Quote

I really do think we're going through a period of concentration of ownership of media, and we're starting to see the effects at the editorial level, and it's all bad. This increased pressure for profits every quarter, smaller news hole, less coverage of important stuff - the extent that it's become one giant infotainment industry.

I've caught myself watching MSNBC more and more, simply amazed at the nightly hate-fest against millions of Americans who don't see the world through the granny glasses of Keith Olbermann or any of the other radical liberals who host shows there.

There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair. I would hate to see that fall victim to a panic about the Fox effect.

We're going to develop - what we want to do is to provide the viewers with what they want from CNN and that is the news. So when people tune in, they'll get the latest news, but they'll also get the biggest story of the day in depth, as CNN does so well.

The current wisdom now is that if the three networks are covering the news the same way the difference is the anchor people. I think that won't be true in the future.

Whether you're talking about MSNBC or Fox or CNN, it's all about getting enough interest out there, sensationalizing the story in such a way that people are compelled to tune in.

By the same token, I think news has more and more of a pro bono aspect to all the networks. When we do our election coverages throughout this coming year, it's not a money-maker for us. It is more of a public service situation.

'Political junkies' and liberals will watch MSNBC, and angry, old right-wingers will watch Fox.

For the broadcast business to be successful, viewers need to be not merely interested in our political melodramas, they have to be in an absolute state about them - emotionally invested in the outcome and frightened not to watch what happens next.