Anderson Cooper: Journalism’s Biggest Sellout – Tom Rossi

A few weeks ago, I wrote a piece about “selling out” that mostly focused on music. But musicians’ selling out is really only a minor irritation. The selling out that really burns me up and hurts us all in concrete ways is when journalists sell out. Today, I’m going to call out one of the biggest sell-outs on television, and one of the biggest disappointments to me – Anderson Cooper.

Anderson Cooper was, not that long ago, a hero of American journalism. He did in-depth investigations into government and corporate shenanigans, he told us things that people in power didn’t want us to hear, and he did so with integrity and a non-sensationalist professionalism that was his brand. For all of this, he has won several awards. I miss THAT Anderson Cooper.

Today, Anderson Cooper is a media whore. He still has his old show on CNN, but it is worthless. In fact, his reports resemble Fox “News” in both their quality and their shallowness. Cooper has also added to his resume. He now appears semi-regularly on 60 Minutes, and he has his own daytime talk show.

The quality of his reporting on 60 Minutes leaves me wondering why they put up with him. At the end of his reports on that show, my wife and I both sit there, in disbelief, full of what seem to us as obvious questions that should have been addressed. A journalist is supposed to answer those, and questions that people didn’t even think of. A journalist is supposed to get through the fluff and cut to the meat of the story, telling us not only the where and the who (everybody does that, it’s the easy part), but the why.

Why???? What was the motivation for this event? What do (qualified) people say about it? Is this part of a bigger issue? What’s the background? If you’re talking about a government program that is turning out in an unsatisfactory way, why did that happen, and what are the alternatives? A journalist doesn’t research and come up with alternatives, but he or she ASKS people in the field what went wrong, what might have been done differently, and what could be done from here.

I saw two different Anderson Cooper reports (I think on two different shows of his) on high-speed rail. They were both done as Fox “News” reports – just “scandal/boondoggle” type talk about how much money had been spent and how the train trip from some corner of New England to New York City is only 28 minutes shorter now. WHY has all this money been spent? What, exactly, has it been spent on? WHY is there “little to show for it?” WHY are the trains “still slow?” What is the real problem? What are the alternatives? What could have been done, instead? What if nothing had been done? And maybe the big one: What should we reasonably have expected, by now?

High-speed rail is such rich ground for journalism, it just shocks me that these reports by a former top-level journalist like Anderson Cooper are so thin.

“Anderson Live” is the name of Anderson Cooper’s talk show. It’s worthless. Cooper has always said that it would not be a news program, but wow. Recently, on the show, he was discussing with his co-host for the day (or week or whatever) Melissa Joan Hart the discomfort that he feels, knowing that someone may have “tweeted” him while sitting on the toilet. This is the level to which Cooper has sunk.

Every time I have tuned to this show I have felt dismayed with his celebrity gossip, and unneeded segments on some isolated crime, committed somewhere, that has already been covered extensively by the people who concentrate on that type of thing. The good news is that Cooper’s talk show has apparently been cancelled.

The thing that bothers me most about Anderson’s adventures in “look-at-me-ism” is that he has spread himself so thin that the quality of his important work, the actual journalism, is obviously suffering greatly. I’m sure the networks lured Cooper with huge amounts of cash. I’m sure they told him he could be the next Oprah. With visions like that crowding his horizon, Cooper seems to have lost sight of himself.

To Anderson Cooper I say this: You have stolen an incredibly valuable resource from the people of America. We want it back. There is nothing preventing you from returning to your former glory. You will be forgiven. Put the money you have made during your long flirt with self-centered, self-indulgent, self glorification in the bank, and return to serving the people. One day, when you lay dying of old age, you can look back at a life of real accomplishment, and people will remember you with gratitude.

-Tom Rossi

___________________________________________________________________________

Tom Rossi is a commentator on politics and social issues. He is a Ph.D. student in International Sustainable Development, concentrating in natural resource and economic policy. Tom greatly enjoys a hearty debate, especially over a hearty pint of Guinness.

___________________________________________________________________________

High Speed Rail Funding Arrives. Has the Need Arrived?

Here in California, Governor Brown recently signed the first phase of High Speed Rail into reality. He likes HSR, but he was also in sort of a jam as California voters had previously (and only partially-informedly) approved a bond measure to raise billions of dollars specifically for this project. This money can’t legally be spent on anything else.

As fantasies go, HSR is pretty cool. France and Japan have enviable HSR systems that are really sexy. They look great, they zoom around majestically at impressive speeds, they lend an air of sophistication to their countries and governments, and they transport large numbers of people efficiently.

In addition, HSR would be more fuel efficient than air travel and it would break the strangle hold that the airlines currently have on us all. But is HSR a timely solution to our transportation problems?

Some people want to avoid this…

and this.

While pseudo-intellectuals like George Will rail against rail (especially but not exclusively the high-speed variety) for contrived and ridiculous reasons, there are better reasons – real reasons – that HSR is a solution whose time has not come. This first phase will run 130 miles, from Bakersfield to Madera (the proposed location of the states HSR maintenance facility) at a cost of $8billion.  

What we really need to spend money on is improving and expanding existing public transportation systems. The real jewels of Asian and European rail systems are their frequency, extensiveness, and efficiency – not just from a fuel standpoint, but from a transportation standpoint as well.

In and around Tokyo, for example, there is an extensive train system in addition to subways and buses. The trains take millions (yes millions) of people into the city from outlying communities each day. There are multiple tracks almost everywhere and, unlike the San Francisco Bay Area’s BART system, you can travel in several different directions from almost anywhere.

Tokyo’s passenger train system is almost all electric and very quiet. The trains resemble nice subways more than they do Amtrak trains. One of the best things about having multiple tracks is that it allows for express trains. These trains are the same as the other trains, they are not built for higher speeds. But they are much faster because they have limited stops and just sail right past many stations.

Because of this, these express trains get their passengers to their destinations much sooner. A passenger may have to transfer to another, local train to make it to a final destination, but it’s still much quicker than stopping at every station along the way.

Here’s another issue. Right now, Amtrak (America’s only real large-scale rail system) has large, conspicuous gaps in it’s travel coverage. For example, to travel on Amtrak from Fresno, California’s agriculture center, to Los Angeles requires that passengers get off of the train at Bakersfield and board a bus for the rest of the trip.

In addition, local light rail and bus systems are riddled with inadequacies, many of which are caused by limited funding and some of which are caused by less-than-optimal management. Part of the new funding is to make unspecified improvements in California’s existing rail systems, but the attention and the priority seem to be on HSR.

All of these systems could be improved tremendously for a lower cost than constructing one thin route for high speed rail between various locations. Also, these solutions apply to real problems today. What people need is help with their everyday commutes and business and errand trips. How many people really need to get from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 2 ½ hours? Many, many more people would benefit from the ability to get to work in under one hour.

High speed rail is a later phase in a mature public transportation system. Our system is far from mature and HSR is not the solution we need now.

-Tom Rossi

___________________________________________________________________________

Tom Rossi is a commentator on politics and social issues. He is a Ph.D. student in International Sustainable Development, concentrating in natural resource and economic policy. Tom greatly enjoys a hearty debate, especially over a hearty pint of Guinness.

___________________________________________________________________________