Olbermann & O’Reilly: Crossfired.
Does anyone remember this moment?
It’s really a great moment, and in many ways its own blueprint for change. Jon Stewart took the time to pull into focus a big problem with American News Media. Stewart took the time to remind us that News is not supposed to be political. That it is in fact supposed to report the news… not make it. There are notable exceptions of course, Murrow’s fight against McCarthyism, Russert’s sinking of David Duke; however in each case it was a newsman taking the time to report the facts in the face of falsehoods. They were not there to debate truth, or debate lies, merely there to make sure that truth was heard above the lies in a manner that is not political but merely factual. If these moments make the news then it is because the nature of American news is backsliding so far into failure that honesty stands out by virtue of its rarity.
Honesty is a virtue no longer available in our media.
It’s sad that a comedian had to go onto a show as divisive as Crossfire to bring the truth to light. The effect that he had was incredible. After this episode CNN refused to resign Tucker Carlson’s contract and the show Crossfire faded away. CNN stated that it was going to adjust the tone of its shows so as to be more fair with the news and stop promoting party positions; it was a shining moment in the media’s big brown bowl of rancid factual reporting. Stewart was almost a populist in his efforts. Almost.
The other stations appear to have learned little from CNN’s mistake. While no station has one show that promotes partisan debates as bad as Crossfire, a popular nugget lately has been the growing battle between Fox News and MSNBC. Fox, which enjoys a near 90% Republican viewership has long been a station representative of the ideas of the right and has also been the most watched news channel on television in recent years. MSNBC, a start-up news organization not even all that old has taken up the news cause of the left and it, too, is rising in the ratings. It’s a battle somewhat remniscent (if not a carbon copy) of yellow journalism and the ongoing war between the two biggest newspaper organizations at the beginning of the century: William Randolph Hearst’s New York Journal and Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World.
Yellow journalism was exemplified by the race of both papers to the bottom; to scandalize and spread fearmongering through the news in an attempt to grab the biggest circulation. It was a war of egos as much as economics and the resultant news coverage became horrifically flawed and sensationalized.
MSNBC and FOX are guilty of the sins of both Hearst and Pulitzer; in their war for ratings they also have reported the news sure to create the highest ratings and not the news most likely to represent fact. MSNBC and Fox have added sins in their commitment to particular ideologies and parties, and they’re willing to promote those parties and ideas through a much more exciting medium than Hearst or Pulitzer had been allowed; television. On top of that the two famous yellow journalists rarely remained committed to one ideology or party for long, but at least managed to declare open season on anyone in the public’s eye who may make a mistake.
Like yellow journalism both Fox and MSNBC have their own individual egos: Bill O’Reilly and Keith Olbermann. Not content (and probably not able to civilly) duke it out on one show, like Crossfire, the two pundits use the framework of their networks to launch partisan attacks. Not content to just bash each other on partisan issues, but go after each other personally.
Watch:
In 5 minutes of expensive television news time, will one ever be allowed to hear the actual news?
Since Crossfire was sunk, the situation has gotten worse. The people using this precious airtime are the 1st and 3rd most popular American news sources and they spent their time dithering about sexual fantasies and screaming about bias to the point of ridiculousness. The same criticisms Stewart used on Crossfire about political theater and newsmen making themselves news, are equally as applicable. The blustering doesn’t even seem to serve a party or ideology anymore but solely the network ratings.
What there needs to be is another third party commentator who steps in to drag us, kicking and screaming if need be, back to reality.
-Marc-
I think you missed the point of what john stewart was saying. He was saying that political discourse is needed, but all they do is offer the stale mainstream points of view, as if they are the only ones available. He was suggesting that they actually discuss things in a useful way, and to not be “partisan hacks” that are just a sound board for buzz phrases already used all week long by the current administration or whomever.
Real discussion, was his critique, not that they were taking partisan sides.
It was a combination of the two, to be fair.
I think Stewart’s points were mainly about how shows like Crossfire are designed to entertain, rather than inform and the sad state of reality was that his show, which is supposed to entertain, in reality, is more informative than the “debate” shows. I think what is truly sad is that most of the network news, whether they lean on side to the other, still tend to cater to an administration and rather than looking for truth, tend to listen, without question, to the byline given to them. What is especially heinous now and during the events that led up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, is that even when the media network is portrayed as liberal, there is a stark lack of questioning the morality of the war and a complete absence of investigation concerning corporate interest, military breakdown, and the voices of opposition. There can be no informed, relevant discussion for either side because many of the important facts are not even reported and therefore, very few people are in fact informed.