1. Don't call it "CNN’s tack toward the middle". They're not moving toward "the middle". Pro-democracy is the middle. They're moving away from that.
2. CNN's recalibration does not make any business sense. They were splitting the non-traitor audience with MSNBC. If they move away from being stridently pro-democracy, then normal Americans are going to drift more towards MSNBC. I certainly am not interested in hearing any more from Scott Jennings or Rick Santorum or Chris Christie or whatever other treason apologist they're going to have on more. Meanwhile, there's no chance they're going to pick up any of the cretins who watch Fox News, after Trump and the traitor caucus spent years using CNN as the prime example of the "enemy of the people".
You make good points, Niss. I meant "tack toward the middle" merely in the sense that CNN's new direction aims to please a certain type of centrist audience, but I agree that authoritarianism shouldn't be framed as a side of a debate.
That's a key failing of media execs who either have never been journalists or don't care about journalism.
They see all members of any audience as interchangeable widgets, idiots to be swapped and traded as objects, not individuals with their own preferences.
Anyone with a brain and half an ounce of sense ses what you see Niss - that if CNN goes the direction they are, people will either find alternatives, like the streamers from NBC, ABC, and CBS, or they'll simply turn the TV off.
In a similar way to how music execs were bullheadedly blind to digital music 20+ years ago, and talk radio execs blind to so much, Licht & his ilk seem to be saying, "What are they gonna do - not watch TV news?"
To which a growing number of people are already clearly replying, "Um, yeah."
"Now, a review of ratings data compiled by Nielsen shows the internal chaos at the network is mirrored by deep declines in viewership across all day parts—total day and prime time. Through February 15, CNN’s average prime time audience among viewers 25-54—the key demographic valued by advertisers—was just 126,000, representing a 69% drop from the same period one year ago. Among total viewers, the average audience was 534,000, a decline of 68% from 2021."
If it doesn’t make business sense, and I think it was a business move as you say but maybe also part of the War for Truth we are in, people will or might turn away. We are dismayed…we don’t need this development.
“There’s the Republican Party, which is being taken over by the movement, but hasn’t completely been yet.”
I disagree. Pro-democracy Republican leaders have been nearly snuffed out, or silenced by their own cowardliness, enough to be irrelevant at this point. MAGA Republicans are living in an alternate universe where their “news” source is based on lies, conspiracy theories, Trump’s grievances and their own feelings of being left behind, of being neglected by the political system and stunted economic growth for decades. When they look around their communities they’re constantly reminded of what that neglect has wrought (specifically, I’m using Sen. Josh Hawley’s home county in Missouri as my example.) People who still consider themselves Republicans but not MAGA are also living in their own delusional world.
To counter the MAGA Rs, we have Democrats who have been so dependent on their own response to traditional Republican policy positions to moderate their own positions most of them have no idea what to do now. (A few examples ACA w/o public option, Medicare non-negotiated drug prices, and big one Hyde Amendment).
My advice to journalists and Democrats: Focus on REALITY, whatever it is. If the REALITY Is bad, then Democrats need to propose ways to fix it. If journalists focus on reporting REALITY, like the success of California to get through a heat wave without major black outs or EV sales in US reaching a tipping point, and when actual REALITY becomes more satisfying and empowering than attending a Trump rally and wallowing in Trump’s pity, then MAGAs will eventually dwindle but the Democratic Party cannot and should not ever use the traditional or MAGA Republican Party ‘platform’ to moderate its own policies again.
I'd urge you, and all of us, not to automatically conflate "the Republican Party," "Republican leaders," and "Republicans." I say this because as a grassroots Democratic activist it drives me bonkers to hear commentators and others continually talk about "the Democrats" as if we're monolithic. We're not. Usually they seem to mean Democratic leaders and/or officeholders. They also like to talk about "trhe progressive wing vs. the moderates," which is just as infuriating so don't get me started.
I also think it's futile to talk about MAGA Republicans wirhout talking about white supremacy, so anybody who hasn't read Heather McGhee's THE SUM OF US, please read it, or at least listen to her talk about it. "Pro-democracy" can only take us so far. On some level Republican leaders and probably most Republicans probably consider themselves pro-democracy -- but it's a democracy that the white, male founders would probably recognize. What many of us pro-democracy types are fighting for is an inclusive, multicultural democracy with justice (including economic justice) for ALL.
Journalists can only report, and frame that reporting, according to what their editors tell them to produce, and the news media is run by a few corporate entities who depend on selling advertising (and try selling advertising time if your company's ratings are in the toilet). News is a commodity to be packaged and sold like doughnuts. CNN has been struggling. It's trying to sell its doughnuts to a different audience. We need more nonprofit journalism because the profit-driven stuff isn't the best.
First, CNN has been pretty awful for a long time now. Their bias was tedious and boring, and it was punctuated by the irritating habit the utterly annoying Wolf Blitzer had of always referring to Trump as "The President of the United States." The one bright spot in their mediocre journalism was their covid 19 coverage, except for the sloppiness and unethical policy of allowing Chris Cuomo to star in the silly "interviews" of his brother. Later, that same coziness cost Chris his job and disgraced CNN for its lack of ethics.
CNN is hurting because its ratings have sunk precariously, and their idiotic solution to this is to try to steal some of Fox's audience. That's the bottom line - market share. What else can we expect from 21st century cable TV channels? Remember, CNN's live streaming channel lived for a month before it was put out of its misery. And most importantly, journalists are required to write what their editors tell them to.
Excellent! Jay Rosen has been helpfully engaged regarding the media especially these last several years as a voice of reason and fairness. We are nevertheless in a battle about truth. In the beginning there was so much shuffling (fear) in the media about using the words “lie” and “lying”. Then the scorekeeping rose about it after. How many lies? That though became not truth telling but part of the silo building and the war we are in as Kelly tried to tell us the lies are an alternative truth. We have a real problem on first base regarding truth and lies, right and wrong.
Using the term “pro-democracy” may not be helpful as an adjective phrase or label without explaining just what is meant. It may be made into a negative by the ill intentioned devoid of meaning if it has not been yet, unbelievably.
Apart from special events I don't watch CNN, but I have been listening to coverage of whar's going on there. I think it's happening to various degrees in other places (like maybe the New York Times? OMG). It's alluded to a few times -- e.g., references to "CNN executives" and the network's "new Republican leadership" -- but I think it bears further exploration. Where is the both-sides pressure coming from?
Well, one doesn't need a weatherman, or CNN's example, to surmise that it's coming from the executive suites and the big money above them that hires, fires, and pays everyone's salary. THAT's the dilemma. When the right-wingers yell about the "liberal media," I start cackling hysterically. Journalists may skew liberal -- I *expect* them to skew liberal in all meanings of the word because a good journalist is open to new experiences, new ideas, different people, etc. -- but those boardrooms and financial interests generally don't. Even a liberal corporate exec probably moves in circles that aren't liberal at all, and the circles one moves in tend to have a pronounced effect on what one considers normal or OK. Under the circumstances it's pretty amazing that there's as much useful stuff in the "corporate media" as there is. Hell, I even subscribe to some of it. (Not the NYT, however. I mooch off them when I need to.)
We curate our news intake trying to keep level headed and open. That can mean something different to individuals. Democracy is getting more complicated and messy. It certainly includes the fourth estate and all that it requires (journalist training and standards, financing.)
I think you mean greedy capitalism. PBS and NPR are good case studies.. and they have been threatened. Mostly though, (I think don't know) financed by benevolence.
Education, though, is key in a free society. And maybe first, upbringing of citizens... which seems at the root of our woes. The experiment in democracy bets on a certain morality and good will prevailing towards the whole of society. That's a big bet.
This opinion in the New York Times today was excellent: "The Greatest Threat to Democracy Is a Feature of Democracy"
IMO "greedy capitalism" is redundant. Capitalism by its nature encourages maximization of profits and/or benefits. Greed is a characteristic of individuals, not corporations. When it comes to problems (aka challenges), many USians like to emphasize individual solutions instead of looking at systems: "If only we were better educated," etc. This gets us nowhere. (This is also true of racism, btw.) What I'm talking about isn't "greedy capitalism," it's UNREGULATED capitalism.
Yes.. "unfettered capitalism" would have been a better term in common usage. But there is such a movement against regulations, like it's an enemy of the people. It goes hand in hand with GOP ( mainly) complaining about "the government" as an enemy. But I don't think it's a redundant term whatever it is called. I mean that capitalism can be benevolent in it's goals ( benefits) which is why I mentioned NPR and PBS which have had to turn to capitalists to keep going giving them the bonus of "doing good" as an asset. I am sure there are many other examples where you have capitalist methods promoting social good...i.e there are different forms of capitalism which do include "welfare capitalism" and public ownership or quasi versions. I am no expert of course but wikipedia on Capitalism is good; there are many forms of it. Capitalist methods can postpone maximization of monetary profits in the short term to achieve benevolent results, the greater good.. re the environment for instance. (Good discussion)
I have friends who watch mostly CNN (at least they used to!) -- are CNN viewers sensing the changes going on? Is it obvious/noticeable or is it like the boiling frog scenario and they aren't necessarily seeing the changes?
As to the three-way fight idea....the pro-democracy Republicans need to speak out and show they are against the MAGA loud-mouths that are so good at screaming their sound bites and buzz word salad in order for anyone to know they still exist. Otherwise, the limelight goes to whoever can yell the loudest and any pro-democracy GOPers just cower behind McConnell and McCarthy and eventually leave office.
As someone who watches a fair bit of CNN I would say changes haven't been very noticeable yet, though there have been occasional segments that have caused raised eyebrows. Like this one from last Friday: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1568353641983254531
I'm also going to be curious about whether CNN's ratings improve, which I doubt unless there's an uptick due to the upcoming midterms. But I'm also wondering about how much Politico will change. It's owned and operated now by the far right.
Two thoughts about today's newsletter:
1. Don't call it "CNN’s tack toward the middle". They're not moving toward "the middle". Pro-democracy is the middle. They're moving away from that.
2. CNN's recalibration does not make any business sense. They were splitting the non-traitor audience with MSNBC. If they move away from being stridently pro-democracy, then normal Americans are going to drift more towards MSNBC. I certainly am not interested in hearing any more from Scott Jennings or Rick Santorum or Chris Christie or whatever other treason apologist they're going to have on more. Meanwhile, there's no chance they're going to pick up any of the cretins who watch Fox News, after Trump and the traitor caucus spent years using CNN as the prime example of the "enemy of the people".
You make good points, Niss. I meant "tack toward the middle" merely in the sense that CNN's new direction aims to please a certain type of centrist audience, but I agree that authoritarianism shouldn't be framed as a side of a debate.
Nor should we think that democracy is solely in centrism.
That's a key failing of media execs who either have never been journalists or don't care about journalism.
They see all members of any audience as interchangeable widgets, idiots to be swapped and traded as objects, not individuals with their own preferences.
Anyone with a brain and half an ounce of sense ses what you see Niss - that if CNN goes the direction they are, people will either find alternatives, like the streamers from NBC, ABC, and CBS, or they'll simply turn the TV off.
In a similar way to how music execs were bullheadedly blind to digital music 20+ years ago, and talk radio execs blind to so much, Licht & his ilk seem to be saying, "What are they gonna do - not watch TV news?"
To which a growing number of people are already clearly replying, "Um, yeah."
Hope springs eternal. If they can't get the audience they want (and they haven't for almost 2 years now), they'll settle for whatever they can get. https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2022/02/21/cnns-ratings-collapse-prime-time-down-nearly-70-in-key-demo/?sh=6ec999e16dda
"Now, a review of ratings data compiled by Nielsen shows the internal chaos at the network is mirrored by deep declines in viewership across all day parts—total day and prime time. Through February 15, CNN’s average prime time audience among viewers 25-54—the key demographic valued by advertisers—was just 126,000, representing a 69% drop from the same period one year ago. Among total viewers, the average audience was 534,000, a decline of 68% from 2021."
More recent: "https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/02/business/media/cnn-profit-chris-licht.html
It is not remotely "centrist" to have Scott Jennings on nearly every night.
Besides, what's wrong with being a progressive?
If it doesn’t make business sense, and I think it was a business move as you say but maybe also part of the War for Truth we are in, people will or might turn away. We are dismayed…we don’t need this development.
“There’s the Republican Party, which is being taken over by the movement, but hasn’t completely been yet.”
I disagree. Pro-democracy Republican leaders have been nearly snuffed out, or silenced by their own cowardliness, enough to be irrelevant at this point. MAGA Republicans are living in an alternate universe where their “news” source is based on lies, conspiracy theories, Trump’s grievances and their own feelings of being left behind, of being neglected by the political system and stunted economic growth for decades. When they look around their communities they’re constantly reminded of what that neglect has wrought (specifically, I’m using Sen. Josh Hawley’s home county in Missouri as my example.) People who still consider themselves Republicans but not MAGA are also living in their own delusional world.
To counter the MAGA Rs, we have Democrats who have been so dependent on their own response to traditional Republican policy positions to moderate their own positions most of them have no idea what to do now. (A few examples ACA w/o public option, Medicare non-negotiated drug prices, and big one Hyde Amendment).
My advice to journalists and Democrats: Focus on REALITY, whatever it is. If the REALITY Is bad, then Democrats need to propose ways to fix it. If journalists focus on reporting REALITY, like the success of California to get through a heat wave without major black outs or EV sales in US reaching a tipping point, and when actual REALITY becomes more satisfying and empowering than attending a Trump rally and wallowing in Trump’s pity, then MAGAs will eventually dwindle but the Democratic Party cannot and should not ever use the traditional or MAGA Republican Party ‘platform’ to moderate its own policies again.
I'd urge you, and all of us, not to automatically conflate "the Republican Party," "Republican leaders," and "Republicans." I say this because as a grassroots Democratic activist it drives me bonkers to hear commentators and others continually talk about "the Democrats" as if we're monolithic. We're not. Usually they seem to mean Democratic leaders and/or officeholders. They also like to talk about "trhe progressive wing vs. the moderates," which is just as infuriating so don't get me started.
I also think it's futile to talk about MAGA Republicans wirhout talking about white supremacy, so anybody who hasn't read Heather McGhee's THE SUM OF US, please read it, or at least listen to her talk about it. "Pro-democracy" can only take us so far. On some level Republican leaders and probably most Republicans probably consider themselves pro-democracy -- but it's a democracy that the white, male founders would probably recognize. What many of us pro-democracy types are fighting for is an inclusive, multicultural democracy with justice (including economic justice) for ALL.
Journalists can only report, and frame that reporting, according to what their editors tell them to produce, and the news media is run by a few corporate entities who depend on selling advertising (and try selling advertising time if your company's ratings are in the toilet). News is a commodity to be packaged and sold like doughnuts. CNN has been struggling. It's trying to sell its doughnuts to a different audience. We need more nonprofit journalism because the profit-driven stuff isn't the best.
Solid interview, Thor.
Excellent.
How about a follow-up on the further rightward drift of Politico? Please.
First, CNN has been pretty awful for a long time now. Their bias was tedious and boring, and it was punctuated by the irritating habit the utterly annoying Wolf Blitzer had of always referring to Trump as "The President of the United States." The one bright spot in their mediocre journalism was their covid 19 coverage, except for the sloppiness and unethical policy of allowing Chris Cuomo to star in the silly "interviews" of his brother. Later, that same coziness cost Chris his job and disgraced CNN for its lack of ethics.
CNN is hurting because its ratings have sunk precariously, and their idiotic solution to this is to try to steal some of Fox's audience. That's the bottom line - market share. What else can we expect from 21st century cable TV channels? Remember, CNN's live streaming channel lived for a month before it was put out of its misery. And most importantly, journalists are required to write what their editors tell them to.
Excellent! Jay Rosen has been helpfully engaged regarding the media especially these last several years as a voice of reason and fairness. We are nevertheless in a battle about truth. In the beginning there was so much shuffling (fear) in the media about using the words “lie” and “lying”. Then the scorekeeping rose about it after. How many lies? That though became not truth telling but part of the silo building and the war we are in as Kelly tried to tell us the lies are an alternative truth. We have a real problem on first base regarding truth and lies, right and wrong.
Using the term “pro-democracy” may not be helpful as an adjective phrase or label without explaining just what is meant. It may be made into a negative by the ill intentioned devoid of meaning if it has not been yet, unbelievably.
Apart from special events I don't watch CNN, but I have been listening to coverage of whar's going on there. I think it's happening to various degrees in other places (like maybe the New York Times? OMG). It's alluded to a few times -- e.g., references to "CNN executives" and the network's "new Republican leadership" -- but I think it bears further exploration. Where is the both-sides pressure coming from?
Well, one doesn't need a weatherman, or CNN's example, to surmise that it's coming from the executive suites and the big money above them that hires, fires, and pays everyone's salary. THAT's the dilemma. When the right-wingers yell about the "liberal media," I start cackling hysterically. Journalists may skew liberal -- I *expect* them to skew liberal in all meanings of the word because a good journalist is open to new experiences, new ideas, different people, etc. -- but those boardrooms and financial interests generally don't. Even a liberal corporate exec probably moves in circles that aren't liberal at all, and the circles one moves in tend to have a pronounced effect on what one considers normal or OK. Under the circumstances it's pretty amazing that there's as much useful stuff in the "corporate media" as there is. Hell, I even subscribe to some of it. (Not the NYT, however. I mooch off them when I need to.)
We curate our news intake trying to keep level headed and open. That can mean something different to individuals. Democracy is getting more complicated and messy. It certainly includes the fourth estate and all that it requires (journalist training and standards, financing.)
The challenge, and not just with journalism, is to keep the financing from running the show.
I think you mean greedy capitalism. PBS and NPR are good case studies.. and they have been threatened. Mostly though, (I think don't know) financed by benevolence.
Education, though, is key in a free society. And maybe first, upbringing of citizens... which seems at the root of our woes. The experiment in democracy bets on a certain morality and good will prevailing towards the whole of society. That's a big bet.
This opinion in the New York Times today was excellent: "The Greatest Threat to Democracy Is a Feature of Democracy"
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/13/opinion/democracy-crisis-speech-trump.html
IMO "greedy capitalism" is redundant. Capitalism by its nature encourages maximization of profits and/or benefits. Greed is a characteristic of individuals, not corporations. When it comes to problems (aka challenges), many USians like to emphasize individual solutions instead of looking at systems: "If only we were better educated," etc. This gets us nowhere. (This is also true of racism, btw.) What I'm talking about isn't "greedy capitalism," it's UNREGULATED capitalism.
Yes.. "unfettered capitalism" would have been a better term in common usage. But there is such a movement against regulations, like it's an enemy of the people. It goes hand in hand with GOP ( mainly) complaining about "the government" as an enemy. But I don't think it's a redundant term whatever it is called. I mean that capitalism can be benevolent in it's goals ( benefits) which is why I mentioned NPR and PBS which have had to turn to capitalists to keep going giving them the bonus of "doing good" as an asset. I am sure there are many other examples where you have capitalist methods promoting social good...i.e there are different forms of capitalism which do include "welfare capitalism" and public ownership or quasi versions. I am no expert of course but wikipedia on Capitalism is good; there are many forms of it. Capitalist methods can postpone maximization of monetary profits in the short term to achieve benevolent results, the greater good.. re the environment for instance. (Good discussion)
I have friends who watch mostly CNN (at least they used to!) -- are CNN viewers sensing the changes going on? Is it obvious/noticeable or is it like the boiling frog scenario and they aren't necessarily seeing the changes?
As to the three-way fight idea....the pro-democracy Republicans need to speak out and show they are against the MAGA loud-mouths that are so good at screaming their sound bites and buzz word salad in order for anyone to know they still exist. Otherwise, the limelight goes to whoever can yell the loudest and any pro-democracy GOPers just cower behind McConnell and McCarthy and eventually leave office.
As someone who watches a fair bit of CNN I would say changes haven't been very noticeable yet, though there have been occasional segments that have caused raised eyebrows. Like this one from last Friday: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1568353641983254531
Also, Licht's first big on-air hire is a controversial cop who likely will make lots of excuses for law enforcement (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/cnn-hires-ex-nypd-official-intelligence-expert-john-miller/2022/09/06/1934c30c-2e39-11ed-bcc6-0874b26ae296_story.html), so I think it's likely the new direction will gradually become more apparent.
I'm also going to be curious about whether CNN's ratings improve, which I doubt unless there's an uptick due to the upcoming midterms. But I'm also wondering about how much Politico will change. It's owned and operated now by the far right.