An election should be good business for a cable news channel. Alas, this is less true if, like CNN, you try to be unbiased.
When Mitt Romney says that 47 percent of Americans are moochers, or Barack Obama says that entrepreneurs didn't build their own businesses, partisan viewers crave a partisan response. Either the candidate hates America or he is being quoted out of context.
Fox News assures conservative viewers that Democrats' gaffes fall in the former category, and Republicans' in the latter. MSNBC, vice versa.
CNN tries to be fair. Viewers hate that. Its ratings in America are sliding, while Fox and MSNBC are doing well.
In the year to mid-September an average of 577,000 people have watched CNN during primetime, 25 percent fewer than tuned into MSNBC and 69 percent fewer than Fox attracted. Ratings affect CNN's two revenue streams: sales of advertising and the fees that cable operators pay to carry the channel. CNN, which is owned by Time Warner, has a thriving international division. Yet America accounts for 80 percent of its revenues, so a slump at home hurts.
In July, Jim Walton, CNN's boss, announced he would leave the company by the end of the year. The search is now on for a new boss. Jeff Bewkes, the head of Time Warner, has scolded CNN for its performance. But he says he wants it to revive without sacrificing its nonpartisan brand.
CNN is good at reporting hard news, because it has lots of good reporters. It has 45 bureaus around the world -- more than Fox News and MSNBC combined -- and about 4,000 employees. Its ratings soar whenever there is a terrorist attack, flood or war. When American embassies were recently stormed in Libya, Yemen and Egypt, for example, CNN got a lift.
When the news is about words rather than action, however, CNN struggles.