Yesterday, while going back and forth with Brian Stelter over the Alan Murray CNBC shot, Stelter tweeted the following to me…
i’m at your service. i would add: this is what i love about Sorkin on “Squawk:” he’s a journalist who happens to be on TV.
I let that comment pass on Twitter because 140 characters just isn’t enough space to properly respond to it and I wasn’t 100% convinced that my read of Stelter’s tweet was what he was trying to get across. But after getting egged on by Stelter and others, here’s my response…
Maybe Stelter didn’t intend it to come across this way, but I took that comment to mean that print journalists like Andrew Ross Sorkin when they’re on TV are better at it on TV than traditional TV news journalists; the sort of dismissive print journalism snobbery we see from time to time when the TV medium gets discussed by the print press. TV news has its faults but to compare print journalism and TV news is an apples to oranges scenario. The rules and processes are different.
National TV news, especially live TV cable news, is basically news by committee; far more so than print journalism. You have editorial directors, writers, producers, and the talent all working together in real time on the product – a journalism assembly line if you will – where viewers get the news in a steady stream as it unfolds. As with traditional assembly lines there are people on the line with specific knowledge who only contribute when the need arises. Because it is an assembly line approach and basically has no controlling authority outside of a set of guidelines sent down from the Editorial Director, we are presented with something of a paradox where the news anchor is considered to be the authority and gatekeeper by the viewing public because of their position on the air yet their input, what there is of it, comes extremely late in the assembly line process. This is why if you talk to a grunt at any network you will hear at least one story about a talent going to the control room and chewing out the staff for something the staff did that ended up making them look bad. It’s also why I have a lot of sympathy for news anchors. They get all the blame by the public but have comparatively little input in the news as it unfolds.
Read more »