Science sphere condemns CNN cuts - December 05, 2008
Science bloggers and media pundits have been collectively sounding off and scratching their heads about CNN’s decision to cut its entire science reporting staff.
Although the network insists that science coverage can successfully integrate into its general news teams, this has not been widely accepted. The Columbia Journalism Review blog notes, “the decision to eliminate the positions seems particularly misguided at a time when world events would seem to warrant expanding science and environmental staff”.
The TVNewser site originally announced on Wednesday that “16-year veteran CNN correspondent and anchor Miles O'Brien will soon be leaving CNN. O'Brien's departure comes as the network dismantles its science, space, environment and technology unit in Atlanta. That includes O'Brien as well as six producers.”
Following this announcement annoyed bloggers have been vociferously criticising the network. Excerpts below the fold.
Just a few days ago, CNN talked about its plans to challenge the Associated Press as a wire service. And yet, now it's planning to do this without science/tech reporters? Odd. Everything about this move seems to be a mistake.
As for the reason "being editorial, not economic," I call bulls**t. This is only editorial in the sense that CNN has chosen not to prioritize good science reporting. And that absence of priorities shows because if you have ever watched CNN science reporting, it was pretty p**s poor already.
CNN is doing this because you, the scientifically oriented person who is reading this very post right now, have not made your impact and readership known to them.When the cost/profits analysis came in, they figured that you weren't worth Miles' salary. Correct them by sending them your feedback.
As part of an ongoing program of reducing their relevance and demolishing their credibility, CNN has just completely shut down their Science, Space and Technology unit. Who needs good science coverage, after all, since nothing important happens in that area…and as the US continues to dumb down its educational system, the number of interested viewers is probably dropping, too.
And one to keep advocates of journalist balance happy
Climate alarmists won't have Miles O'Brien to spread global warming hysteria on CNN anymore as the network has decided to eliminate its science and technology unit.
...
Of course, the cynic in me wonders if this move has anything to do with the decreased interest in global warming by the public as a result of the economic downturn.
Image: Punchstock
Comments
It's concerning that a network leader is taking this action. On the internet, feedback matters almost as much as hit count. The internet community can jar CNN with negative feedback.
Posted by: John Benac | December 5, 2008 03:12 PM
It's my experience that people are more interested in climate change and other science-related topics as usual, and perhaps even more. CNN has underestimated its audience, again. I blogged about the shutdown of their science and technology unit the day after it was announced.
I doubt that they care -- they care only about "star power" with their remaining reporters, and as I pointed out in my writings on this, I doubt that the news execs had much science experience. They worship at the altar of the Prophet Motive.
I have been a science writer for a long time and there has always been a fear of science in the newsroom. In a way, this is not news. In another way, CNN's actions are sad and very short-sighted.
Posted by: ccpetersenc | December 6, 2008 12:23 AM
In the longer term I wouldnt be too concerned about CNN, or any of the under threat commercial channels, whose advertising revenue ais disappearing and whose cost base is becoming insupportable. The discussions that matter will be created by the innovators and protagonists involved in discovery, and will migrate to the net. Now, we are all becoming creators of content, and storytellers. So scientists get out your video camreas and start talking and posting. We know there are some cracking stories to be told, because we make them, but scientists should become better and more committed communicators, and who knows they might even learn to enjoy the experience. The audience is there on the web, go get it.
Posted by: Paul Ormerod | December 9, 2008 05:01 PM