Commentary Magazine


Contentions

Don’t Blame the Networks

Republicans are crying foul because ABC, CBS and NBC won’t be carrying a minute of coverage of the first night of their convention next week. That’s a blow to the GOP since it means one of their best speakers and appealing personalities — Ann Romney — will have a smaller audience watching on television than she might have gotten to kick off the Tampa event. Democrats have their own beef as it’s been announced that the following week when their own gathering convenes in Charlotte, NBC will skip the Wednesday night session in order to avoid any interruptions of the National Football League’s opening game between the Giants and the Cowboys. That means a smaller audience for former President Bill Clinton as he makes the nominating speech for President Obama.

This is seen by some as a cynical move by the networks who are accused of placing money making above their civic duty. A disgruntled Romney advisor told the New York Times, “I don’t think it’s the decision that Bill Paley would have made” — a reference to the head of CBS during its so-called “golden age” of network news with Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite. Maybe Paley would have run coverage of Ann Romney’s convention speech instead of a rerun of “Hawaii Five-O” — the show that will be aired on CBS while the candidate’s wife talks. NBC and ABC are also running crime show reruns during this slot. But don’t blame the networks for choosing sleuths over the candidate’s spouse. If they are treating the two national party jamborees very differently from the way Paley and his colleagues did in the 1950s, 60s and 70s, it is because the conventions are different.

Back then, they were deliberative political bodies where real issues were debated and voted upon while other, often even more important decisions, were decided in the proverbial smoke-filled rooms off the convention floor. The broadcasts of the conventions weren’t a civics lesson so much as they were a highly dramatic and colorful display of the political system at work. Though some parts could be excruciating, they were often dramatic. And like the NFL contest that many Americans will sensibly prefer to Bill Clinton next month, the outcome won’t have already been decided before the game begins.

The last national convention whose outcome was in doubt prior to its opening was in 1976 when incumbent President Gerald Ford narrowly fended off a challenge from Ronald Reagan and his resurgent conservative movement. Through some speculated about the possibility of a brokered Republican convention this year, that mouth-watering possibility for political junkies was no more likely to happen this year than it has any other presidential year for the last generation. The parties have created a nomination process that makes such an outcome unlikely if not impossible. Neither Republicans nor Democrats will ever have any interest in producing a good spectacle that will mean their side will be unable to prepare for the general election until September. Nor do they relish the political bloodletting and internecine warfare that a deliberative convention would bring.

So they give us what makes sense for them: a highly scripted television show in which the candidate picks all the speakers and dictates the contents of their speeches. Each convention is no more than a lengthy infomercial. Their only resemblance to the past when the nation would sit by their radios or televisions listening with bated breath as the roll call of states voting is the setting in an arena.

Under these circumstances, the parties are lucky that the broadcast networks still give them three free hours of coverage for each convention. Those addicted to politics can watch the cable news networks or C-Span.

It’s true that there was something to be said for the past when anyone with a television set was forced to watch gavel-to-gavel convention coverage. But most Americans now have hundreds of channels to choose from and are no longer dependent on three middle-aged liberal white guys to tell them what the news was at 6:30 each evening.

If the parties want more coverage of their conventions, they should give us something more interesting to watch. Since that is antithetical to their political fortunes, they should pipe down and get the staged charades over with as we head to the fall campaign. And anyone who wants to watch an interesting political convention can rent “The Best Man.”

Introducing Commentary Complete

5 Responses to “Don’t Blame the Networks”

  1. RAPHAELENNIS says:

    Interesting point of view but bad for the country since the convention marks the official launching of the campaigm. Plus it would be an antidote to unfavorable coverage Republicans normally get on network TV.

  2. John Burke says:

    Utter nonsense. I’ve been watching conventions since 1952 when I was ten years old, and the only ones that had any real drama were the 1964 Dems who confronted the Mississippi seating challenge and the 1968 Dems at which the party broke in half and melted down in public.

    Other supposed “drama” was largely manufactured with a lift from the media which had an interest in drumming up some shred of suspense as long as they were providing gavel to gavel coverage. Appropriately skeptical commentators like David Brinkley would from time to time puncture this silly balloon.

    Anyway, no one is asking the nets to broadcast gavel to gavel for four days but only to stick with the lousy total of four hours they doled out in their miserly way four years ago. The broadcast networks have a unique responsibility that everyone seems to have forgotten. They are lucrative networks solely due to a grant of monopoly use of the public airwaves. They are asked for very little in turn — as one can see from the fact that network programming remains a “vast wasteland” just as Newton Minnow described it in 1960. They can spare four hours once every four years and should be obliged to do so.

  3. m0derateGuy says:

    Nonsense, this is not about networks "making money over civic duty"; this is about networks being in the tank for Obama and deliberately planning to sabotage the coverage of GOP convention; much like all the Obamettes planning to sabotage the convention itself with cheap campaign stunts. nWhether all this planning will bear fruit depends on American voters.

  4. pfkga89 says:

    The conventions were much anticipated just like the Olympics and the space missions. Sadly for us, they are not of much value anymore. Voters have so many more options to becoming informed, but in a much more isolated and impersonal manner. It used to be the coverage of conventions generated an atmosphere of excitement and suspense as the candidates were discovered and party platforms defined. Viewers became much more vested by watching hours of coverage each day. It was a communal experience as it seemed everyone else was watching and talking about the same thing. Network coverage now is perhaps a tribute to the significance that conventions once held. Not much more than free advertising for the campaigns.

  5. jbirdmenj says:

    I don't understand – on CBS and ABC, are they broadcasting more of the Democratic convention than the Republican Convention, or is the # of hours of coverage equal?

Leave a Reply