Some colorfully apt descriptions of the current state of cable news from David Carr in the New York Times:
Gorged on ratings from a historic election and still riding on leftover adrenaline, the cable networks have steadfastly remained in campaign mode. And the hyperbolic rhythms and requirements of a cable news world have never seemed less relevant to the story at hand…
After a recent round of big name renewals and contracts, the cable networks are loaded with red meat eaters and cud chewers. MSNBC is pretty much wall-to-wall politics with a roster to match — the obsessive Chris Matthews, the freakishly partisan Keith Olbermann and the reliably left-leaning Rachel Maddow.Fox, too, sees politics everywhere, with Bill O’Reilly on the hunt for new enemies every day and Glenn Beck’s increasingly popular atavism. And CNN still has all manner of political boots on the ground — panels stacked like cordwood even though the election is long past.
But, Carr notes
the business of governing, which involves incremental progress and endless negotiations, isn’t a made-for-television event…We’re not waiting for late returns from California any more. Instead, we’re getting unemployment figures from Michigan. While it’s a far less exciting story, it’s a far more important one.
Which is just about the same point my colleague Katia made last week regarding the press’s focus on the president’s tone during his prime time press conference:
[T]he focus on tone demonstrates all over again how the press transforms politics into a blood sport with quantifiable winners and losers, which is disconnected from the significance of actual policy—roads built, hospitals staffed, schools renovated. The impulse to cover the horse race at the cost of the seriousness of governance persists. In this case, if Obama’s the professor, then the press is a bunch of unruly kids who won’t calm down after recess. The election is long behind us, get back to work.

Freakish? You wanna know what's freakish? Bill O'Reilly sending thugs out to stalk people on their vacation and ambush them with a camera. Freakish is implying that a teen who was raped and murdered was at fault for her misfortune. Freakish is announcing on national TV that a kidnapped 14-year-old boy must have enjoyed being sodomized or he wouldn't have stayed with his captor.
You want more freakish? Some crackpot extremist holed up in a "Doom Bunker" fantasizing on national TV, tearfully, about being surrounded by ...some really really scary thing.
Olbermann's partisan, sure. But how right-wing biased is Carr when he calls Olbermann "freakish" and writes about O'Reilly and Beck as if these extremist clowns were in some way normal?
#1 Posted by Tom, CJR on Mon 30 Mar 2009 at 12:51 PM
I would go farther and say that not only is campaign-mode coverage not appropriate now, it's rarely appropriate during the campaigns. Day-to-day fluctuations in poll numbers are mostly random and deserve no more coverage than this week's lottery picks. A town-hall meeting held by a politician is as newsworthy an event as a focus group held by a marketing exec. The "predictions" of party strategists are about as significant as advertising slogans (and have essentially the same purpose). And of course, the herds of self-important analysts and panelists that roam the cable news grasslands -- they seem to exist only to prove the truth of that old saying about what opinions are like . . .
Considering how much coverage the cable networks devoted to nothing of importance in 2008, should we be surprised that they're still doing it in 2009?
#2 Posted by D. B., CJR on Mon 30 Mar 2009 at 01:28 PM