Media

"Media 'R US"

                                July 7, 1995

From the article it is obvious the networks have
problems, but have yet to make the changes needed
to meet the demands of there 'customers'.

I doubt they sense what is important to viewers.
There is such a sameness to network reports. None of
them offer a quality of reporting that sets them apart.

They are driven by advertising dollars, not by good journalism and still retain an arrogance from their
'glory days' and act as though the world has not
changed since there arrival in the 50s.

What is occurring to network news today happened to
the American auto industry in the 70s. The competition
has filled the void by providing better journalism,
with a creativity the networks do not offer, and a
greater respect for the viewing public.

The networks still believe in packaging, rather than
the contents within. I say this not to disparage the anchors, since each is a quality newsperson. But
somewhere the journalistic compass has shifted and
the networks are less than they can be, and the public
is poorer for it.

What will it take to fix the problem? One word, boldness.
One network must be bold, daring, and not limit itself
to the old rules. That is what is needed.

With all the money being spent to promote themselves
I find it amazing how little creativity is displayed.
Real creativity, not eye-catching graphics; creative,
honest journalism.

This problem is not necessarily the fault of the media
since too often our elected officials feed us half-truths
or misleading statements. But you, the media, are THERE, face-to-face, as the public's representative to get the story. You are the ones who can get to the truth.

So often I come away from the evening news or daily paper frustrated with the questions never asked, the statements not challenged and important information not made available to the public.

I often perceive a degree of collusion between the media
and politicians, sensing that reporters know the boundaries
they cannot go beyond, fearing they will no longer get within the political inner circle.

I don't ask you to be abrasive, cynical, or rude. But I do request you provide clear inciteful answers to the public.

The issues of today are complex and need more detailed reporting for the public to truly understand what politicians are feeding us.

As an example, balancing the budget, what does this mean?
Will our debt be erased or reduced by the time we reach
the year the budget is balanced? If not, how much will
our total debt be?  And does it even matter given the
amount of 'income' our taxes provide?

Yet we allow politicians to 'explain' such topics, without
actually telling the American public what they need to understand.

A politician's (I no longer refer to them as elected officials) objective is to build himself up at the expense
of his opponent. Every speech defining a position also steps
on that of a political adversary. And the media feeds on this because its 'news'!

But sadly, while thousands of feet of video tape is used to
'report' this worthless diatribe, important issues do not get the full measure they deserve.

We allow them to fill the airwaves and newspapers with
sound bites meant more to incite and divide rather than solve problems.

Statements such as 'the rich don't pay their fair share'
are never followed with how much is fair?

Last year's health care reform effort did not have a realistic chance once the Administration decided to create
demons of the insurance and drug industry.  The media never challenged why these two industries were being picked on, while both hospitals and doctors avoided similar criticism.

And with the dismal state of our public school system the media does not seek solutions aside from 'spending more money'.

But in this commentary I offer a suggestion (and challenge) that would not only benefit the public but also the media industry itself.

Very simply, become creative. Produce more in-depth news programs for the prime time audience. If Koeppel's
program gets the ratings it does at 11:30, think of how
much higher the rating would be earlier in the evening.

Prime time programming is such a waste, most networks
piggy-backing on whatever 'sells', and we send a stream
of comedies, police, medical, or whatever is in favor.

Networks rarely seek to educate viewers, a responsibility that clearly should be in the charter of the news division.

                                Anthony J. Bruno