»» Columnists

Memo To CNN: Keep Parker, Drop Spitzer

Video

by Matt Schneider | 6:55 pm, January 12th, 2011

» 18 comments

Amidst reports that CNN is eager to shake-up the relatively new, but ratings-starved, Parker Spitzer, by dumping Kathleen Parker and giving Eliot Spitzer a new co-host, I politely suggest the exact opposite strategy would better ensure the show’s longevity. With the ratings for Parker Spitzer consistently placing it in last place among cable news networks at its time slot, and often last among CNN’s own primetime lineup, the evidence is clear that the show’s current format is not clicking with audiences. Change is a good idea. Keeping Spitzer is not.

The problem with Spitzer is that despite many thinking his preparedness and intelligence makes him good on television, viewers are still not compelled to watch him night after night. And let’s face another fact, this show is dominated by him, and it is so even when he’s not intentionally trying to command the conversation. Just check out the clip below from last night where Spitzer and guest Governor Tim Pawlenty are laughing about football and Parker politely, then more emphatically, needs to lean forward to get the Governor’s attention for her serious question. Parker’s sophisticated arguments and subdued cleverness are more often than not shoved aside by Spitzer’s hard-charging brashness.

To more specifically theorize about the rationale behind an audience rejection of Spitzer unfortunately requires revisiting old wounds. The likely problem is the elephant in the room, the fact that asking a national audience to invest their time and attention in a man they primarily associate with scandal is a bit too much to ask, and at the very least, a bit too soon. Though there was potential for Spitzer’s albatross to be overlooked, such a courtesy only would have been extended if the Parker/Spitzer dynamic was so electric and entertaining that it created compelling and insightful television. It did not. Instead, the awkward chemistry between the two resembles the parents of children who can barely tolerate each other, but are sticking it out until the kids move out of the house. Parker herself has admitted there is “editorial and political tension” behind the scenes, but is willing to work through it.

Why then am I so quick to defend Parker rather than advocate scrapping the show entirely? Parker in the past demonstrated a unique ability to calmly and convincingly debate with liberal commentators as an outnumbered frequent conservative guest on The Chris Matthews Show, fearlessly led many conservative voices during the 2008 election by claiming Sarah Palin was not qualified to be John McCain‘s running mate, and consistently writes thought-provoking columns. CNN needs to differentiate itself from the larger-than-life personalities of Bill O’Reilly and Keith Olbermann and what better way than with the unique perspective Parker can offer, but that currently is drowned out. If Spitzer was replaced with someone totally new to the national stage, like maybe another insightful newspaper columnist or maybe even the eager to be a TV star Governor Ed Rendell, then audiences would properly have an opportunity to judge Parker and her talents. While the ratings might struggle at first, an effort by CNN to have a nightly calm and reasoned discussion with various political views led by Parker just might surprise everyone and be CNN’s antidote to their more partisan and successful time-slot competitors.

However, if CNN absolutely insists on ignoring this advice and keeping Spitzer with the belief that his bigger name will garner larger ratings, then at least make things interesting and pair him with someone like Ann Coulter. Actually, if ratings is all they want, then dump Spitzer too and hire former Governor Blagojevich. Imagine a Coulter/Blago show – now that’s a combination that would be sure to get some ratings! And as crazy as that sounds, realize that many had the same reaction when Spitzer was first mentioned as a candidate for the job.

Enjoy the Parker Spitzer duo while you still can in the clip from CNN below:

CNN, eliot spitzer, Kathleen Parker, Rob Blagojevich

WCinWI

Both should go and Dana Loesch should be put in against another “credible” Left personality that won’t talk over the other person.

Parker is NO conservative.
Ricia

Memo To CNN: Drop Parker, Drop Spitzer
felixw

The reign of the clueless continues at CNN. When a show is dead, you can’t fix it by amputation.

Of course, CNN could fix all of its problems tomorrow. Just present frank dialogue between different views without the mind-numbing political correctness. You know, sort of what Fox does every evening. The ratings make clear that’s what the public wants. But CNN would rather maintain ideological purity and slowly become marginalized rather than survive with honest coverage of events. So they tinker with a failed formula, rather than address the root problems that are obvious to any impartial observer. But since CNN doesn’t hire impartial people, they will be the last to figure it out.
MediaiteCensorsSux

Drop Spitzer.
stephenpyle

Drop them both. Drop the show.

– A CNN loyalist
Gasket

WCinWI said:
Both should go and Dana Loesch should be put in against another “credible” Left personality that won’t talk over the other person.

Parker is NO conservative.

Dana Loesch would get her lunch eaten by Spitzer as well. What a poor choice! You need someone of Coulter’s caliber to counter Spitzer. Parker is very smart, introspective but she’s timid paired against Elliot on TV. It doesn’t mean Elliot is much smarter than her but it looks that way with the pairing.. Another good strong and intelligent female voice would be someone like Peggy Noonan. Or better yet, do something different (on CNN) and pair 2 conservative women against Spitzer. That right there would limit his domination in interviews and discussion.
puck30

Memo To CNN: Drop Parker/Spitzer………..Bring Back Crossfire!

Oh wait, this is CNN. ‘Crossfire’ might offend/set-off somebody.
http://www.libertarianism.com/ Jack Burns

felixw said:
The reign of the clueless continues at CNN. When a show is dead, you can’t fix it by amputation.

they tinker with a failed formula, rather than address the root problems that are obvious to any impartial observer. But since CNN doesn’t hire impartial people, they will be the last to figure it out.

People who stand in shite all day become immune to the smell….
Try2bFair

Kathleen Parker is smart – i bet alot of people agreed when she implied that that Chase CEO choice of Pres Obama’s ‘had Bill Clinton written all over it’ – her voice gets on your nerves like Elisabeth Hasselbeck’s, but unlike Hasselbeck, who’s so stupid she doesn’t know she’s stupid, Kathleen Parker has interesting insights, is not impressed with herself and is a searching individual, kinda like Eliot Spitzer. Alec Baldwin was rude to her and others have been and Spitzer doesn’t seem to like that. I hope they give the show a little more time.
BarneyFranken

How will he pay for his hookers if he loses his job?

And think of the hard working girls he ‘employs’- He may only afford one or two a week if he’s fired.

Have you no concern for that, mediaite? For shame.
Jelperman

Yeah CNN needs to keep Parker, who is best known for a 2003 column where she called for the assassination of Wesley Clark.
milynily

Eliot Spitzer has a face for radio!
stephenpyle

I have always liked CNN and while I want to root for them, this show just isn’t good. I don’t respect anything Spitzer says enough to take him seriously and Parker bores me. Furthermore, the model of the show isn’t healthy. It’s negative and shows set up in this manner aren’t productive for politics or its viewers. Once again, it’s too divisive.

Here’s an idea. Why don’t we set up a show where we have two opposing viewpoints and a topic (ie health care). Make them find common ground and expand on it.

I know it won’t make for the shouting and partisan politics we all like but at least it could accomplish something.
Michael_T

Mediaite’s resident conservative partisan writes:
“The likely problem is the elephant in the room, the fact that asking a national audience to invest their time and attention in a man they primarily associate with scandal is a bit too much to ask.”

Oh c’mon. Your conservative bias is in full view for all to see.

No one on TV has had a more embarrassing episode than Fox News ratings leader Bill “Falafel King” O’Reilly.
remoriah

I’ve written CNN on several occasions that giving the very sleazy Spitzer a forum would never work with women. The very site of him is disgusting and unsettling. It’s amazing that someone like Parker can even sit next to this low-life. It’s the Yuk factor. Women will not watch him. His brashness is NOT a site to behold. Yuk-Man
lonestar77

I agree that CNN should change the show. They should change it to a left vs. right format instead of the current left vs. left format.
WCinWI

Gasket said:
Dana Loesch would get her lunch eaten by Spitzer as well. What a poor choice! You need someone of Coulter’s caliber to counter Spitzer. Parker is very smart, introspective but she’s timid paired against Elliot on TV. It doesn’t mean Elliot is much smarter than her but it looks that way with the pairing.. Another good strong and intelligent female voice would be someone like Peggy Noonan. Or better yet, do something different (on CNN) and pair 2 conservative women against Spitzer. That right there would limit his domination in interviews and discussion.

Clearly you don’t know what Conservative means. Noonan and Parker are not Conservative at all. Dana Loesch has been on the show tons of times and has made Spitzer look like a dolt. Noonan & Parker are both center-left “journalists” that would bring dismal ratings. If I compared the nights that Loesch is on versus when she’s not, I’m sure she gets more viewers. Or better yet, bring Breitbart on.
felixw

Michael_T said:
Mediaite’s resident conservative partisan writes:
“The likely problem is the elephant in the room, the fact that asking a national audience to invest their time and attention in a man they primarily associate with scandal is a bit too much to ask.”

Oh c’mon. Your conservative bias is in full view for all to see.

No one on TV has had a more embarrassing episode than Fox News ratings leader Bill “Falafel King” O’Reilly.

Thanks for clearing this up. Based on your post we now know that if anyone disapproves of sleazy dealings with call girls they must be a conservative. I’m sure all the liberals here are happy that you clarified this for the rest of us. I was thinking that maybe liberals objected to sleazeballs too, but I can now see that is too much to hope for.