(So called) Expert Analysis

by M. Zaiem Beg

For the second time in the last three months, I received a phone call very early in the morning (for this West Coaster) from a friend telling me to turn on the news because something very important was going on. The first time was September 11th and the second time was when American Airlines flight 587 crashed in Queens and she thought we had another terrorist attack going on, even though it turns out that flight 587 appears to have crashed due to less sinister causes.

But at the time nobody knew this and the speculation was rampant.

Now I know these people at CNN (or MSNBC or Fox News or ABC News or NBC News or CBS News or CSPAN) need to fill airtime, but they've found the most inane way to do it: "expert" analysts.

Some analysts are actually experts in their field and offer useful insight. On 9/11 they had the designer of the World Trade Center towers talk about the building structure, for example. That was insightful and informative. But what has happened is these news networks rely on these people as a crutch and since relevant experts are few and far between, they end up bringing in some guy to speculate in vague terms.

Anchor: We've brought in Mr. Randall Glorb, expert on aviation. How are you this morning?

Glorb: I'm fine, thank you.

Anchor: Glorb, can you tell us what might have happened?

Glorb: Well, the plane crashed.

Anchor: Yes, and do you know why it could have happened?

Glorb: Well, we don't know anything right now but it's possible that there was a chance that it crashed due to what may or may not have been mechanical failure or possibly something else.

Anchor: I see. And do you think it could have been terrorists?

Glorb: Well, it's not clear at this time, but there is a chance that perhaps a terrorist may or may not have gotten on board where he could have done something that might have caused the plane to crash, assuming that it was not something else, which it might have been.

Anchor: And how do you think this will impact the American people?

Glorb: Well, one never can tell right away but the people of the United States could experience some impact on an emotional level that may affect them in some way that possibly would mean a change in attitude on some level that may or may not be discernible.

Anchor: Thank you for your valuable insights.

Glorb: You're welcome.

(Repeat ad nauseam, using different "experts")

CNN tells me that they have coverage they can count on more than ever before. (What, before this I was only able to count on them most of the time, but you never knew when they'd throw in a red herring story just to see if their viewers are paying attention? "And in other news, Pauly Shore accepted his Best Actor Academy Award today. . ." It's good to know they're not doing that anymore.) Shouldn't it be more like CNN is the news network that may or may not have the possibility of the chance that they may provide something that could or could not be insightful provided I don't get something that might be something else?

But every now and then something happens that taxes the resources of the news network and they even run out of pseudo-experts. At this point they have reached the equivalent of watching Cinemax through the squiggly lines late at night in the hopes to catch a glimpse of someone naked because you're frankly very desperate. When you couple that with taxed "on the spot" people, you end up with a parade of clichés and statements so obvious a six year old child could have provided more insight by making poop jokes and telling the story about how one time this kid at recess fell and skinned his knee and he cried and the teacher had to take him to the nurse's office.

Anchor: It's now been sixteen hours since the second plane crashed into the World Trade Towers and the rescue workers are out there giving it 110%. Let's go to our on the spot guy, Jeremy Yurk. Jeremy, what can you tell us?

Jeremy: Well, a terrible thing has happened today. People have died and the world may never be the same again.

Anchor: I see. And what is it like at Ground Zero?

Jeremy: People are distraught, upset, and they're wondering how this could have happened. There have been tears of anguish for some and tears of relief for others as they were reunited with their loved ones.

Anchor: And how are the rescue efforts coming along?

Jeremy: The rescue workers here have pushed their chips to the middle of the table and they're putting their noses to the grindstone. They're giving it all they've got and there's no I in team. They've got no quit in them, I'll tell you that.

Anchor: Thank you for your valuable insights, Jeremy.

(And so on)

What happened to the news just being the news? You don't have to talk about the same thing all the time. If there's other news going on, talk about that too! What's wrong with saying "and since we have no further information on (topic de jour), let's update you on what's going on in the rest of the world. Michael Jordan scored 97 points as the Wizards lost to the Knicks 98-97."

Maybe we need to bring in an analyst to explain that one.