| From Capitol Hill Blue That's Entertainment CBS is planning to inflict a new "Evening News" anchor on the American public sometime during the year and the betting is that Katie Couric, the cutesy half anchor of NBC's "Today Show," will get the high-profile job once occupied by such icons as Walter Cronkite and the controversial Dan Rather, who had to be shoved out the door after a cub-like performance during the presidential campaign. One might ask why this would be worth commenting on. The justification lies in the details that once again shed some light on what is happening to journalism and its responsibilities to its community of readers, viewers and listeners in the vital area of public affairs. The most startling thing about this prospect is not Couric's ability to measure up to her predecessors, having had some minor beat training as a national correspondent before entering the world of show business. It is how much the network is willing to pay her _ or whomever it might name if the rumors about her job change prove false _ for reading off a TelePrompTer. That figure is put at a cool $20 million annually, perhaps the most stupefying amount paid any "news person" in the history of the First Amendment. Even in this age of excess that kind of money is reserved for the most celebrated Hollywood stars, Wall Street tycoons and overstuffed CEOs, certainly not journalists who are supposed to be able to understand and connect with the commoners about whom and to whom they report. This many clams are particularly poisonous when every news organization in the nation is making severe cuts under the constant pressure from parent companies and Wall Street to increase margins. The new president of CBS News, Sean McManus, pledges that the anchor salary will leave enough in the network's budget to pay for correspondents who actually collect what goes in the reports the anchors introduce for 20 minutes of the 30-minute newscasts _ 10 minutes are out for commercials _ five nights a week. The percentage of Americans who get this daily briefing from the three major networks is declining steadily and the networks have become increasingly less willing to spend as they once did to develop the news. In truth, the quality of these shows has declined markedly since the networks decided that the news operations should no longer be public service loss leaders but profit centers instead. That required substantial economies. So whenever there are proclamations about preserving and protecting the viability and quality of the journalistic enterprise, one should regard them in the same light as Rather's swan song about President Bush's National Guard records. The impact of such high priced anchors for such little contribution _the anchor spends only a relatively few minutes a night on camera _ also trickles down to the affiliates who must curtail their own local operations to pay for the network's extravagance. In the excellent film "Broadcast News," it is suggested to a legendary star anchor that he might give up $1 million of his considerable salary to offset planned cutbacks in the Washington operation. The anchor, played by Jack Nicholson, instantly becomes completely unsympathetic to the plight of his colleagues. His longtime friend and subordinate realizes instantly that he may have put his own job in jeopardy by daring to make the suggestion. Is anyone in this business worth that much money? The answer quite clearly is: Of course not. Cronkite, who came to broadcast journalism already established as one of the better print reporters of his day and whose presence on camera and vast experience made him one of the most reassuring figures in the world of journalism, would be the first to say so. Newspaper reporters have been notoriously underpaid forever. It was not unusual for a veteran print journalist with years of experience to be sitting at a press conference next to an electronic newsperson with half the background but making 10 times the salary. But since television news still retains its primary mission of entertainment, such disparity in pay is understandable. The Securities and Exchange Commission is now considering altering the public reporting requirements for executive salary and bonuses to include non-management performers like Couric whose enormous pay packages impact the stock. The shareholders certainly have a right to know and so do those who tune in every night believing these superstars are just like them.
(Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service.) © Copyright 2005 Capitol Hill Blue |