Tweet
The network that invented 24-hour cable news and then dominated the genre for more than two decades is king no more. In fact, CNN now sits fourth and last in the ratings behind FOX, MSNBC, and its sister network HLN, according to a report by NPR.
What does this say about CNN, and more to the point, what does it say about the state of cable news? FOX is blatantly partisan to the right, MSBNC more often than not favors the left, and HLN is now just shamelessly tabloid. Is this a sign that there is no longer a viable market for straight-up, unbiased TV reporting?
13 Comments
I try not to watch CNN much, but when I do they just seem like an Epic Fail. I’m not comfortable with the notion of “unbiased” reporting, as I think that’s a 100-year old notion that “scientific facts” can be presented without a point of view. I do think CNN has a terrible streak of embedded Villager groupthink, so that Conventional Wisdom (usually Republican) is taken Very Seriously and alternative ideas (often Progressive) are dismissed as “the left.” Serious People who write for the Washington Post are taken Seriously, and as a result CNN is wrong about everything and doesn’t make anybody feel good about themselves either.
A clown like Wolf Blitzer seemed anxious to demand that Bill Clinton resign, but fawned over Dick Cheney. Why? What possible end could be served by that, except Fail? I think Chris Matthews is a trite entertainer, but at least he seems to understand that there has to be outrage in both directions, even if I don’t think he has thought very deeply about it.
Not at all. CNN and “straight-up, unbiased TV reporting” have nothing in common with one another. CNN is pure theater, “he-said, she-said” with little time for facts; nothing but dueling spin-artists.
CNN stopped providing “straight-up, unbiased TV reporting” over 15 years ago.
MSNBC is one of the ONLY places on TV you can get much of an alternative spin on anything besides the Inside Village Hip which is establishment serving. And MSNBC is FAR from being progressive.
To catagorize them as LEFT serving is a joke.
Why is anything but self serving Inside Villager speak labeled left?
How about TELLING THE TRUTH?
Truth knows no left or right.
It’s only when truth is filtered does it become left or right, and our right is so far gone the middle looks like radical left.
They all suck, Jim. One network does not suck worse or less than the others.
NONE of them do justice to the truth.
And why would you, I or anyone expect them to serve the truth? They are corporate owned and part and parcel of the feudalist system in place with respect to wealth, greed, power and control.
De-regulation of media and media ownership killed the 4th Estate. And its been war on the the truth ever since.
In war, the first casualty is always the truth.
And in response to your question at the end of your post:
The market is there, there’s always a market for the truth.
The media just refuse to put the product on the air.
Your question doesn’t address the issue at hand, who controls programming content.
The market is there, but it would be against their own self serving interests for the media to tell the truth about corporate greed and the flow of wealth upwards into the hands of the 1%.
Hey Jim!
Without cable it’s out of my league to judge between these 4, but apparently people have strong opinions on the issue – hate them all, but still watch them enough to make these arguments.
I’d have to agree, however, that “unbiased reporting” is a myth, especially on television. Even Bill Moyers, who in my opinion is the best journalist out there, shows a bias in his choice of guests and topics.
Good point Lance. I go out of my way to avoid CNN, Fox, and TV news in general (although I do occasionally watch KO and Rachel just to see how they are presenting a particular story to a TV audience). Nonetheless I have spent enough time in airport, auto repair shop, and hospital waiting rooms to know for a fact that CNN (and their brethren) are not “straight-up, unbiased” news sources. Nothing sends me around the bend faster than being trapped in room with a TV I cannot control. I would give a great deal to have TVs banned from waiting rooms.
I agree with the comments above. That CNN is lousy at stenography doesn’t mean that they are doing real journalism. It just means they are lousy. If they actually did straight-up, unbiased TV reporting, more people would watch them. It is certainly an underserved market. The real issue, and this is true for any of the the news outlets is why their parent companies are deadset against them doing such reporting. The answer is that it does not serve their corporate interests and those interests trump any “right” for the public to know and be informed.
As I don’t choose to get CNN, am spared finding out how boring they can be. Couldn’t watch Lou Dobbs, though, any more than I could take Rush or Beck. Nielsen hasn’t asked me lately to tell me what I think of teebee, or I’d be among the consensus that CNN rates ‘way below the internet here.
Funny, attaturk chose the same subject at FDL front page; great minds.
I think Jim White is right, or that is my experience with them. They do nothing very well. They are not a good news organization, imo. Hosts are horrible, their commentators rife with conflicts of interest and hidden agendas. Their research is lazy and without content.
Sadly, they have the recources to be great. Seriously, if they would simply take CNNI (international), bring it home and broadcast it, they’d see immediate improvement in their ratings.
You can’t seriously be asking this question in reference to CNN.
I just try to stay away from TV news in general…
Sort of echoing Phred, I have to say that CNN has failed the mission of providing actual news.
People watch the news to find out things, like how politics will affect their lives. We want accurate, truthful information. CNN provides too little of either. And when they veer off onto GOP talking points, it exposes the extent of the disconnect between the news editors and the news consumers.
News anchors are surrogates for the rest of us. They get to question the powerful, and the public wants them to ask the questions the public wants answers to. The anchors instead ask the questions of interest to corporate management or just focus on the dog and pony show of politics. This does not interest the viewers, who have proved it by staying away in droves. People want the anchors to put issues into focus; to give viewers the tools they need to understand the issues.
People do want real news. If CNN can find the stones to present it, they can come back. As long as they try to minimize the truth, that their viewers actually do like progressives policies and ideas, the slide will continue and group blogs like Firedoglake will become even more influential. This is where we find the facts, not on CNN.
I only watch CNN on weekends when nothing else is on. I used to have it on all day at home, but they stopped being unbiased years ago, and so I am boycotting it. During the presidential campaign, they were extremely biased, first against Obama and toward Hillary, and then toward McCain. It was extremely difficult to watch. Blitzer has always been difficult to watch, but since he turned his Sunday morning program over to John King, I cannot watch it at all. King is even worse than David Gregory on Meet the Press, so I avoid all Sunday Morning programming these days. They are nothing but a joke! I watch MSNBC all day and evening, EXCEPT for “Morning Joe,” which I abhore. Joe Scarborough is a mean, sadistic person, and his symbiotic side-kick is unwilling to extricate herself from his web of evil. Otherwise, the network has rid themselves of most of the other bad actors, except Pat Buchanan. They have become quite a tolerable alternative for those of us who still like to watch TV.