PANELS ON POLITICAL MEDIA SHOULD NOT BE STATIC

Too often we see the same faces over and over on panels.  On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, we heard Peggy Noonan in her soft, condescending voice, almost whispering her criticisms as to why the country is not running her way.  George Will pontificates his fears on how no one really understands security, Matthew Dowd has history he can frequently call on and speaks authoritatively.  Donna Brazile, who has been around politics. for nearly 30 years, speaks like a kind mother who has learned there are many sides to any political picture and tries to give us a few.  On This Week it is the first time I have seen Keith Olbermann (on his This Week debut)  other than his home now on CURRENT-TV.  As always, Olbermann has much to say to which it is worthwhile for us to listen, as do most good panelists.   Nevertheless, rather than focus on the politics of the day, it was the sports of the day.

Switching over to Meet the Press, it was refreshing to hear the same problems being discussed, but by people either in charge of or close to the problems of the GSA or the Secret Service.  Obviously, most of what the panels do is speculate...which any of us who use the Internet a lot can speculate with the same information. Rather than allowing the panelists to take over the show, David Gregory had Congressional watchdogs  speak with some facts.  It was refreshing to hear some real content rather than lots of guesses, and campaigning of people not running for office.

It may make the job of the producers a bit more tedious, but I think there should not be the same panelists week after week.  I think panelists should be on because of the subject to be discussed and the match of panelists who are in closest touch with the facts of the situation.

Any man who affects the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood.  -H.L. Mencken  That statement seems to be true today as it was before he died in the 50s and spoke  it.  One of the disturbing facts of our times is that it differs when a man stood on a soap box in the village or city square and spoke without amplification.  In today's world, the word of men and women is tweeted, networked, and distorted in is being repeated by the massive media systems.  We have radio which can be heard everywhere, hand held technology that gives instant news, and even apps to inform us that raindrops are about to fall.

Ed Schultz

Rachel Maddow

Today we live in a world where we are subjected to the opinions of people who have no constructive ideas.  As one show pointed out, about three times as many Republicans, most from the Bush administration, while only three Democrats, not especially close to the the killing of Osama bin Laden. were brought in to comment.  Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow both (MSNBC) questioned why the shows seem to be bringing on a lot of the Bush administration people.  This was unclear to them as it is to me. 

Christianne Amanpour

David Gregory

More importantly, I was a faithful viewer of This Week on ABC and admire Christianne Amanpour but whether by her choice or that of the producer of the show, the past few shows have lacked news and meaning for me as has Meet the Press, though I also don't believe it is the fault of David Gregory, either.  Who chooses the guests?  I'm afraid I have become a non-viewer on Sunday mornings though I cannot get desperate enough to think going to church would improve Sunday mornings.

Could we suggest better choices for guests and panelists in the future?

A TRIP DOWN MEET THE PRESS MEMORY LANE

The longer I live, the more I observe world crises, environmental disasters, reflections of man's inhumanity to man, losses, evil in the world, and so much more sorry stuff. Many people have contributed to good, and many to evil. Meet the Press recently celebrated it's 60th anniversary with pictures that raise one's memory of people who came to power before today. Look for the slide show under the Caption of Meet the Press. By viewing the pictures you can watch the lucky ones age. Less lucky, gone through attrition and old age, assassinated or other reasons are seen as they were then Time stands still for John and Robert Kennedy and some others, Indira Ghandi being one of them. Others have grown old before our eyes.

There was a time when corporate owners had a hands-off policy in directing the news. That seems to be lost today when our media has become a free-for-all, biased voice, pushing its own self-serving agendas, politics and candidates. It is reported that "the news channels play different roles within their respective companies that are useful to note in trying to imagine how they might evolve in the future. Fox News is one of the stars of News Corp.'s TV portfolio. CNN is a solid performer for Time Warner, but not an enormous factor. MSNBC, by contrast, contributes little financially to either of its parents, General Electric (the NBC of MSNBC) or Microsoft (the MS). On the one hand, that might suggest MSNBC is in a precarious position, which has led to speculation about its owners' commitment to the channel in the long term. On the other, having multiple platforms to deliver news and other content may be central to both companies' strategies." You can get a more complete report here.