Cable News Is Over
What comes next will be more fragmented, more decentralized, and more authentic than the old legacy networks.

When the Cable News Network (CNN) launched on the evening of June 1, 1980, it was a youthful upstart business. There were just a few hundred employees, and the company was based not in New York or Los Angeles, but in a former country club building on the periphery of Atlanta, Georgia. Cable television itself was still relatively new, and the idea of a 24-hour news channel made its programming practically experimental.
The big broadcast networks and their regularly scheduled nightly newscasts had a lock on viewers and TV news. The network news desks were money machines with massive resources and handsomely paid name-brand talent.
But CNN was offering something different—a steady flow of TV news programming that was always available, that took viewers into stories in a more intimate and organic way, that harnessed modern media technology to build a product that was better suited to contemporary viewers. CNN was a bet on something cheaper, more energetic, more intense, more modern, and more flexible.
That bet paid off. CNN went on to become a fixture in American homes and a singular force in the nation's news ecosystem. It created new stars of its own, and, with its always-on programming, changed the way Americans consume and think about news, especially political news. It helped pave the way for more cable news networks, like Fox News and MSNBC, which became more explicitly partisan in their coverage and emphasis. CNN was a major power center in American politics; it has been so integral to political news consumption in the United States for so long that it's almost difficult to imagine American politics without it.
We may soon find out what that's like. As Dylan Byers noted on X, just a week after the election, the network saw the lowest ratings in the all-important 25–54 age group—what broadcasters refer to as "the demo"—since June 2000 (not counting last year's July 4th holiday). This was at a moment when political news was breaking and developing at a hectic pace, when an incoming president was putting together a new cabinet, when elections results and their meanings were still sinking in. It was a moment, in other words, when CNN should have been at the top of its game. Instead, it was warming the bench.
Viewers had tuned out. And it wasn't just CNN. After the election, MSNBC also suffered similarly low ratings in the demo. And this all comes on top of years of decline for both networks, as younger consumers cut the cord on cable TV, which is now the ancient, stagnant technology that broadcast was when CNN launched. Like the broadcast networks of the 1980s, CNN and MSNBC still throw off a lot of revenue, and can afford to pay well for top talent. Their anchors and commentators are still well known in the world of media. But it's clear that they are on their way out.
The era of cable news is over. Which is probably why Comcast, which owns MSNBC and its finance-focused sister network CNBC—as well as other cable networks like SyFy, USA, and the Golf Channel—announced this week that it's spinning off most of its linear cable news channels into a separate company. The problem for MSNBC and CNBC isn't that they aren't profitable. As CNN reports, "the channels still contribute strong profits to Comcast's bottom line." The problem is that they no longer look like growth businesses. Although executives are sure to position the move as an opportunity for a reboot, the spin-off is best understood as an acknowledgment that cable news is in decline. MSNBC's 53 percent ratings decline from October, before the election, to November just underlines the long-term trajectory.
To some extent, this is a story about ideology: CNN and MSNBC catered to left-of-center viewers who seem dejected about President Donald Trump's election to a second term. Those viewers appear to be looking away rather than gearing up to start a second run of resistance-by-obsessive-media-consumption.
But in many ways it's a story about technology and form, with upstart new media operations—which include everything from streaming services to YouTube channels to newsletters to interview podcasts—making inroads with younger, less traditionally TV-centric news consumers.
Like CNN in its infancy, these upstarts are clearly influenced by their legacy media predecessors, and in the case of the big streaming services often have direct connections to them. But they are also using new technology to break and change the form, offering political news in packages that are practically experimental.
Younger YouTube and TikTok commentators sometimes make their points in just a few seconds, with goofy graphics and wink-wink musical cues that no self-serious professional news broadcaster would ever employ. Podcasts, meanwhile, have gone the opposite direction, offering lengthy, discursive interviews that let subjects speak uninterrupted for minutes at a time and conversations that flow more naturally—a near-impossibility in the tightly paced, commercial-bounded programming blocks of cable news programming.
What comes after cable news will be much weirder, much less centralized, much less bound to the old formats and assumptions about what makes for a high-quality, professional product. And in shedding the old formats, it might even shed some of the old ideas as well, finding ways to move beyond cable's endless yelling-match squabbles and predictable partisanship.
This is a story, in other words, of competition, of new entities forming to use technology to deliver news to younger consumers in a way that better suits their interests.
If there's a counterstory to cable's decline, it's Fox News. Since the election, the conservative-leaning network's ratings are up, and Trump seems intent on building a cabinet of people pulled from its orbit. It's not too much of an exaggeration to say the Trump White House is shaping up to be the Fox News White House. But Fox, too, has seen a longer-term trend of declining viewership in recent years, as cord-cutters have abandoned cable. And as with CNN and MSNBC, the average age of its audience is quite old.
Fox is clearly poised for a short-term boomlet. But in the longer term, cable news as we know it is on its way out, and cable news' influence will continue to wane. And in its place, we'll see new power centers spring up, built on new technologies, new talent, and new format possibilities. And maybe, if we're lucky, we might even see some new ideas.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Robby should at least get XP as a party member, if not looting rights.
Why? What happened?
Nothing. CNN has to downsize and live with the reality that they aren't the only game in town. They aren't going anywhere despite what the MAGA crowd want to think lmao
CNN is tanking, but TDS-addled shit-piles aren't willing to accept that
War's been over, man. Rogan dropped the big one.
Peter, you're a moron. Left leaning Youtubers are experiencing a similar decline and leftist streamers have cratered the available advertising on that platform due to their antics in service of ideology. This isn't about changes in media landscape but a collapse of the ability to push leftist orthodoxy across the board.
The two trends are not mutually exclusive. Competition in ideological biases can disfavor the previous liberal lock in both cablenews and podcast-influencer environments while cablenews continues its decline due to changing demographics.
Agreed
Thought Gutfeld got decent ratings.
Gen X and younger matriculated to social media outlets that show and share the news instead of direct folks what to what they think the news should be.
During live events, Chumby usually uses Agenda Free TV on YouTube. Steve does a decent job of showing but not editorializing his political spin.
https://www.youtube.com/@AgendaFreeTV
What's his agenda though?
I think his agenda is to get views and stay funded by donations. Iirc, he’s out of Mass so he will cover bigger events in Maine too and anything big national/international. His election night coverage was neither pro Trump nor pro Kamala. When Trump would pick up another state and he would report it; the associated chat room had some complaints. He would say, “I’m just reporting how a state was called.” He comes off as mildly autistic where knowing & reporting news is what he wants to do.
Am I expected to form my own opinions instead of following a credentialed journalist?
Those that don’t follow the news are uninformed. Those that do follow the news are misinformed.
This is why Jesse muted you. I’n sorry to be the one to inform you.
It’s the worst thing that has ever happened.
Getting muted is like losing your soul. Tragic stuff.
Could lead to heavy drinking and actions that result in CPS being called.
"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." Thomas Jefferson
Reason still can't bring themselves to admit what everyone knows damn well is true: the far left media have pretty much destroyed every last shred of their credibility by crying wolf (and outright lying) for far too long to the point where a critical mass of the public has caught on.
I think that's right. Seems like MSNBC and CNN viewers were fully convinced on Nov 4 that Queen Kamala would be spreading joy for years to come only to wake up on Nov 6 and realized they'd been lied to. They killed the messenger but for good reason.
Not caught on. Can no longer tolerate it.
CNN went on to become a fixture in American homes and a singular force in the nation's news ecosystem. It created new stars of its own, and, with its always-on programming, changed the way Americans consume and think about news, especially political news. It helped pave the way for more cable news networks, like Fox News and MSNBC, which became more explicitly partisan in their coverage and emphasis. CNN was a major power center in American politics; it has been so integral to political news consumption in the United States for so long that it's almost difficult to imagine American politics without it.
Hey Pete, you know that there are people out there who not only couldn't have CNN/MSNBC/Fox News as a fixture in their lives but couldn't even have TV as a fixture in their lives, right? That there are lots and lots of people for whom The Simpsons or Johnny Carson is more of a fixture than CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News, right?
I believe centralized news is dying, not just cable news, but this article cherry picks its data and opinions.
MSNBC and CNN ratings tanked because they are stodgy centralized old-fashioned talking heads and it has nothing to do with their ideological slant or their candidate losing.
Fox ratings are going up in spite of being stodgy centralized old-fashioned talking heads, because their candidate won.
Choose one or other, please.
I think it has everything to do with peddling BS [Na]tional So[zi]alist LIES and propaganda.
Something Reason itself should be very weary of.
The USA is a *Constitutional* Republic.
NOT a [Na]tional So[zi]alist Empire.
The falling of Nazi-Propaganda outlets give me hope this nation can save itself from the grips of Nazism that has completely taken-over D.C. and immigrant invaded coast lands.
Cable promised to be advertisement free because of subscription fees. Instead we get ever increasing fees and even more advertising. Out of the hundreds of channels, there might be 1 or 2 worth watching. Cable News is even more of a joke. When there isn't any news worthy of reporting, Cable News needs to create the news to fill the time. Again you get a bundle where the vast majority is trash not worthy of wasting even if you are stoned and eating cheetos on a couch all day.
Streaming is more targeted and more authentic. Typically does not pretend to not have a bias like the corporate media does. The trick will be to keep the government from restricting free speech.
Mmmm. You mean the 20 minutes of commercials in your average one hour primetime cable show is not what they promised?
I'm enjoying msdnc the last two weeks.
I grew up in a world where three TV networks created the conventional wisdom. Newspapers were largely a local affair but of course NYT, WAPO and WSJ all signed off on the collective consensus. When Cronkite said this Viet Nam thing was out of hand, Johnson dropped out. That's how powerful he was. Cable news served essentially the same function and while Fox promised to be fair and balanced their news programs were virtually indistinguishable from their competitors. There were always malcontents publishing contrarian and subversive views but they rarely had an effect on policy. Neither the legacy media nor the alternative media have the exclusive ability to dictate the conventional wisdom anymore and the malcontents can monetize what we used to call conspiracy theories that sometimes. turn out to be wisdom, conventional or not. It's a brave new world indeed.
The bigger picture is that the cable TV bundle is kaput. Consumers have gotten wise to the fact that a hundred dollars a month for 150 channels, of which they watch maybe ten, is not a good deal. Streaming has gotten closer as never before to the promised land of ala cart TV, which the public has long demanded and the pay TV oligarchs insisted wasn't feasible. As they say, content is king and in the direct to viewer channel era, the gravy train has left the station for low ratings leeches like the beer pong channel, Vice, BET, and CNN.
yup, I think more and more people are just leaving cable, I left so long ago I can't remember when. I do get my news from around the web though.
Big issue, though, is that streaming BLEEDS money. Netflix is the only one actually making money on it. Disney sure as hell is not. Nor is WB.
The major streaming services would like to actually basically do the same bundling crap that worked for them on cable.
I can scarcely imagine no more exciting a time! Maybe it would be a good time to give consumers a soap box as well as see journalists find popular vloggers to supply a story feature or good content. Media has tried to be viral in the past but now they may be outnumbered in that "Big Network losing adherence" sort of way.
The network news, whether it's off cable of the three major networks is all filtered through the CIA. All of it. The overpaid hacks who regurgitate whatever the spooks order them to say know they are lying and they know who their real masters are.
Finally people like Joe Rogan and even Tucker Carlson are killing them. Rogan get millions of views per week outpacing CNN(Crap News Network) and PMSNBC.
It won't be long before The View gets the axe either. Whoopie's fat ugly face and glaring stupidity won't be able to pollute the minds of stupid white suburban female liberals.
Amen. I was wondering when someone was going to address that Mockingbird thing.
As bad as Whoopie is, and she's pretty bad, she's not even the dumbest one on The View. Ana Navarro is absolutely stupid.
But she makes up for it by being horribly unattractive with a horrendous accent and enough mass to generate her own gravity field.
Comcast bought a bunch of linear programming channels some years ago. This a was move uncommon in the cable business: most other cable companies (Time Warner Cable, Charter) did not own linear channels. Now Comcast is divesting these. The rise of streaming vs linear programming is likely a huge contributor to this. Consumers prefer watching video content on their own schedule, now that it is increasingly available.
Newsmax has grown rapidly at the expense of Fox News, and several of their shows have surpassed MSNBC and CNN in the evenings and primetime.
I consider Greta Van Susteren more insightful and objective than Fox News' Brett Baier (from 6pm to 7pm) and Greg Kelly is far more informative and objective (and far less opinionated) than Sean Hannity (from 9pm to 10pm).
Trump also prefers Nesmax to Fox News (ever since Chris Wallace helped Biden during the 2020 presidential debate by repeating the deep state's lies about Hunter's laptop.
In general, I now use the NY Times and Washington Post as an index to news stories, with particular attention to which stories they suppress (e.g., impending WWIII). Papers have just lost their credibility following too many years of gossip and thinly-veiled news analysis. Everything must be verified.
I then go to a variety of podcasters (including genuine experts) or YouTube clips largely from cable news for detailed discussions that confirm, explain, or deny the importance or veracity of what I saw in the newspaper. Now that the traditional news media incessantly repeat warnings about how disinformed and misinformed everyone is, I really don't see reading a newspaper as remaining a daily ritual very much longer for me.