Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Identity Crisis Continues for CNN
The New York times ^ | 1-27-03 | AP

Posted on 01/27/2003 10:22:32 AM PST by ifhult45

Identity Crisis Continues for CNN By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 8:10 a.m. ET

NEW YORK (AP) -- This week marks an anniversary the people at CNN would prefer be observed quietly -- very quietly.

It was one year ago that Fox News Channel first beat CNN in the ratings, toppling the network that invented cable news and had enjoyed a monopoly for most of its existence.

The pecking order not only hasn't changed since then, Fox's lead is wider. This month's unexpected resignation of CNN Chairman Walter Isaacson and the exit of six correspondents has people asking, once again: What's wrong with CNN?

There's no simple answer. But facing a challenger with confidence and a clear sense of mission has only amplified the lack of those two qualities in CNN.

``CNN's problems go deeper,'' said Frank Sesno, a former CNN Washington bureau chief and now a professor at George Mason University. ``They cut to the question of what is CNN? What is their audience? And how are they talking to that audience? I think CNN has created its own fog of war and they're getting lost in it a little bit.''

Executives at CNN tend to get exasperated when their network is defined narrowly in terms of its ratings race with Fox News Channel.

Jim Walton, who will replace Isaacson (who leaves to join a think tank) this spring as CNN chairman, said he has four ways that he will measure success. Ratings is one yardstick, and the others are the quality of CNN's journalism, the network's profitability and the people who work there.

Morale is a difficult thing to pin down, of course, but suddenly telling longtime correspondents that their services are no longer required and having security escort them out the door can't help.

The contracts of Brooks Jackson, Allan Dodds Frank, Mark Potter, Bruce Francis and James Hattori were not renewed at the end of 2002, and Garrick Utley decided against staying. Knowledgeable observers say the moves were a combination of cost-cutting and a recognition that the veterans worked better with prepared reports instead of live stand-ups, which CNN is emphasizing more.

Most experts say CNN is still able to charge more for commercials than Fox, but that gap is narrowing rapidly.

A study last year by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that 37 percent of respondents believed all or most of what they saw on CNN, compared to 24 percent on Fox. When a big story breaks, like the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, more people are likely to turn to CNN for information.

A war with Iraq will offer a high-profile test of whether that's still the case, and Fox has launched an aggressive ad campaign claiming it's trusted more because it's watched more.

``If it were just about higher ratings, we would put Bill Hemmer in a tight, white T-shirt and our numbers will go up,'' Walton said. ``But I'm not sure it would be good for the brand.''

But if not ratings, what was Connie Chung's aggressively promoted interview last week with ```The Bachelorette's' Rejects'' all about?

CNN likes to claim it's above the fray, but many of the changes in the network's on-air look over the past few years -- more colorful graphics, vibrant appearance and frequent news alerts -- reflect Fox's influence.

CNN's emphasis on establishing beachheads in its schedule with personalities has given birth to strong, informative programs helmed by Aaron Brown, Wolf Blitzer, Judy Woodruff and Paula Zahn.

Yet the schedule, described as ``patchy'' by media analyst Tom Wolzien of Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., has its holes: an awkward ``Talkback Live,'' an increasingly shrill ``Crossfire'' and the tabloid-driven Chung hour. Even perennial Larry King, or at least his guests, are beginning to show their age.

The viewership gap between Fox and CNN is widest in prime-time: an average of 1.32 million viewers to 930,000 in the last three months of 2002.

``The ratings success Fox has had is a reflection of what Fox has created for itself -- which is a voice, a buzz and identity that is consistent throughout the day, lifted by strong personalities and magnified by a strong leader,'' Sesno said. CNN's management structure has been confusing and unwieldy since the departure of founder Ted Turner. Teya Ryan runs CNN's main network, and she reports to Walton, who reports to Turner Broadcasting head Jamie Kellner, who reports to bosses at AOL Time Warner.

There's no question Roger Ailes is in charge at Fox News, as succinctly pointed out by Newsday columnist Verne Gay recently.

``Historically, the strongest news organizations have been dictatorships,'' Wolzien said.

CNN has also lost the public relations war, he said. The pugnacious Ailes has no problem going toe-to-toe with his rivals and, as a former political adviser, knows how to run a campaign. CNN has shied away from taking him on, and Walton indicates this isn't likely to change.

Much of the negative attention is unavoidable. When you have the field to yourself and that suddenly changes, your faults clearly come into view. People notice.

``It's hard to be on the front lines of the revolution when the revolution stops,'' Sesno said. ``Then what do you do? The revolution is over and it's settled into trench warfare. You have to know who you're fighting and where you're going and have an objective that's clear.''


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ailes; cnn; fox; isaacson; media; msnbc
Why does CNN continue to refuse to admit that there are real reasons why FNC is number one? People like getting unbiased news and entertaining personalities--cable news doesn't have to be bland. Is it any surprise that CNN overlooked Teya Ryan and countless others to hire a guy who made his mark in sports broadcasting? Their holier-than-thou approach isn't working, so I guess its the old 'if you can't beat 'em join 'em' theory.
1 posted on 01/27/2003 10:22:32 AM PST by ifhult45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
Has CNN thought that maybe their programming is just plain dung? Its so booooooring. On Fox I get personality and can identify with the person somewhat. THe morning crew might be a little less in knowledge but they entertain the living crap out of me in the morning. Zaun is like watching moss grow.
2 posted on 01/27/2003 10:29:20 AM PST by smith288 (the tag that itches the back of your neck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
...informative programs helmed by Aaron Brown, Wolf Blitzer, Judy Woodruff and Paula Zahn.

HA! Judy Woodruff?!! Give me a break. She is totally worthless.

At least they called the other shows what they are: namely, the overly shrill Crossfire - Begala and Carville are awful, silly Talk Back Live - what a waste of airtime, and tabloid driven Connie Chung - this one cracked me up because I thought the rationale between Chung was that it would be a real NEWS show to go up against O'Reilly, not a new analysis show. Instead, it is just ridiculous!

3 posted on 01/27/2003 10:29:25 AM PST by Wphile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
What's wrong with CNN? ...... There's no simple answer.

Yes there is. They spew the Democrat "message", and the viewers hate it.

4 posted on 01/27/2003 10:33:03 AM PST by concerned about politics (Achievement is politically incorrect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
Aaron Brown

An insider said his nickname said behind his back at CNN is 'Skippy'.

5 posted on 01/27/2003 10:33:52 AM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
It’s fun to read the New York Times do an exposé on an institution without mentioning the elephant in the middle of the room.
6 posted on 01/27/2003 10:34:37 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
CNN will be greatly disappointed when it figures out what it is.....
7 posted on 01/27/2003 10:35:39 AM PST by tracer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
informative programs

It's quicker to just read the Marxist handbook than to watch it spun on CNN.
There's a reason it's known as the Communist News Network.

8 posted on 01/27/2003 10:36:41 AM PST by concerned about politics (Achievement is politically incorrect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
What's wrong with CNN?

The same thing that's wrong with the NYT. BIAS

9 posted on 01/27/2003 10:46:00 AM PST by Drango (don't need no stinkin' tag line)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
The lowest forms of life on Earth can adapt and change to find success (whether it be movement, food or countless other things). CNN, however, is apparently unable to. That speaks volumes.

10 posted on 01/27/2003 10:46:19 AM PST by ifhult45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
``If it were just about higher ratings, we would put Bill Hemmer in a tight, white T-shirt and our numbers will go up,'' Walton said.

Hemmer turns me off almost as much as Bill Schneider. Here is a perfect illustration that they simply don't get it and won't anytime soon. Go Fox Go but get rid of Whorealdo.

11 posted on 01/27/2003 10:49:20 AM PST by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
``If it were just about higher ratings, we would put Bill Hemmer in a tight, white T-shirt and our numbers will go up,''

It sounds like their viewer base is still hung up on boxers or briefs. That is soooo impeached yesterday.

12 posted on 01/27/2003 10:54:45 AM PST by concerned about politics (Achievement is politically incorrect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
They spew the Democrat "message"

And, they spew it in such a high handed manner that they come off as the elitists that liberals usually are.

"We are smarter than you, know what's best for you, and we are going to tell you what to think."
"oh, and gimme your money."

13 posted on 01/27/2003 10:54:56 AM PST by MrB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
As for the question where CNN went wrong...number one, they finally got competition. The FOX folks know how to compete. They don't make fancy stories or spends tons of money on environmental documentaries. They simply tell the news. Number two, when CNN launched its International version...they slide the major focus of the network to the liberal left. Anyone in France watching CNN International thinks that all Americans are liberals and everyone loves this kinda news. While we all love Larry King, the truth is we all got hostile about the liberal left slant. Number three, their experts got to the point of being non-experts, and we all realized that. Watching the Simpson court case develop...I got to the point where I could not watch CNN...it was simply awash in dimwit experts. Number four, their original focus was simply and purely news...and they lost that focus over 10 years ago. They cannot give you a decent neutral slant on anything except sports. Its a sorry situation to be in...because CNN isn't willing to change or reverse itself...most of their hosts can't believe that the public wants neutral news views...and FOX is determined to give the public exactly what it wants. For CNN...its a sad day...they can never get to be number one again.
14 posted on 01/27/2003 11:06:11 AM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
Anyone in France watching CNN International thinks that all Americans are liberals and everyone loves this kinda news.

In a book titled "Reagans War", the author went around the world to find out why people hated the U.S.
They hate us because of what they see on TV. Hollywood, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN. All they know about America is liberalism.
They don't really hate all of America, they hate liberalism! They just weren't told we exist!

Now that FOX is on the air, I suppose the world may decide we're not all liberals after all, and America has a really good class of people living in it that hates liberalism as well.

Only by turning back liberalism will there ever be peace in the world. Clinton was wrong. It's not our wealth, it's people like him that gives America a bad name.

15 posted on 01/27/2003 11:18:30 AM PST by concerned about politics (Achievement is politically incorrect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
What's wrong with CNN?

Too bad that any published book on this subject (which would take up a very sizeable volume indeed) would just deal with bureaucracy; editorial foibles, urine testing, and other procedural maladies.

From the TV audience's point of view, CNN is a state propaganda service following a doctrine of the US as a corporatist state structure (without anybody's knowledge or consent).

Highlights in the past decade include the CNN Town Hall from Ohio State University where anyone with antiwar sympathies was forced to sit far away from Madeleine Albright as possible, with Bernie Shaw taking questions from pre-screened "ordinary citizens".

There was the work of Christiane Amanpour - claiming she knew Serbs shelled a Sarajevo marketplace while sitting at a coffee shop in Belgrade.

CNN viewers watched with disgusted bemusement at the complete transformation of CNN into a NATO propaganda service during the Kosovo war. Few were surprised when it turned out Army spin doctors were actually employed by CNN to guide its spin-doctoring - eg. constantly trumpeting patented propaganda lies such as "genocide" and "over 100,000 killed - no doubt" to boost war support. CNN even tried to broadcast a live assassination of a Serbian government minister and Serbian television employees by arranging an interview at the exact time when it was scheduled for bombing by US F-16 fighters.

What's wrong with CNN? CNN is not only a liar, it's an accomplice to murder, illegal armed aggression, and a variety of other crimes.

16 posted on 01/27/2003 12:02:15 PM PST by Ichabod Walrus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifhult45
A study last year by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that 37 percent of respondents believed all or most of what they saw on CNN, compared to 24 percent on Fox.

The ratings certainly DON'T confirm the results of this "study".

17 posted on 01/27/2003 12:07:27 PM PST by TankerKC (That handle left of the steering column? It's a "turn signal".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TankerKC
A study last year by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that 37 percent of respondents believed all or most of what they saw on CNN, compared to 24 percent on Fox.

That's because CNN directs their leftst propaganda straight to the dead heads stupid enough to watch them.
Fox, on the other hand, has both brilliant rights and stupid lefts. Of course not everything if believed! Like I said, they also have stupid lefties! Who in their right mind would believe a leftist? DUH!

18 posted on 01/27/2003 12:22:02 PM PST by concerned about politics (Achievement is politically incorrect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
connie chung is unwatchable, she's so inept it's embarrassing.
it seems CNN is attempting to get a younger demo, there are too many un-mature correspondents and personalities.
19 posted on 01/27/2003 12:59:08 PM PST by contessa machiaveli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson