Posted on 08/18/2012 6:54:15 AM PDT by Kaslin
What’s wrong with CNN? Rewind to 1991, the first night of the First Gulf War. American attack planes are dropping laser-guided missiles on strategic targets in Baghdad. CNN, with Peter Arnett reporting from Baghdad and Bernard Shaw anchoring from the US, owns the story. So much so that then-NBC News President Michael Gartner gave up on his own news division’s coverage of the outbreak of war and ordered them to carry the CNN feed for the remainder of the evening. (A decision, predictably, that led to Mr. Gartner’s eventual dismissal).
CNN was in that position because its founder, Ted Turner, imagined that it might be, someday. When the day came, it wasn’t luck. It was, to alter Branch Rickey’s phrase, the residue of Mr. Turner’s leadership.
Fast forward to last Sunday. There’s an episode of the “Newsroom” airing on HBO. In it, a “Newsroom” producer shows his fellow “Newsroom” staffers how CNN Headline News anchor Nancy Grace and her production staff shamelessly hype and distort the Casey Anthony story for maximum ratings impact. No one at Time Warner (which owns HBO and CNN) said to anyone at HBO: “you can’t say that about another division of this company.” What was the point? What “Newsroom” creator Aaron Sorkin wrote into last Sunday’s episode wasn’t wrong. It was true.
In a little over twenty years, CNN devolved from the most important television news organization in the world to another channel to skim through or skip over.
But don’t take my word for it. Look at the numbers. In the second quarter of this year, CNN’s primetime ratings basically collapsed. The overall numbers were down horribly and the key demos were down horribly. It was so bad that in primetime, CNN was losing to CNN Headline News, which is a little bit like the Yankees losing to their farm team in Columbus Scranton, every night.
On the day that this ratings news hit the wire, a ritual sacrifice was performed: the executive in charge, Jim Walton, “retired.” Turner Broadcasting CEO Phil Kent, to whom CNN reports, was tasked with the assignment of finding a replacement. The search, as they say, is ongoing.
On one level, CNN’s woes are “first world problems.” CNN Worldwide is profitable (Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes told analysts it would earn $600 million this year). CNN International is respected, widely watched and has the advertising rate cards that prove it. The network in general has a boatload of talented, dedicated, hard-working employees. If war breaks out in two places at once, CNN is probably the only US television news organization that can actually cover both in any kind of depth. And it has, at least in theory, access to the vast journalistic capabilities of the Time Warner magazine group and the (documentary) film-making capabilities of HBO. In short, it possesses the two essential elements of media success: richness and reach.
What it doesn’t have is leadership. It isn’t likely to get it any time soon.
The internal politics of Time Warner explain why. Most of the various division heads would like to have Mr. Bewkes’s job. They can’t, of course, challenge Mr. Bewkes directly. Bad manners, corporate suicide. They can, however, moan about the sorry state of one of the company’s flagship brands (CNN) to selected friends in the press. And they can “offer to help” fix this problem. And make that known to selected friends in the press. All the while, they will be doing everything they can to ensure that a suitably pliant executive is found to replace Mr. Walton. Even Mr. Kent, to whom the new executive will report, has an interest in finding someone who won’t overshadow him.
So the internal politics seem destined to produce more of the same. Without strong leadership, the fiefdoms maintain their power, the supposed “stars” stay in their places (not one hour of Wolf Blitzer, two!) and the network’s programming drifts along. Yes, the US ratings are embarrassing in primetime. Yes, viewership is actually down in an election year. Yes, the website isn’t nearly as good as it could be. Yes, but so what?
This seems to be CNN’s answer to most everything: “yes, but so what?” Consider Erin Burnett, who could be a superstar if properly produced. What does CNN do with her? They give her a not-very-well-produced show in the 7pm slot. To no one’s surprise, it doesn’t do very well.
The thinking, apparently, is that tinkering with the primetime line-up of Anderson Cooper and Piers Morgan would be too risky. The exact opposite is true. It couldn’t possibly be less risky to move Ms. Burnett to 9pm and build a real show around her. Almost no one watches Piers Morgan. He is universally un-beloved.
Yes, but so what?
Mr. Bewkes would be well-advised to blow this all up and start fresh. He might begin by floating a story that he is considering hiring someone like Roger Ailes to come fix things at CNN. He might even suggest hiring Mr. Ailes himself, just for fun. That would certainly get everyone’s attention.
The prospect of Mr. Ailes arriving at CNN Headquarters in New York with his wild-eyed band of FNC Hell’s Angels is probably too good to be true. Sad to say. But say this for Mr. Ailes: if he ever did get the job, he would say: “we’re taking this beach, in this way and if you don’t want to help, then get the hell out of the way. ” He would actually lead.
CNN needs that kind of leadership. If it didn’t matter, it wouldn’t matter. But CNN is an important resource, nationally and internationally. CNN actually matters.
Glenn Beck says he has more paying viewers at GBTV than CNN (Communist News Network) has people viewing for free.
"CNN actually matters."
Only as a source of fiction ...
CNN? They are still on?
I don’t understand why so many people have fallen for the left’s propaganda that the gulf war started in 1991. This is like claiming that world war two started on D-Day.
In reality, the war started in 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. The war was started by Saddam Hussein, not by George Bush.
I guess it just goes to show that if you repeat a lie often enough, even people who write for “The American Interest” will start to believe it.
Now that I got that off my chest, I can finish reading the article...
How does that rate on the Warp scale?
Is that closer to Warp 1 or Warp 10? It seems like it would be really fast, but Warp took them across the universe pretty quickly. Except for Voyager, of course, which never could seem to find its way back. (And I’ve never seen the final episodes, due to overseas deployment through that year. :-(
At that point I was so appalled I never had any reason to watch CNN again. Now one of the debates will be anchored by that Candy Crowley who was having a tizzy fit on air about Paul Ryan not having a TIE on, when announced last weekend. SHE was chosen? WHY and the GOP/RNC says we are overreacting. As Paul Ryan continues to say - you are either part of the problem or part of the solution. Well folks - WE need to be part of the solution. Let's get on this - volunteer do what you can for victory in November.
There is actually a pretty interesting conspiracy theory about CNN being in Iraq back in the day. Some funny youtube videos of off camera moments that make it look a little...well...its funny whether true or not.
I’m not endorsing this, but it is funny to watch RE: Old School CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApZDJo5wsH4
I can’t find it but there was one scene on a video where the “outside” scene from Saudi Arabia panned to reveal a utility shelf as if they were actually in some basement somewhere. It has been awhile since I watched it, maybe there is an explanation and I missed it.
All broadcast news and most printed news began using dem talking points to create the myth of “Republican Racism” as the reason police weren't being held accountable for abuse and corruption, when if fact it's the dem controlled city govts that are responsible.
They did air them but no one was actually able to view them as they went by too fast in the other direction.
maybe a backward glance on the shuttle doing 18x the speed of light would have been able to catch a glimpse of them.
“What the heck happened to HLN?...”
Like CNN they went for the prime advertising money.
That money is paid for for single mothers and young people: dumb sluts to be concise. Those viewers pay the most money most easily for the least product value - so advertisers pay the most for them.
These are Democrat voters too.
Re: “CNN is an important resource...CNN actually matters.”
The problem for CNN?
First, not enough breaking news that galvanizes the average viewer.
Wars, mass murders, terrorist attacks, celebrity murder trials, deadly storms...
In 1980, real time TV coverage of these things was stunningly new.
Today, we’re used to them, they all pretty much look like the last catastrophe we watched, and, most important, there’s only so much to say about them, there’s only so much actual “news” to report.
Second, when there is no breaking news, CNN is just one more Hard Left media program.
I can get the Democratic Party talking points from a dozen different sources.
Why do I need CNN?
Folks, on those cruises and more than a dozen others I've been on, one was forced to watch International CNN as the only source of news in one's cabin. ICNN pollutes the seven seas like decaying fish.
I kid you not....every ICNN news-reader has a foreign accent (mostly British, real Labour-type socialists), is anti-capitalism and anti-American. Every news tid-bit is as slanted as humanly possible.
I never watch the domestic CNN shows, I don't patronize its major sponsors, and I gripe nicely but firmly when CNN is the only source of news in doctors' waiting rooms, etc.
CNN is socially amoral, politically immoral, and its radical cast of talk characters are the antithesis of all the founding principles of this nation and responsible journalism.
I avoid this network like the black death. Scrue 'em!
Leni
perfect graphic :-)
I love the graphic '18 times the speed of light'! Just think, if CNN could travel 18 times the speed of light they would have no competition because they would be 18 times larger than the whole universe!!! ;-)
Back in the Clintooon years I used to urge FReepers not to watch these networks and then with loss of viewership they would eventually go out of business or change for the better.
I was wrong, sadly!
These companies like Disney, GE, Viacom etc. are willing to keep these propaganda organs operating at a loss just in hopes that they can persuade a few shallow minds to believe in fantasies.
The only time I have watched CNN for over 10 years is when I go to Firehouse Subs some Saturday afternoons. If football is on I can easily talk them into changing the channel! :-D I can eat in peace because I feel comfortable with mindless automatons spouting drivel that has no particular meaning. It is sort of like listening to a speech by Nikita Khrushchev! :-D
CNN has become unwatchable. It’s almost as insultingly far left as MSNBC, which at least has occasional unintentional comedy value. Soledad O’Brien makes me want to reach into the TV and slap her smugly ignorant lying face.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
