Barack, Britney, Rudy And Anna Nicole

News Is Entertainment, But Then So Is Politics, Says CBSNews.com's Dick Meyer

(CBS)  This commentary was written by CBSNews.com's Dick Meyer.

---

It has been a truism since the invention of television that politics has become more like entertainment. That truism is now too generous.

Much of what we call entertainment isn’t. It is, rather, gossip and voyeurism pertaining to celebrities who may or may not be entertainers: Britney, Anna Nicole and Zsa Zsa Gabor’s husband.

Similarly, much of what we call politics isn’t. The zany scrutiny of Mitt, Rudy, McCain, Hillary, Barack and Edwards 18 months before the 2008 election is gossip, fantasy and voyeurism masquerading as serious politics and statecraft. It is a form of societal distraction just as much as celebrity rehab watching is. Just as obsessing over Anna Nicole’s autopsy is a relief from credit card debt, dull jobs and dented Dodges, dissecting the latest dust-up between staffers for Hillary and Barack is a distraction from an Iraq problem that has no solution, a healthcare system that has cancer and an entitlement system that will screw our kids. The cliques are just different.

We in the media and political clique are righteous.

We think it’s sick the way cable TV exploits the Britney Meltdown. And we think what is happening in Campaign ’08 right now is Very Important. And, well, yeah, it is important. It does matter who the next president is – duh.

The point is that the endless American campaign – and this one in particular – is a diversion from what campaigns are supposed to be about – governing. It is fun to dish about the latest leaked opposition research tract. It’s fun to speculate about a McCain/Giuliani dogfight in the airwaves of South Carolina. It’s fun to read polls. I love it and I admit it. But it comes with a cost. It’s celebrity star-gazing or sports fanaticism for people who happen to be interested in politics. Washington, they say, is Los Angeles for ugly people.

I hate to be a scold, but: The country is about to send more than 20,000 more kids into battle in Iraq. Thousands of others are in veteran’s hospitals, maimed. The national debt has blimped. Al Qaeda is reported to be growing, not shrinking. Etc., etc., etc. And while many fine journalists, private experts and public servants are committing their professional lives to these matters, the Washington zeitgeist is all about ’08. It’s what motors the political blogosphere, attracts the biggest names in journalism, books the talk shows and motivates the Congress. It is easier for me to write this column than to write about the effects of the boom in private equity on corporate governance and income distribution.

There is a merry-go-round of vicious circles with which to contend. Reporters say they Have To cover the minutia of the campaign right now because the campaign has started for real. Candidates say the Have To start campaigning right now otherwise they won’t have the money to run credible campaigns. Iowa and New Hampshire Have To be first so they Have To be in January.

If we didn’t cover Al Gore’s utility bills and Mitt Romney’s abortion record, would the campaign go away? If we didn’t cover Britney’s shaved head and the Rosie-Trump ego orgy, would America tune out? Is the press supposed to cover what people are interested in? Do the media create what people are interested in?

I give up on those big questions. This much is certain: The political elite needs to be sent to rehab. Reform is too mild and gentle.

For my money, the single greatest deterrent to a more rational approach to public policy, a less cantankerous civic climate and a reversal of the decline in trust in government is the structure of the campaign system. It is a bi-opoly financed in an arcane way that deters many highly qualified participants and creates systemic disincentives for effective government policy-making. While the entitlement program quagmire is more than important than campaign shenanigans 18 months before Election Day, semi-intelligent repairs on entitlements will not occur until the campaigning system goes into detox.

Next week, the 12-step program begins.

---

Dick Meyer is the editorial director of CBSNews.com, based in Washington.

If you prefer e-mail to public comments, complaints or arguments, send them along to
Against the Grain. We may occasionally publish some of the interesting (and civil) ones, sometimes in edited form.

[belladonita]

When I wanted to know what Hollywood celebrities were doing I wanted Entertainment Tonight, not the evening news. I stopped watching CBS Evening News when Bob S. was replaced by the Couric. News is either death, depression, distruction or the dummies in Hollywood. Same *** every evening. I only care about the weather and I wonder if there's even an honest reporting on that now...

[dismay2]

I think the main reason the news programs have deteriorated to this point falls back to the networks and producers. They are more concerned about the ratings than presenting news of value.
I have little if any faith in the evening anchors, bring back Bob Scheiffer, at least he exudes validity. If I wanted to do was see legs and fluff I'd go to Hooter's.

[seafang]

And for the record, why would your censorbot be ashamed of your own name.

[seafang]

Well ***, you're the one in charge. Why don't you disconnect all the wire services, and send out some reporters to actually gather news yourself. Why would we want to hear your marrionettes re-reading what was already posted in the New York Times or the Washington Post last week. You are the ones who take stale stories and jazz them up into entertainment. Edward R. Murrow would be disgusted with the whole lot of you; including dear Katie there trying to sound important.

If you concentrated on going and getting the news, instead of making it up out of whole cloth, you might recover some level of credibility.

[scott4261]

Ever since Bill Clinton's pin hit the paper when he signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, our news reporting has been increasingly dominated by tabloid fodder. In this piece of legislation, deregulation of radio that was started when Ronald Reagan signed the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was complete. In addition, television and radio could be dominated by 2 companies in any given market. The result is that Clear Channel, Infinity or whoever else could buy up to half of any market, creating a bunch of niche formats designed to entertain, rather than inform. The bottom line in their mind is that this sells advertising which makes them rich! And as long as we continue to buy what they are selling, nothing will change.

[bobgee_1999]

"If the dems are for it, I'm automatically against it." - Posted by US_Infidel

That clearly demonstrates you aren't a thinking individual, merely a reactionary robot.

Why are you even reading CBS news? Shouldn't you be over at the Faux News website, where everything you see is brightly colored and tailored to your biases? At least you're honest in your name: there's no doubt you are a US_Infidel; i.e., unfaithful to what the United States was meant to stand for.

[oleander8]

News has deteriorated into entertainment. It wasn't always like that - and I wish it wasn't now. Ever since the conglomerates got into the media business - it's ONLY about the bottom-line, not good reporting. The stuff we see in our news media now used to be relegated to the tabloids. So if you didn't want read the trivia, you didn't buy the tabloid. Now you're slapped in the face with it (usually the same story) every time you try to read the news.

[observantx]

CBS:

Please, oh pretty please, please, PLEASE, I implore you, stop with these utterly banal and fluffy Smith stories.

ENOUGH, already.

Sheeesh!

[us_infidel]

As of early 2007, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), along with Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), and Louise Slaughter (D-NY) have announced their support of legislation which would reverse the 1987 FCC decision and restore the Fairness Doctrine.[4]

If the dems are for it, I'm automatically against it.

[rafterman1]

"Why in the world does the news media think that the public is just holding its breath to hear the latest tidbits about Anna Nicole Smith or the Brittany Spears? (Or, any other celebrities for that matter.)"

Because the public does care. The media wouldn't report it if ratings (and therefore money) weren't so big. Celeb mags and gossip rags like the Star and National Enquirer sell millions. The kinds of people who dig this stuff and can't get enough of it are the same ones who vote on American Idol (but not in elections) and watch those other crappy reality shows. Maybe around here, where people are more politically oriented and aware, don't care. But elsewhere, people can't get enough of that nonsense.

[bj8842]

Why in the world does the news media think that the public is just holding its breath to hear the latest tidbits about Anna Nicole Smith or the Brittany Spears? (Or, any other celebrities for that matter.) These women are soooo very unimportant in the daily lives of most Americans.

Talk to us about worthy news, please. The war, what congress is doing about it, who is running for president, the economy....!

[scott4261]

Ever since Bill Clinton's pin hit the paper while signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, our news reporting has been increasingly dominated by tabloid fodder. In this piece of legislation, deregulation of radio that was started when Ronald Reagan signed the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was complete. In addition, television and radio could be dominated by 2 companies in any given market. The result is that Clear Channel, Infinity or whoever else could buy up to half of any market, creating a bunch of niche formats designed to entertain, rather than inform. The bottom line in their mind is that this sells advertising which makes them rich! And as long as we continue to buy what they are selling, nothing will change.

[nvme3]

It began in the gulf war with an endless barrage of media embedded. The Media outlets are given liscense to perform public service. But the intergrity was lost when the "news" became a lapdog rather than a watchdog. when media sponsors determine content that is when the battle is lost. When you Diick meyer stop diggin and start taking table scraps from the Government. when you dont question the source of info because fox is gonna run with it then naturally we become ill informed. YOu are supposed to hold the fire to their butts then you will see a change in america's viewing habits.