In Other News...

 

With the filing of the Georgia indictments against Trump et al, it seems all the shoes, at least the big ones, have now dropped. So where do we all go from here? By “we,” I include the media.

First off, we can stop with “historic” and “unprecedented.” Been there and said that.

Let’s face it: the next phase just isn’t going to be as exciting. It will be all about procedural twists and turns in the legal cases, which could mean more hours spent on cable news with the various legal experts. How much of that are we willing to watch?

Of course, Trump is way ahead of his potential Republican competition -- not surprising at this stage, and we saw only about half the candidates in the latest debate. Must we spend hours talking about whether Trump can run the country from jail if he’s convicted, then elected President? Come on, everybody. There have been no primaries yet. We are way ahead of ourselves, or in front of our skis, as it seems popular to say now.

But TV audiences can be fickle. Isn’t there a point where fatigue is going to set in, and we’re just going to want to consume something else? Even when court cases begin, they can take a long time and be boring.

Suppose Trump is not the Republican nominee next year. Will we be quite as  interested in following the trials, some of which could last well after the 2024 election? Talk about long national nightmares.

The man who came up with that phrase was the late President Gerald Ford, who pardoned Richard Nixon so that the country could move on. Ford is being blamed in some quarters now for setting the precedent by which future Presidents could escape justice. I believe that Mr. Ford was sincere in his action to bring the Watergate drama to an end. In Nixon’s case, he resigned. He was not a fan of journalists, and aside from granting an interview or two, did not seem interested in becoming a perennial media star after his departure.

These days, there are simply too many unknowns for there to be much profit in playing “what if” games in the Trump saga. I think we’d be much calmer if we simply see where the actual chain of events takes us.

 

 

Our Long National Nightmare - The Series

First off, I am not going to discuss the legal issues related to Donald Trump’s indictment – more agile minds than mine are doing just fine with that. I do want to talk about whether the trial, if it happens, should be televised. As a former journalist who is no fan of Trump, you might think I am one of those clamoring for the trial to be on TV or streamed live, but I’m actually not so sure.

I get that this is just about the most important story in our history, so that we feel entitled to have cameras in that courtroom. One cable pundit said this week, well, the OJ trial was on TV, why shouldn’t this be? I think there needs to be a better poster child for that argument.

In the interest of full disclosure, I lapped up the OJ drama along with many others, and watched the Geraldo evening coverage after every court proceeding. In the small city I worked in as a journalist, the city manager felt that there would be no useful work done at verdict time, so he invited every city employee to a large conference room to watch  it come down on TV.

It is said that the final yes or no on TV coverage for the Trump trial is up to US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. The high court itself only recently allowed live audio coverage of its own proceedings. I don’t have a problem with that.

But there is just something about seeing court activity on a screen. That makes everything cross the line into entertainment. Can you imagine the viewership if Trump were to actually testify?

There is another thing that bothers me a little. Even now, every minute spent on all this special TV coverage is a fund-raising tool for the former guy. Hey, here’s an idea: I’m sure if they put the trial on pay-per-view, we could retire a big chunk of  the national debt.

Supporters of Trump suggest there would be riots in the streets if he’s convicted. Is anybody asking, what’s going to happen if he isn’t?

But back to the point: This is serious business; it shouldn’t be infotainment. Narration to enhance the courtroom audio would work for me. And hey, if your eyes aren’t glued to a screen, maybe you can get some other stuff done.