The CNN Example
In media circles, it’s almost a game talking about the recent CNN issues. So here are some random, perhaps vague Monday Morning Quarterback thoughts from the legal pad:
CNN was an interesting example of trying to evolve with tweaks. A good idea when you’re #1, a confusing exercise if you’re #3. Challenging and a monumental task to execute but critical to make an impact in the intensely competitive environment, with an existing 800m in profit which will, along with circulation, spiral into a slow decline without significant and noticeable change. At a time when CREDIBLE information delivery is culturally critical in the emerging TikTok world of misinformation.
- Band aids that generate little noticeability. Changing the lower third, a new set and some new slogans won’t do it. Noticeable inside the building, invisible to viewers. It’s a classic change paranoia of many news organizations. At Tribune, they’d change the font on the business page and internally there was a feeling that the world was ending . On the streets it was un noticeable. The point being we are so hammered by media, bold and noticeable evolutions are necessary to cut through the clutter. It’s a fact of life that easing into change rarely works in today’s highly distracted media world.
- Are they part of the new era of future forward companies or are they part of the old school news establishment or mega corporate which drags them down in perception? They can join the new generation but again, not with tweaks. But with a focused programming and cultural reset. An exciting relaunch rather than slow drip.
- The Trump event negative perception could have been minimized by out programming him as you know they’ll be programmed by him. This includes packaging the Presidential town halls as a series rather than an isolated experience. Trump being simply one in a series covering all candidates right and left.
- Speaking of Trump. A big percentage of the new mainstream like him, so better figure out what they’re about. Not pandering to or going soft, but understanding. More focus on his followers thinking rather than assuming or guessing.
- Too many facts being interpreted by anchors vs using raw facts presented visually and graphically to drive home factual information. Unleash the power of truth with every creative vehicle imaginable.
- Journalists can be brilliant at collecting news, but not particularly good at programming and some are a bit arrogant about that. Programming strategy was apparently never presented as a grand plan opting for a series of tweaks instead of a master vision. If there was a master vision we’d know about it because they leak memos
- Too much emphasis on politics to the point to be defined by political skew rather than the delivery of fact based information Test stories as radio tests songs. Know, don’t guess at the public pulse. Politics of course is a huge story, but you can drown in it
- Inconsistent pacing. Sometimes it simply…boring or subject locked
- Lose the anchor speak where everything…is…presented…in this certain…cadence…and back to you…
- Too much emphasis on personality rather than pure information. THERE ARE NEW WAYS OF STORYTELLING that engage personality differently from the set driven focus. Reminiscent of radio DJ’s in the past, as you can to a degree, program stories as songs. The great personalities are the great talkers like Howard Stern AND the voices that compliment but never overwhelm the music. Same applies to information. Personality can be very important to add context but they need to be in sync with the programming direction and rethought in terms of their positions in the art of storytelling. An organization the size of CNN needs a big idea, translated to the staff with clarity, consistency and intense teaching and guidance with strength and great empathy.
- Having the courage to aggressively present the facts about both the left and right. Good bad and ugly. Instead of allowing a free form response from haters. Take control of that conversation.
- Failure to engage the public. Allowing the media to control the perceptions. A news war that the public wasn’t invited to
- Eye Ear Brain. A favorite of mine. No breakthrough changes in eye and ear (with great opportunity). Brain? They’re intelligent but without eye and ear components it’s incomplete.
- Compartmentalize. Lock the biggest story topics into fixed compartments.
- A lack of franchises. Tune in magnets. Short form features that add depth to the programming and can evolve into trademarks
- Operating in the walled in news environment. Living in the TV News universe, reticent to make mind blowing changes that rewrite the playbook rather than echo the old one. A symptom of being oriented toward the industry not the street
- Introduce programming techniques from other media to rethink the cable news mentality. Just maybe the 80’s roooted cable news approach is too worn out for the new Wild West.
- No significantly new ideas. No wow. More of the same with new lipstick. Absence of a big idea allows the
Pundits free reign. Everyone’s an expert. And they won’t deliver result
Change is a serious business.. You can’t “sort of” change. If they’re too big to change I think their best bet is video brand reinvention online—-that’s where it’s all headed and partners well with their potent website. They need to be on the forefront of digital video in a noticeable way …and it ain’t “+”.
It’s all about noticeability that can be engineered for any declining business
(https://www.leeabramsmediavisions.com/blog/the-noticeability-threshold?rq=Noticeability)
Just a few general and from afar thoughts…there’s a lot more to it of course…..what are yours?