Thanks. I'm guessing you've done no further reading or

Posted on: January 8, 2019 at 12:03:22 CT

searching on the subject after finding something to run here with and be outraged about?

Here:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/why-the-networks-are-broadcasting-trump-an-interview-with-cnns-brian-stelter

But I think there are some big differences between Obama in 2014 and Trump in 2019. For one thing, virtually all of Obama’s prime-time addresses were carried live by the broadcast networks. This one in 2014 wasn’t for a few reasons. One is that it was—and I know this sounds like a really ridiculous reason—a big night on TV. I am laughing saying that, because I know it sounds ridiculous, but these are the factors that networks think about: what schedule will be on, which shows are being interrupted, how much ad revenue is on the line, how many ratings points are on the line, how disruptive is the speech going to be, how long is the speech going to be.

I also think a big difference is that Obama had been President for [nearly] six years and had given many speeches in prime time. Think about the power of the Presidency. Part of the power of the Presidency is to give an Oval Office speech, and Trump is choosing for the very first time in his Presidency to use that Oval Office setting [for a prime-time address]. I have a feeling that was a big factor in the broadcast networks’ decision.

Can I just add that it was remarkable that the broadcast networks didn’t say yes right away? When I was reaching out to spokespeople for the networks, I thought it might be an instant yes. An immediate yes. That is the custom, at least sometimes. It was notable they spent some time thinking about this. Oh, to be a fly on the wall. [Laughs.]

Edited by 90Tiger at 12:03:40 on 01/08/19