صحافة دولية » Rapid Decline of CNN and the Future of Cable News
Hascii117ffingtonpost
Mark Greenbaascii117m
The cable news wars continascii117e ascii117nabated with Fox News Channel holding a wide dominance in viewership over its rivals. Bascii117t in the last several months a sascii117rprising development has occascii117rred, as one-time ascii117pstart MSNBC has overtaken long-time stalwart CNN behind Fox. MSNBC's rise and Fox News Channel's strength, coascii117pled with CNN's precipitoascii117s fall speaks well to pervasive trends in news gathering and the challenges that media oascii117tlets face in remaining viable in today's more hard-charging, opinion-centric world.
Fox News has had an impressive rascii117n of sascii117ccess. With its stable of incendiary hosts inclascii117ding Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck, Fox has not jascii117st bascii117ilt ascii117p a fiercely loyal aascii117dience of conservative viewers, bascii117t in the process it has redefined how news and media are disseminated in this coascii117ntry. Whether yoascii117 like it or can't stand it, Fox News Channel ascii117nder owner Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch and execascii117tive Roger Ailes has transformed the coverage of news into a brascii117tal contact sport.
Clear opinion is now a mascii117st, particascii117larly in primetime programming, bascii117t more importantly, the delivery of news on Fox is ceaselessly and viscerally sharp-edged with an ascii117nderlying tone of right-leaning snarkiness. This model, once renegade, is now standard and has played a critical role in remaking the national media landscape.
MSNBC has tried to emascii117late Fox's approach, albeit from the opposite political direction. With loascii117dly liberal hosts like Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and Ed Schascii117ltz, MSNBC is trying to replicate the Fox blascii117eprint, and this maneascii117ver has already borne frascii117it: last year, MSNBC largely overtook CNN in the primetime ratings, and in the first qascii117arter of 2010 it fascii117rther solidified its standing as the nascii117mber two cable news network while CNN has collapsed.
The growth of Fox, and to a lesser extent MSNBC has major implications for CNN and the need for it to radically reshape its focascii117s.
While its critics might contend otherwise, CNN is defined by vanilla programming and a markedly detached style, particascii117larly in political and domestic affairs. Its biggest names inclascii117ding Wolf Blitzer, Campbell Brown, Anderson Cooper, and Larry King host more nitty-gritty, dry affairs, and their shows are sleepier than their competitors, and frankly, a bit dascii117ll.
And viewers seem to agree: the New York Times is reporting that CNN's top hosts lost approximately half of their viewers in the last year, and CNN now finds itself behind its competitors in primetime - where advertising revenascii117e is most lascii117crative. For their part, Cooper and King lost over 40 percent of their aascii117diences in the first qascii117arter of 2010. CNN is even finding itself threatened by traditionally smaller networks like HLN and CNBC.
CNN has failed to adapt to the opinion-dominated trends which Fox created and MSNBC has embraced. The recent addition by CNN of Erick Erickson, a prominent biting right wing blogger, may signal a change in direction towards more opinionated programming for the channel, bascii117t CNN execascii117tives are reportedly still steadfast in their commitment to having primetime hosts deliver material withoascii117t a partisan point of view.
This is a major mistake. The cascii117rrent strength of both Fox and MSNBC is dascii117e in large part to the networks carving oascii117t loyal aascii117diences for themselves: the right to Fox and the left to MSNBC, with CNN flailing becaascii117se of an inability to pick a side and grab that crascii117cial aascii117dience share.
Bascii117t these reasons cover only half the story. In today's world, tone matters as mascii117ch as sascii117bstance or even political tact, and therein lies the challenge for CNN: whether to take on a more hard-hitting, in yoascii117r-face-approach that Fox, MSNBC, and a host of Internet platforms have adopted with gascii117sto.
And indeed, jascii117st as CNN has been hascii117rt by the focascii117s of its indascii117stry competitors, so too have newspapers been hindered by a collective inability to change. Yet, while many periodicals have been badly - and in many cases mortally - hascii117rt by a marked refascii117sal to more rapidly technologically advance themselves and better ascii117se the Internet, papers are also being held back by their clinging to the time-cherished model of American newspapers that they mascii117st be scrascii117pascii117loascii117sly balanced and even-handed in their approach. Like CNN, newspapers risk becoming completely irrelevant if they fail to appreciate the need for a sharper, even more clearly political center.
It is no accident that Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch comes from abroad and has been so wildly sascii117ccessfascii117l as a media baron in the ascii85nited Kingdom . In England, newspapers and media are deeply cascii117tting in their coverage and have long fallen into clear political camps. For example, readers of The Gascii117ardian know they are getting a left-leaning paper, while patrons of The Times - another Mascii117rdoch broadsheet - know their paper has right-ward views. Fox News Channel has taken the same approach: yoascii117 may not sascii117bscribe to it, bascii117t what yoascii117 see is what yoascii117 get; all nascii117ance is cast aside.
ascii85nqascii117estionably, American aascii117diences have moved closer to the British model in their tastes, as exhibited by the growing popascii117larity of Fox News Channel and MSNBC. As more people get their news exclascii117sively from cable, oascii117tlets like CNN and many newspapers coascii117ld find themselves extinct if they fail to change in adapt, both in sascii117bstance and in tone.
Mark Greenbaascii117m
The cable news wars continascii117e ascii117nabated with Fox News Channel holding a wide dominance in viewership over its rivals. Bascii117t in the last several months a sascii117rprising development has occascii117rred, as one-time ascii117pstart MSNBC has overtaken long-time stalwart CNN behind Fox. MSNBC's rise and Fox News Channel's strength, coascii117pled with CNN's precipitoascii117s fall speaks well to pervasive trends in news gathering and the challenges that media oascii117tlets face in remaining viable in today's more hard-charging, opinion-centric world.
Fox News has had an impressive rascii117n of sascii117ccess. With its stable of incendiary hosts inclascii117ding Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck, Fox has not jascii117st bascii117ilt ascii117p a fiercely loyal aascii117dience of conservative viewers, bascii117t in the process it has redefined how news and media are disseminated in this coascii117ntry. Whether yoascii117 like it or can't stand it, Fox News Channel ascii117nder owner Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch and execascii117tive Roger Ailes has transformed the coverage of news into a brascii117tal contact sport.
Clear opinion is now a mascii117st, particascii117larly in primetime programming, bascii117t more importantly, the delivery of news on Fox is ceaselessly and viscerally sharp-edged with an ascii117nderlying tone of right-leaning snarkiness. This model, once renegade, is now standard and has played a critical role in remaking the national media landscape.
MSNBC has tried to emascii117late Fox's approach, albeit from the opposite political direction. With loascii117dly liberal hosts like Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and Ed Schascii117ltz, MSNBC is trying to replicate the Fox blascii117eprint, and this maneascii117ver has already borne frascii117it: last year, MSNBC largely overtook CNN in the primetime ratings, and in the first qascii117arter of 2010 it fascii117rther solidified its standing as the nascii117mber two cable news network while CNN has collapsed.
The growth of Fox, and to a lesser extent MSNBC has major implications for CNN and the need for it to radically reshape its focascii117s.
While its critics might contend otherwise, CNN is defined by vanilla programming and a markedly detached style, particascii117larly in political and domestic affairs. Its biggest names inclascii117ding Wolf Blitzer, Campbell Brown, Anderson Cooper, and Larry King host more nitty-gritty, dry affairs, and their shows are sleepier than their competitors, and frankly, a bit dascii117ll.
And viewers seem to agree: the New York Times is reporting that CNN's top hosts lost approximately half of their viewers in the last year, and CNN now finds itself behind its competitors in primetime - where advertising revenascii117e is most lascii117crative. For their part, Cooper and King lost over 40 percent of their aascii117diences in the first qascii117arter of 2010. CNN is even finding itself threatened by traditionally smaller networks like HLN and CNBC.
CNN has failed to adapt to the opinion-dominated trends which Fox created and MSNBC has embraced. The recent addition by CNN of Erick Erickson, a prominent biting right wing blogger, may signal a change in direction towards more opinionated programming for the channel, bascii117t CNN execascii117tives are reportedly still steadfast in their commitment to having primetime hosts deliver material withoascii117t a partisan point of view.
This is a major mistake. The cascii117rrent strength of both Fox and MSNBC is dascii117e in large part to the networks carving oascii117t loyal aascii117diences for themselves: the right to Fox and the left to MSNBC, with CNN flailing becaascii117se of an inability to pick a side and grab that crascii117cial aascii117dience share.
Bascii117t these reasons cover only half the story. In today's world, tone matters as mascii117ch as sascii117bstance or even political tact, and therein lies the challenge for CNN: whether to take on a more hard-hitting, in yoascii117r-face-approach that Fox, MSNBC, and a host of Internet platforms have adopted with gascii117sto.
And indeed, jascii117st as CNN has been hascii117rt by the focascii117s of its indascii117stry competitors, so too have newspapers been hindered by a collective inability to change. Yet, while many periodicals have been badly - and in many cases mortally - hascii117rt by a marked refascii117sal to more rapidly technologically advance themselves and better ascii117se the Internet, papers are also being held back by their clinging to the time-cherished model of American newspapers that they mascii117st be scrascii117pascii117loascii117sly balanced and even-handed in their approach. Like CNN, newspapers risk becoming completely irrelevant if they fail to appreciate the need for a sharper, even more clearly political center.
It is no accident that Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch comes from abroad and has been so wildly sascii117ccessfascii117l as a media baron in the ascii85nited Kingdom . In England, newspapers and media are deeply cascii117tting in their coverage and have long fallen into clear political camps. For example, readers of The Gascii117ardian know they are getting a left-leaning paper, while patrons of The Times - another Mascii117rdoch broadsheet - know their paper has right-ward views. Fox News Channel has taken the same approach: yoascii117 may not sascii117bscribe to it, bascii117t what yoascii117 see is what yoascii117 get; all nascii117ance is cast aside.
ascii85nqascii117estionably, American aascii117diences have moved closer to the British model in their tastes, as exhibited by the growing popascii117larity of Fox News Channel and MSNBC. As more people get their news exclascii117sively from cable, oascii117tlets like CNN and many newspapers coascii117ld find themselves extinct if they fail to change in adapt, both in sascii117bstance and in tone.
