News as an alternative to Survivor

In an article for Commentary (subscription required) James Q. Wilson discusses the question - How Divided are We?. Professor Wilson, as he frequently does, offers some insightful commentary on that issue showing that we are dividing more than we have in recent years based on a number of divisors. The common ground of politics is becoming increasingly scarce. But what struck me about this particular article was not his review of the things that seem to help produce our current political divisions but more an offhand comment he makes about news on the telly.

Wilson argues that when TV news first started it was a loss leader - something to fill in around the sitcoms and westerns. But now it is a profitable part of the business. One could compare TV news to Survivor or American Idol or Fear Factor - the reality based TV shows that have swept the dial in recent years. In the case of the reality TV shows they became a good vehicle for the network because of their costs. No high priced stars. No script writers. No real production schedules. No residuals. For what seems like a tiny investment the network can put on a show, that if done right, catches the interest of the viewer. The comparison to news is almost completely congruent. For example, replace Ryan Seecrest or Simon with the current talking head at CBS, NBC, Fox or ABC. Add in a couple of stunts - like following your tail on the Cheney shooting incident. And all of a sudden you have a new version of reality TV, with about the same value on reality.

I still believe there is a vibrant market for information but to lament the decline in the objectivity of the electronic news media is to miss the point - TV news is not part of that market for information any more than American Idol is really about developing new talent for the music industry.