This morning's WSJ (Yes there is a Saturday edition) has an interesting article on the move by Katie Couric to CBS news. I have always thought of Ms. Couric as sort of a news bimbo. Today has increasingly sought the infotainment niche - with short segments and silly conversation. Couric's gift to try to throw in a reliably left wing point of view has become so obvious (and odious) that it almost charactures itself. So one wonders in a world where most of the people talk to themselves (and increasingly that is true for their on screen presence also - with declining ratings) why CBS would make such a move. But John Ellis (Subscription Required) makes some very interesting points. He comments that CBS news is the only major news source on TV (assuming that any of the networks is in reality a news source) that does not have a cable division. Thus, the expense of running the news division is lain entirely on the news division and that (he esimates) is a $400 million proposition - not sumething that advertisers are likely to pay for. By adding a popular personality to the news division they may fatten up the balance sheet a bit for an eventual sale - he speculates to Time Warner or Fox (now that is a wacky idea but not outside the realm of possibility!) may be the suitors. Couric then becomes what some M&A folks call an "interim asset."
Couric is not as bad as Bryant Gumble was in his today era with phony glasses and all (Gumble went on to become the host of an entirely forgettable sports show where he changed from the mild mannered "intellectual" to a sports mad dog - one wonders how the network execs think these things up). Couric's stridency on a number of issues is off putting at least to me and I suspect to a larger audience. I am not sure how CBS thinks putting her into the new role will abate the concern than many have raised about the Rather network. Couric's successor at today seems to be an interchangable persona with a bit different orientation - both could have probably been one of the briefcase carriers on Deal or No Deal in their younger days.
Ellis argues that Fox could benefit from having a network news outlet - although I am not sure I agree with his judgment - the divisions between cable and network are continuing to blur. Cable is becoming almost universal and the role of broadband here could change the way any channel broadcasts. But his overall assessment - that CBS has no way to produce the revenues to make the system profitable - was revealing and I believe in the short term accurate.
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment