Most people outside the journalism business are unfamiliar with Frank Magid, although they see the damage he inflicted on the nation anytime they watch local television news. Magid was “news doctor”— a consultant hired by TV stations and networks to add spice to newscasts. And more importantly, help build ratings. He died this week at the age of 78.  

Frank Magid and Associates conceived a format known as  ”Action News,” adapted by some stations as “Eye Witness News,” and often called “Eye Witless News.” It is a superficial conglomeration of crime, fires, accidents and feature stories designed to be “viewer friendly”—especially for folks who relish blood and guts. “If it bleeds, it leads” was a mantra in a lot of newsrooms. Despite an overload of tragedies, news anchors were encouraged to smile a lot and engage in superficial chit-chat.

Unrehearsed chatter had its moments. During my investigative reporting tenure at a Boston station, our well-respected anchorwoman—who I will call Natalie—was delighted to learn she was pregnant with her first child. The sometimes airhead co-anchor—who I will call Tom—wanted to reveal the pregnancy on the late evening newscast. She said, “No. Do not mention this on the air.” He seemed to acquiesce. But a characteristic of many anchors is that they don’t know what’s coming out of their mouths next. On this particular night, the final story happened to be a feature about the birth of chimps at the local zoo, prompting Tom to turn to Natalie and ask, “Does this remind you of something you wanted to tell viewers?” She said nothing, but the look on her face was priceless.

The Boston gaffe was minor compared to stuff that periodically pops up now on You Tube. Television news has become far more trite in the days since I worked in Boston for a station then described in the New York Times as “the nations best local station.” The demise of quality is due in large part to the adoption of a formula devised by Frank Magid and Associates, as well as other consulting firms.

The reliance on news consultants is not limited to local stations. I vividly recall my foreboding while sitting in a meeting at CNN, listening to a network executive parrot a consulting firm’s advice to keep stories brief, visual and “viewer friendly.” It was a re-run of a meeting I attended years before at the Boston station.

Admittedly, I have a prejudice toward news consultants, such as Frank Magid and Associates. The format advocated by these firms does not bode well for in-depth investigative reporting. As CNN’s Senior Investigative Correspondent, I fought battles with the newsroom over the length and substance of reports. Boring was the most frequent adjective attached to many segments produced by our Special Assignment Unit. Which leads me to a premise that is not widely embraced by the money-changers who control much of the news media.

I believe viewers are often secondary when it comes to investigative reporting. The role of muckraking is to ”keep the bastards honest.”  A fear of being exposed by intrepid journalists accomplishes that goal to some measure. However, the present state of television news is such that politicians, bureaucrats and all-around scoundrels consider the majority of TV reporters to be lightweights incapable of finding restrooms in courthouses. The lack of concern over being exposed is understandable. Most television stations long ago abandoned the idea that investigative reporting is an obligation instead of a luxury. 

Frank Magid and Associates, and other media consultants are not solely to blame for the sorry quality of contemporary TV news. The proliferation of cable channels gives viewers the choice of watching reruns of bad situation comedies rather than tolerating bad news programs. Even worse is the fact that large numbers of broadcast outlets are owned by conglomerates. The loyalty of big corporations is to stockholders—viewers be damned.

Before closing this diatribe, I must offer a confession. A Magid consultant gave me advice that improved the quality of my muckraking. He pointed out that some one-hour investigative documentaries I producer were too complicated for the average viewer to comprehend without a scorecard. He suggested that I consistently remind viewers what the story was all about, suggesting that every five minutes or so during the narrative, I give a simple review of what I had reported and where I was going with the story. 

The timely advice was a reminder of the first important lesson I learned as radio reporter many years before. ”Tell’em what you’re going to tell’em, tell’em, and tell’em what you told’em.” 

I was then producing a complex exposé titled, The Best Insurance Commissioner Money Can Buy. The documentary helped send the Louisiana Insurance Commissioner and several insurance company executives to prison. And thanks in large part to Magid, the report was so comprehensible that it won me a fourth Peabody medallion. So thanks, Frank. 

But as I morbidly told a friend after learning of Magid’s death, I hope the format of final services was different from the format of the nation’s local newscasts he helped shape. It would be an injustice to limit eulogies to two minutes or less—except for uncontrollable sobbing—out of fear that mourners would switch to another funeral.