Your Views on the News, June 19, 2010

There was a good read in Newsroom Magazine this week comparing CNN to Goldman Sachs.

"Goldman Sachs sought out the brightest talent, developed the longest reach, and amassed the most power of any financial services firm in history. Over the same period, CNN sought out the brightest journalists, made itself the premiere world-wide news producer, and developed the longest reach of any journalistic endeavor in history. Fast forward a bit."



Today, both organizations are at major inflexion points. Goldman Sachs involuntarily, due to federal investigations that threaten both the firm and its senior managers, and CNN voluntarily perhaps, due to differences in values and culture between its immensely successful journalistic operations and its still-profitable pseudo news television business.

Bubbles Eventually Burst
CNN enjoys two qualities Goldman somehow lost: An ethical foundation shared by large numbers of employees and time to make its own decision about the future — something Goldman lost when the SEC accused the firm of duplicitous dealings.

But, there are many other similarities. Both firms have been a driving force behind immense bubbles that have had immense impact on their own businesses as well as everyone else similarly engaged.

If Goldman’s bubble has been burst by Justice Department investigations, as now seems to case, CNN’s current concerns over domestic television ratings has the feel of a major inflexion point from which the company may choose to exit the bubble, or continue to escalate it.

Time To Return To Sobriety?
The core issue behind the inflexion point at hand is CNN’s willingness to continue the pretense that what makes entertaining television and what constitutes responsible journalism can, or ought to be commingled in the name of profitability. CNN president Jim Walton seems, for the moment, not to be overly worried about CNN primetime ratings.

Some may think this evidence of a return to sobriety at CNN, if not reason to believe journalism may yet win back greater control over domestic television content.

While Walton’s long history at CNN, and journalistic roots, might suggest an eventual exit from the pseudo news bubble, pressures to achieve optimum financial performance at Turner Broadcasting ( and parent Time-Warner ) argue otherwise.

When Money’s The Issue, Nothing Else Seems To Matter
The central issue is money and how to make as much as possible. These are not core values of journalism, but commercial success has always been the foundation upon which journalism, whether good or bad, earned its keep. The question that defines CNN’s inflexion point is whether pursuing the present pseudo news bubble is too risky.

Given that all bubbles eventually burst, and that those who most profited from the bubble are the ones most damaged in the implosion, would seem to suggest caution — especially for a player that still has largely intact what is arguably the most productive and credible news-gathering operation on the planet.

The question isn’t whether Turner Broadcasting should or shouldn’t have entertainment television channels, but whether they ought to have a relevant, probative and credible news channel. History suggests that such questions are almost always resolved in favor of money — not responsible journalism.

For now, and for many, Jim Walton may be the last responsible adult still in the business. What’s not so clear is whether that any longer matters at CNN.
















All content, unless otherwise cited, is © All Things CNN and may not be used without consent of the blog administrator.