What’s wrong at CNN
Feist, who oversees all of CNN’s political coverage, insists that the network does have a strategy.
“Our editorial direction is clear: we are the only U.S. cable news organization committed to worldwide newsgathering and reporting a broad range of stories without picking sides,” he told POLITICO.
Continue ReadingCNN’s struggles are most notable in primetime, where the problems are myriad. Anderson Cooper, once known for intrepid reports from disaster zones, now makes his most notable contributions to the following day’s news with a humor segment called “The RidicuList,” which has occasionally caused him to break out in uncontrollable fits of laughter. Part of the reason for the show’s waning relevance is that he now divides his attention between CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360,” a syndicated “Oprah”-like daytime talk show, and CBS’s “60 Minutes.” One staffer even referred to “AC360” as “Anderson’s third job.”
The newer faces on CNN’s primetime lineup are former CNBC anchor Erin Burnett and British television host Piers Morgan, both of whom have yet to find their footing at the network. Burnett, who thrived as part of an informal, ensemble show at CNBC, now anchors an hourlong show off the teleprompter that only occasionally focuses on her actual beat, which is the financial sector. Morgan, who replaced Larry King in 2010, often comes across as knowing little about the state of the national political conversation.
“You watch Anderson Cooper and you don’t know if it’s his daytime talk show or CNN,” Adgate said. “Piers Morgan is not Larry King. He doesn’t have the guests, he doesn’t have the cachet.”
With the exception of “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer,” CNN is also not as dedicated to the daily grind of American politics as MSNBC, which over the past nine months has covered — or, CNN would say, analyzed — almost every story through the lens of the election year.
MSNBC may not offer as much reporting — Steve Friedman, an executive producer there, recently described cable to The Huffington Post not as news but as “programs about the news” — but in spite or because of that fact, it still retains the audience of political insiders.
“The media mavens, the people who watch the news all day long, they’re not watching news, they’re getting opinion,” Adgate said. “Maybe they’ll tune into CNN if there’s a plane crash.”
As the general election gains momentum, CNN will likely renew its dedication to campaign coverage, and the primetime lineup will increasingly come to resemble extended versions of “The Situation Room,” as they did during the primaries and as they did in 2008, when CNN had more viewers on election night than any other channel on television. With King’s departure, Blitzer will already retain the third hour of programming it had then.
But there is a growing fear that in the interim period — the so-called halftime — as viewers continue to align with MSNBC on the left and Fox News on the right, they will forget to return to CNN when the general election picks up momentum.
“People have already made up their mind about where they’re going to watch the election,” Adgate said.
“If they’re not watching you before the primary night, they’re not going to come to you on primary night,” said one media executive.
For his part, Feist remains bullish on CNN’s political coverage. He even believes that Americans are starting to resist the partisan analysis provided by MSNBC and Fox, citing a recent Pew survey that identifies independents as the fastest-growing political group in the country, at 38 percent.
Feist explains CNN’s role in the current media environment in sports terms. If you’re watching a game between the Red Sox and the Yankees, he asks, don’t you want a non-biased sportscaster covering the play-by-play?
“There are a lot of people … who are baseball fans. They don’t cheer for the Red Sox or the Yankees, they just cheer for baseball,” Feist told POLITICO. “They want to get their coverage straight. They don’t want coverage of the game colored by the fact that their announcer has taken sides.”
Readers' Comments (347)
Leave it to the rednecks to help destroy the last salvation of our democracy....a free and fair press...and replace it with a propaganda network built to advance the interests of the ultra wealthy.
And then they have the nerve to call it fair and balanced.
Republican = LIAR
On television, CNN wins the election...
http://www.politico.com... />
"While CNN struggles to make 24-hour news compelling, its competitors at Fox News and MSNBC have redefined the industry. They have eschewed traditional, straight-forward newsgathering in favor of partisan, personality driven analysis — a model that is increasingly successful in an era of hyper-partisan politics, but one that CNN has resisted even as its ratings continue their slow and steady decline."
I have watched closely CNN since the Republican primaries started, and I have found it as partisan as Fox News or MSNBC are or ever were.
CNN non-partisan!!?? What a joke! Uh, maybe their bias is their problem. You can't fool all of the people all of the time.
what's wrong with CNN?
If you have to ask, you would not understand the answer.
what's wrong with CNN?
If you have to ask, you would not understand the answer.
what's wrong with CNN?
If you have to ask, you would not understand the answer.
what's wrong with CNN?
If you have to ask, you would not understand the answer.
Don't worry about CNN. Right wing nuts tune to Fox, left wingers to MSNBC and they get their fixes....
When something happens I still turn quickly to CNN. And if it gets to be a really big story, I
switch to one of the networks.
I'm convinced that the minds of people that watch Fox are never changed and the minds of people that watch MSNBC are never changed. Both groups sit in front of the tube drinking the red and blue colored kool-aid, thinking they've got it right.
And in the real realm of things, try to remember that re-runs of the Golden Girls dwarf them all
:) :)
Dude, I admit I only read half of the boring and poorly written article, but how do you blame this on "rednecks".....it just seems CNN can't get enough bleeding heart liberals to watch.
.........lol.........simple.
They are a pro-Obama MSM Super Wolf Pac............100% in the tank for the Democrat Party and liberal /progressives causes because their "staff" are almost totally liberal/progressive Ideologues....
Any other view is simply propaganda................America is a Center-Right nation and we demand "center-right" dominate media outlets and come Hell and High water we are going to get there.........
CNN has an opportunity to increase their viewers.......................represent the "majority"......we don't bite.......lol.
How many times are you going to ask Gomer?
CNN is left-wing, competing with far-left wing MSNBC. There is nothing non-partisan about CNN. Dylan is making a fool of himself for trying to make us believe that CNN isn't a liberal establishment. Roland Martin? Soledad O'Brien? John King? Wolfe Blitzer? Piers Morgan? All far lefties.
Come on, man. Don't lie to us. What next - only Sorkin can rescue CNN by being "neutral"?
Dylan has some credibility for about a week. Now he is just another liberal kool aid drinker.
"They have eschewed traditional, straight-forward newsgathering in favor of partisan, personality driven analysis — a model that is increasingly successful in an era of hyper-partisan politics, but one that CNN has resisted even as its ratings continue their slow and steady decline."
Not a true statement. .@CNN had Lou Dobbs. Wolf Blitzer is as partisan (and I would state a Zionist embed) as they come.
CNN decided to go full monty red bait for a grab at the #FOX elderly crowd and failed.
Now, just like a hand maiden who's lost their only value ~ their virginity ~ they can't go back......there was no objective 'there' there anyway.
.@CNN has also RECENTLY hired Murdoch & Glenn Beck employees~I mean, come ON, folks. SOME Americans can actually still use their common sense.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/s... />
When something happens I still tune quickly to CNN. If it's big, I'll go to the networks.
For the people that watch MSNBC and FNC, no minds are ever changed. Just talk to them, in person.
Duh...
And in the big scheme of things, remember that re-runs of the Golden Girls dwarf them all
CNN will be fine.........
sits in between the chairs left = msnbc and right Fox .... no room left left and doesn't want to go Fox
CNN's problem is actually pretty simple but they first have to come to terms that they too are a partisan news station. You have Fox news that clearly leans right. You have MSNBC that resides on the far left fringe. CNN is also left leaning but they have convinced themselves that they are bipartisan because MSNBC is so far left that it makes CNN look like a much more moderate viewpoint.
How many CNN newscasters, journalists, correspondents, etc... classify themselves as Democrat? How many as Republican? It would come as no surprise to see that CNN as a whole is likely 75% Democrat or leans liberal. Here in lies CNN's problem. The potential viewership and appettite from the American people on liberal journalism is smaller than those who have an appetite for conservative spun news. So in essence CNN is directly competing with MSNBC. The problem is that MSNBC is not only 99.999% liberal but they are Democratic shock jocks that will say anything and I mean anything to advance their liberal agenda and ideology. So if you are a Liberal and you have to decide between Fox, CNN, and MSNBC then your first choice is always going to be MSNBC. When you get your fill of MSNBC you might switch to FOX just to see what an opposing viewpoint might be. If you are conservative you will almost assuredly watch FOX and you might switch occasionally to MSNBC to see the opposing viewpoint.
Solution: Since we already know that FOX completely dominates these cable outlets then CNN would be wise to take a more moderate conservative view point to the news rather than a moderate liberal viewpoint. The pool of potential conservative viewers is much much larger and would substantially increase their ratings. While CNN is not likely to take over FOX in ratings anytime soon they could undoubtedly knock MSNBC down to the third tier position in a matter of 12-24 months with a shift in how they are portraying the news.
Again, the problem is that CNN hasn't reached the place of acceptance and understand that the American people do not care about moderate liberal viewpoints. If you are a liberal you want to go all in with MSNBC and their shock jocks. The rest of the population basically goes to Fox (moderates, republicans, independents, etc...)
I will give CNN some credit on "attempting" to report unbiased news but tempering their liberal journalists a bit and pulling back their reins. If they want to compete they better start balancing their liberal journalists with some more moderate journalists. The best political pundint on CNN is Ari Fliecher. As a conservative he is one of the ONLY reasons why I will still tune into watch CNN on occasion. People like Donna Brazile ought to consider moving over to MSNBC where she can feel right at home on the far left liberal wing with Rachel Maddow, Ed Shultz, Lawrence O'Donnell, Chris Mathews, and lets not forget Al Sharpton.
Slow news day, I guess.
"Several staffers at the network complain of low morale and an absence of editorial leadership".
Are you kidding me?? They can't get the job unless the hate America!
CNN needs to take a long hard look in the mirror and decide if they want to continue to broadcast liberal leaning news or if they are ready to balance out their list of journalists with more conservatives to add credibility to their brand. If they make a few minor adjustments they could drastically change their ratings. For example, if they filled John King's old time slot with a solid conservative journalist they would almost immediately notice a positive impact in the ratings for that show. If they can balance out the score card across the board enough then they can see their overall ratings easily outperform MSNBC.
You must be logged in to comment
Not yet a member?
Register Now