Howard Kurtz today in the Washington Post tries to get a grip on the John Roberts story and finds it as…um…interesting…as the cable channels…
“Supreme Court arguments and decisions are fascinating to a few of us and really pretty boring to most,” says MSNBC’s Dan Abrams.
“The Supreme Court deals overwhelmingly with abstractions, and ideas and abstractions are not easy to convey on television,” says CNN’s Jeff Toobin.
“The minutiae of it, how people interpret statutes, that’s not the most exciting stuff,” says Fox’s Greta Van Susteren.
If three of cable’s best legal commentators, all lawyers, struggle with the subject, imagine how difficult it is for all the other anchors, correspondents and producers.
ICN concedes that the Roberts story is not compelling on several fronts, not the least of which is that cable news loves to sink its teeth in on controversy and Roberts is so far proving to be a teflon pick because nothing is sticking. But ICN wonders if controversy should be the story of this story? There are other things to relate to the average public which really needs to be informed of just how big the Court does matter to them. And Kurtz shows that for the most part that cable news (in fact most of the MSM) is not doing its job…
On Wednesday, the day after the Roberts announcement, Van Susteren, who has camped out in Aruba several times, did four Holloway segments on her “On the Record” program and one — an interview with John McCain — on the court vacancy.
“I see it as a lesson in how we collect evidence,” says Van Susteren, whose ratings have soared since Holloway’s disappearance in late May. “Far more people are going to be touched by trial courts and police investigations than by Supreme Court decisions. I would not be so arrogant to think that only the Supreme Court matters. More people now know about Aruban law than they ever did before.”
ICN isn’t trying to single Van Susteren out on this because all the networks aren’t talking enough about how much the Court affects their lives and what Roberts may or may not do to the Court. Nor is ICN going to weigh in on the debate over whether Cable News is over-reporting on the Aruba story. Nontheless ICN would counter that “far more people” are going to be touched by what the Supreme Court does in a single year than what Aruban law does to them in their entire lifetime…