Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Salon Columnists
Follow these links for the most recent column by:
Susie Bright
Robert Burton, M.D.
Joe Conason
Sean Elder
David Horowitz
Garrison Keillor
Anne Lamott
Greil Marcus
Joyce Millman
Camille Paglia
Amy Reiter
Mary Roach
Scott Rosenberg
Ruth Shalit
Michael Sragow
Virginia Vitzthum
Sarah Vowell
Cintra Wilson
Burt Wolf

+ Columnists' schedule

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon Media

Media
Prime-time propagandist
Is ABC's John Stossel a reporter or a right-wing apparatchik?
By David Mastio
[02/25/00]

Media
The emperor's new shows
For Rupert Murdoch, being a media mogul means never having to say you're sorry.
By Sean Elder
[02/24/00]

Media
When bad shows become truly abominable
Who was the real victim of the "Multi-millionaire" hoax?
By Frank Houston
[02/23/00]

Column
Real Life Rock Top 10
Special all-Beatles edition!
By Greil Marcus
[02/22/00]

Media
Laughing gas
Modern Humorist wants to win our hearts by mocking the very things we hold dear.
By Sean Elder
[02/22/00]

Complete archives for Media

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

barnesandnoble.com

Save up to 40% at barnesandnoble.com

There isn't any.

OK, that's not entirely true. During a hot race like Michigan's two weeks ago, the evening news of CBS, NBC and ABC all led with reports on the campaign. Ted Koppel still does an admirable job of wrapping up primary results (he's well situated, in his 11:30 p.m. time slot, to watch the last trains roll into the station). And the Sunday talk shows have become the de facto forum for candidates to debate each other and suffer the slings and arrows of the networks' best political reporters.

But that's it. Most nights, the primaries are lucky to get 30 seconds' coverage on the network news shows. That's the length of one commercial.

It wasn't always thus, of course. In the pre-cable 1960s, the Big 3 owned the presidential race, with floor-to-ceiling coverage from the New Hampshire primaries in January to the conventions in summer to the last rehash of the main event in November. Such programming established the network anchors (Walter Cronkite, Huntley-Brinkley and Howard K. Smith) as the Mt. Rushmore of American political campaign coverage while making stars of such then-hotshots as Dan Rather, Sam Donaldson and Leslie Stahl.

Fast forward to Tuesday night. On ABC, as Bush and McCain were fighting hammer and tong over Virginia and Washington, you could watch an all-new "NYPD Blue."

"The fact is that we are doing a very minimal amount of coverage [of the presidential campaign] at ABC," Donaldson conceded to the Dallas Morning News a few weeks ago. "Outside of 'Nightline' and our Sunday show, ABC News in my view has simply forfeited the field. And there may be good reason for that. The cable [news] networks are just omnipresent now."

Donaldson, who made his bones beating up on Carter and Reagan, is now hosting Samdonaldson.com for the ABC site and is clearly a convert. "Boy, let me tell you, the Internet is the future!" he said, sounding just like Dad with a new pair of bongos. But just as a select minority gets its news from the Internet, so only two-thirds of the population has access to cable.

So as fine a job as MSNBC, CNN and the Fox News Channel are doing of covering the primaries, they're not reaching anything close to the 30 million viewers the networks share each night at news time. And that, according the Alliance for Better Campaign's Paul Taylor, is a crime.

"When the average cost of cable is over $40 a month, access to political coverage becomes an economic issue," he says. "If you want to witness a presidential candidate you've got to buy a ticket."

The good news for those who do get cable is that the news networks are doing a more thorough job than the Big 3 could ever do. "These small upstarts are delighted to get the brand recognition," says Taylor, a former Washington Post reporter, "much in the same way the networks took over the job of being the hosts of the campaigns in the '60s."

If people now think of Jeff Greenfield and Brian Williams when they think of political coverage, it's a boon for CNN and MSNBC, respectively. But that working-class voter with the old-fashioned antenna on his shingled roof is left with only a few seconds on the nightly news -- and, at election time, a barrage of misinforming, mind-numbing ads.

"Part of what's changed is that the portrait of politics being presented is not a particularly attractive one," says Taylor. A blizzard of ads and/or coverage about the ads is what most people without cable can expect. (A study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that 80 percent of the network coverage leading up to the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primaries dealt with campaign tactics and strategies, with 13 percent devoted to issues.) Such insider-baseball, with all its attendant description of push-polling, mass phoning and the like, doesn't exactly increase the public's appetite.

Next page | Next page