One look

I’m probably more alert to journalistic issues this semester because our classes are focused on that, but sometimes something comes up that is odd enough that it’s hard to believe anyone would think it’s a good thing.

CNN is revamping "American Morning" for the second time in two years, bringing in network newcomers John Roberts and Kiran Chetry to replace anchors Soledad O'Brien and Miles O'Brien.

I can see how this story flew under the radar for the most part, and I guess it might not seem odd if you just skim over it.

As for Chetry, who joined CNN in February from Fox News Channel, "one look at her tells you why she deserves the spot," Klein said. "She's a terrific anchor who lights up the screen."

The reasons they cited for bringing in Roberts, his status a “classic news anchor”, were respectable, but Klein’s quote about Chetry was confusing and a little disturbing. Can reporters really be deemed “terrific” based on “one look?”

Don’t get me wrong, the idea that the media culture is obsessed with superficial qualities and good looking people is not new to me, but this seemed to take it a step further. I don’t think I’ve seen a quote that represents the culture so clearly and openly. Has the mainstream media embraced that idea so much that Klein, president of CNN, feels comfortable saying he likes an anchor based primarily on looks? More importantly, has the audience embraced the idea to the point that it trusts reporters based on one look?

One case certainly doesn’t prove anything. But how many stories like this do we need to see to call it the norm? If this is the norm, will the audience follow the news reports based on who looks good more than what the reporters say?

Comments

[Potts]

Good catch, Dustin. That quote about taking "one look at her", um, qualifications is depressing. CNN is almost a self-mockery at this point.