THE ROOT OF ALL NETWORK DECISIONS
ABC News' crown jewel faces formidable enemy: the almighty dollar
by Deborah Potter

ABC News president David Westin was in the dark. He had no idea his bosses were trying to lure David Letterman from CBS to ABC, and were willing to dump Ted Koppel's "Nightline" to do it. Westin's first hint came when the New York Times called him for comment.

Nothing more clearly illustrates the changing climate for network news than the fact that Disney-owned ABC cut its own news chief out of the loop on planning for the most prestigious program he oversees. Nothing, perhaps, except the comment by an unnamed network source, quoted by the Times, that "Nightline" had become irrelevant in this era of 24-hour cable news.

Irrelevant? How absurd. A program launched 22 years ago in the midst of an international crisis, when Americans were held hostage in Iran, could hardly be more relevant today, when Americans are at war against international terrorism. For years, "Nightline" has been a reliable source of foreign news, even as the networks decimated their overseas bureaus and cut foreign coverage on other programs. Most recently, Koppel and company spent five nights deconstructing the conflict in the Congo, a story no other network newscast would even touch.

Koppel's program has held the beachhead for serious journalism on television for years with few reinforcements. While the prime time news magazines sank to new lows covering true crime and celebrities, "Nightline" offered town meetings on serious issues like AIDS and school violence. While the cable networks featured less hard news and more opinionated shout-fests, "Nightline" offered depth and context.

No wonder Koppel was offended by his network's--forgive me--Mickey Mouse antics.

"It is, at best, inappropriate and, at worst, malicious to describe what my colleagues and I are doing as lacking relevance," he wrote in a New York Times op-ed. Journalists and critics from coast to coast rallied to Koppel's cause. Former NBC News president Reuven Frank slammed ABC for its "astonishing clumsiness" in handling the Letterman negotiations. But hurt feelings and management ineptitude are only part of the story. The real story is the chill this casts over "Nightline" in particular, and network news in general.

The fact is that all the talk about "Nightline's" relevance is completely irrelevant. It's obvious that what really matters to ABC is not relevance but revenue. "Nightline" draws about four million viewers a night; so does Letterman's Late Show. But the Letterman hour on CBS makes more money, because advertisers will pay more to reach his younger audience. And ABC desperately needs younger viewers. The network ranks dead last among viewers in the prized 18-49 age group, and there are predictions that ABC might actually lose money this year. So network president Alex Wallau made no bones about his goal: "Our ongoing objective is to provide a top-quality schedule with strong audience appeal." With those marching orders, it's really no surprise that ABC was willing to push Ted overboard to make room for Dave.

Koppel himself may be partly to blame for making "Nightline" vulnerable, by cutting his anchor duties to just three nights a week and doing fewer programs live. But now, as he puts it, "collateral damage has been done." It took Disney a full month to respond to Koppel's plea for "an unmistakable signal…[of] serious corporate backing." And while the public reply from Disney's President Robert Iger was positive it apparently was not open-ended. Word is the program is secure only until the end of next year, even though Koppel has four years left on his contract.

The fact is that Disney already had sent quite a different signal, and it should not be misunderstood. By lusting after Letterman, the company made plain that its commitment to news is shaky at best. If "Nightline" is vulnerable, then no program produced by ABC News is safe.

Once upon a time, network television produced news programs like "Nightline" as a public service. Back then, network news divisions were prestigious jewels in the corporate crown. Not any more. Now, each of the so-called Big Three networks is just another business unit within a much larger conglomerate. Disney, Viacom and General Electric are calling the shots at ABC, CBS and NBC, and their focus is not the public interest, it's the bottom line. You could argue that producing quality journalism adds to corporate value, but the bean counters aren't buying it. To them, quality is all cost and no benefit.

What does it all mean for the future of network news? Nothing--in the short run. But in the long run? Nothing good.

This article was originally published by American Journalism Review, May 2002.