Today's MOZEN: Seek, and Ye Shall Find

F LoBuono

Change is inevitable. It simply cannot be stopped. It is a universal fact. So, they sooner we accept that actuality the better off our lives will be.

Still, we struggle not only with the fear of the unknown that change can bring but also from the speed at which it occurs today. Alvin Toffler, in his seminal work, Future Shock (Random House, 1970), claimed that the stream of information available to us will far surpass our ability to process it. Remember, he wrote that book in the days before the Internet was readily available. And, his prediction has seemingly come to pass - with a vengeance.

The amount of information READILY available to us is simply overwhelming!

And, when we get overwhelmed, we tend to "turn off". That is, instead of seeking MORE information we simply avoid looking for any.

I believe that this is the case particularly in the way that the main stream/traditional news is

currently viewed. I've been in and around the news business in various capacities for nearly 35 years. And, in that time I've observed a great deal of change in the industry. Perhaps, the biggest has come over the last ten years with the advent of widespread use of the Internet. The speed at which information is gathered, collated, and distributed is simple staggering. When in the past it might take hours to get and report a story, it can now be accomplished in hours or even minutes. There is virtually NO LIMIT to the AMOUNT of information that is available on almost any subject. And, these tools are not limited to the news industry. Virtually any individual with a computer and rudimentary skills can access almost anything that they need to know. It can, indeed, cause a sort of shock.

With this in mind, the way that news is produced AND distributed has changed greatly. There is simply SO much information available that it is physically impossible to present it in a traditional newscast. This has forced news directors to find new ways to create and deliver their product. The days of the public relying on ONE NEWSCAST to provide all of the information needed are quite simply over. You will no longer be force fed a steady diet of news pablum. You might actually have to look for it.

So it is with the latest round of political coverage. We are "in season" for another Presidential campaign and that means HUNDREDS of political events to cover each and every week. With the amount of candidates running (or, who were running) this means an astonishing amount of material to cover! During the height of the season, there are dozens of events a day, every day. It would be IMPOSSIBLE to give each one full coverage under the traditional guidelines. So, what the "normal" newscasts do is try to present a balanced approach to EVERY candidate with a fair amount of coverage to each and to make the rest available through alternative sources like streaming on the Internet. In this way, virtually anything and everything that you need to know can be yours to study. There really is no excuse. I am no computer "geek" but even I can easily find access to virtually anything I want to find out about.

Now, one of the complaints is that within the traditional newscasts, which still remain our most popular source for information, the amount of actual coverage is NOT balanced. Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of many caring people, this may be true. Sometimes, it is simple economic reality. Newscasts are commercial endeavors. Even with slick, new ways to produce them, newscasts are expensive to create. Highly technical equipment and the staff to use it is not cheap. And, those who deliver the messages don't come without a steep price either. Therefore, a certain commercial viability is essential to every news operation. This is the reason that, of all the current candidates, Donald Trump seems to soak up the most attention. His bombastic style, for better or worse, gets him noticed. In industry parlance, he delivers eyeballs. Viewers, even those who dislike him, WANT to see him. He is an instant ratings machine. And, that my friends, whether we like it or not, is fiscal reality.

Of course, this leads to complaints from the supporters of all of the other candidates. This seems to be particularly egregious to those who favor Senator Bernie Sanders. They claim that in an effort to support the other Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, newscasts have deliberately shunned him. They will often show photographs of huge Sanders' rallies that they claim received absolutely no coverage. Now, I will say that Sanders does NOT receive the same coverage as Trump. But, then again, NONE of the others do either, and for the reasons I explained. However, from my insiders perspective, there is NO SINISTER PLOT to prevent Bernie Sanders from receiving the coverage his supporters believe that he deserves. It is simply a matter of supply and demand. And, this does not mean he (or the others for that matter) do not receive good coverage. One of my job responsibilities at CBS News is to record the campaign appearances of ALL the candidates and prepare edited clips of them to all CBS affiliates. I can assure everyone that this is done with as much respect for balance and fairness as is possible while still dealing with the economic realities of running a business - and it IS called the news BUSINESS. Even PBS (PUBLIC broadcasting) has "corporate sponsors" like the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The news cannot simply run for "free".

Should it be this way? I think not. But, the reality of economics is always a factor and must be accounted for. This does NOT mean that traditional newscasts are now worthless endeavors. They are still essential sources for information. However, they should not be looked at as the ONLY source. There is NO excuse not to KNOW.  You don't have to drive 50 on the NJ Turnpike anymore. Seek and ye shall find.

Embrace change.