed it had to do w/ WJM's budget and their inability to afford anyone better. Either that, or Ted had REALLY good connections, LOL!

Maybe Lou felt sorry for him or something. Or he did have connections from his Fresno days! :lol:

Actually Ted was marginal--not out and out execrable bad. He did have a mellifluous voice and good give a good presentation if he was prepped. But of course fell short in so many other areas, as you said.


So....I guess the show took poetic license, having Ted on certainly provided a lot of food for thought and he was a wonderful foil for everyone else. But in the real world, he likely would have been canned a long time ago.

LOL!
Yes, Ted looked the part of an anchorman, and he certainly had the voice.
And he could recite what was written on cue cards.
It's just that when the good ones read the news, they actually understand what they're talking about, and that obviously wasn't always the case with Ted.
When he deviated from the script at all, it was usually trouble for WJM ... but classic comedy for the Mary Tyler Moore Show viewer!

for the same reason Jane Hathaway never quit on "THE BEVERLY HILLBILLIES".:lol: :lol:

Maybe the powers that be at WJM felt the poor ratings were bad enough and people tuned in to see Ted mess up and if they got a better anchor man,they'd drop further.

The amount of change of managers at the station reflected they didn't know what they wanted,except in the last episode and Terd got kept on!