TOO MUCH TALK NEWS NETWORKS ARE FILLING THEIR SCHEDULES WITH COMBATIVE COMMENTARY.

Byline: David Kronke Television Writer

Reese Schonfeld, co-founder of CNN, has a mea culpa for those ``Sabbath gasbags'' (as Calvin Trillin insightfully dubbed them) who used to appear just on Sunday morning talk shows but now - thanks to the success of the early CNN series ``Crossfire'' and its imitators - appear throughout the week.

`` 'Crossfire' was supposed to be a little different - they weren't just supposed to yell at each other,'' says Schonfeld, author of the new book ``Me and Ted Against the World: The Unofficial Story of the Founding of CNN.'' ``Yelling is easy. Ranting is easy. It contributes nothing to the national dialogue; it just confirms the opinions of people who have already formed them.''

Now, with MSNBC, CNBC and the Fox News Channel joining CNN, much of the content of these news channels has become what Schonfeld and others dismiss as ``televised talk radio.'' And in a world of cost-cutting - CNN suffered only the highest-profile round of layoffs in its news divisions (NBC and ABC also recently scaled back) - it's easier to produce and promote personality-driven - and commentary-driven - news programs.

The news networks have created a landscape in which partisan ideologues routinely rave and bicker, without resolution or even allowing a hint that they're listening to one another, not unlike ``The Simpsons' '' Itchy and Scratchy, cartoon characters who eternally blast, bonk and blow each other to smithereens.

Which accounts for the explosion of shows like MSNBC's ``Hardball,'' Fox News Channel's ``The O'Reilly Factor'' and recent additions, like CNN's Wolf Blitzer newscast, ``The Point,'' with legal analyst Greta Van Susteren and ``The Spin Room,'' which presents political issues with the gravity of morning-drive-time radio jocks.

The success in the ratings of these shows has prompted CNN to add more of the same to its lineup. ``The Capital Gang'' has expanded to an hour, and this month, ``Take Five,'' a talk show with political reporters acting as panelists and pundits, will be introduced. Also on the schedule are ``People in the News,'' a profile series in conjunction with People magazine, and ``He Said/She Said,'' featuring an Entertainment Weekly critic (like CNN, both magazines are owned by AOL-Time Warner).

``CNN News Site,'' an afternoon newsmagazine featuring reports suggested by viewers at CNN's Web site, is another addition. In the spring, the network will feature a documentary series, and CNN's respected senior analyst Jeff Greenfield will host a show offering, according to a press release, ``an unconventional perspective'' on the day's events, with pundits but ``avoiding the typical choices.''

``The more you emphasize personality in newscasters, the more they're inclined to make happy talk,'' observes Entertainment Weekly TV critic Ken Tucker. ``The emphasis is on being ingratiating rather than delivering news or, God forbid, going out and reporting. This is lessening the quality and quantity of news.''

USA Today TV critic Robert Bianco calls these programs the news networks' ``equivalent of pro-wrestling. Honestly, the value of most of it escapes me. Unfortunately, with most pundits on TV, once you get their affiliation, you can fill in what they're going to say. When was the last time someone on one of those shows said something that surprised you?''

Sid Bedingfield, executive vice president and general manager of CNN/U.S., defends the new trend. ``What we're doing is looking for the right balance between hard news, sharp analysis and compelling storytelling,'' Bedingfield said. ``We're committed to hard news. We wanted to highlight some of our personalities, but in a way that's consistent with CNN.

``Wolf is a reporter, and we created a newscast around his skills as a reporter and interviewer,'' he continues. ``And I've always felt that Greta could explain stories very well. So you have an hour driven by news but within it, a decent amount of analysis. The main point is, CNN is not going to all talk, all analysis.''

It pays to be able to pontificate artfully. Hosts of such programs make approximately $1 million to $3 million annually, Schonfeld estimates, with high-end personalities like Larry King and Geraldo Rivera earning roughly $7.5 million and $5 million, respectively. Blitzer and Susteren, who came from news and analyst positions, may earn in the mid-to-high six figures.

To be fair, some industry analysts do see value in this type of programming.

``Original reporting four hours a night is a monumental job, and discussion shows are a cheaper way of doing it, and not necessarily a bad thing,'' suggests Robert Thompson, Syracuse University's founding director of the Center for the Study of Popular Television. ``Listening to a conversation of presumably informed people is entertaining, dramatic, and it gives people a sense of the ambiguity of these stories.

``Anyone who watched a substantial portion of the cable coverage of the election understood that this was not an easy situation, much more than from a half-hour news broadcast.''

Mark O'Connor, MSNBC director of media relations, says his network is assiduous in presenting thorough examinations of the issues. ``The guideline for everybody at the network is to present both sides of the story. We seek out many people representing any given situation who are authorities on the subject. That's rule No. 1, and that's what we strive to do and do very well. Be the issue Marc Rich (Bill Clinton's controversial pardonee) or Hugh Rodham (Clinton's brother-in-law who represented a pair of pardon receivers), we get the best people and the most people to talk about what's going on.''

O'Connor points out that MSNBC has the only hourlong straight-news broadcast in prime time (seen at 7 p.m.; CNN airs a half-hour at 7 and 10 p.m.). ``It's not just political talk, like our competitors,'' he says.

To understand where TV news is, it helps to remember where it has come from. ``It's so easy to forget that until 1965, there was only 15 minutes of news on the networks in the evening,'' Syracuse's Thompson notes. The networks expanded modestly, and then, in 1979, ``we got the miracle of CNN. It was a totally different idea - news like tap water, available 24 hours a day.

``It wasn't too long ago, CNN was the young turk challenging the establishment, but now, CNN is now what CBS was to CNN in the early '80s,'' Thompson continues. ``CNN has become the old (guys). CNN got caught off guard. Besides MSNBC, there's CNBC and Fox News Channel, and CNN is suddenly not the only game in town - there are now more news networks than there were networks in the '60s.''

Those new networks brought a new attitude. ``MSNBC does it so much better,'' Thompson says. ``It recognizes the fact that we want to get to know these people better. They have a totally different style of news. Brian Williams gives a straight report, but there's still some ad-libbed conversation, some kind of commentary seeping out.''

During the prolonged debate over the 2000 presidential outcome, CNN actually lost viewers in areas where all three news services were available, from an average of 452,000 viewers the first week after the election to 367,000 in week five. By contrast, MSNBC enjoyed a bump, from 336,000 average viewers in week one to 376,000 in week five; the highly partisan Fox News Channel soared from 354,000 average viewers the first week after the election to 421,000 the fifth week.

``The election for MSNBC was what the Gulf War was for CNN,'' Thompson says. ``Notice everyone is moving to the MSNBC model. It's more user-friendly.''

Many in the news industry dismiss Fox News Channel as a conservative mouthpiece that has made its name simply by making Bill Clinton its favorite whipping boy - ``They have yet to let go of Clinton,'' says USA Today's Bianco. ``Fox's coverage of George W. Bush's inaugural was a signal event. They should've been happy, but they couldn't concentrate - they're so obsessed with Clinton that Bush was an afterthought on his big day.''

Schonfeld begs to differ, though: ``Fox, despite its conservative bent, does a good job. Their point of view is clear, and they do a good job with the news. There's a place for a conservative network.''

Still, Schonfeld does say that filling air time with pundits and quippery isn't really cheaper than straight news reporting, just lazier.

``It was not expensive when CNN was a news factory, producing news the same way cars were done - CNN could easily fill the time with hard news, but they're in a panic because they're not winning the hour. The thinking is, 'They're more successful, so maybe we should change our format.' They made the switch because they saw Chris Matthews and 'The O'Reilly Factor' and didn't know how to compete with them. It's the me-too factor. I don't think Wolf and Greta are the answer.''

Nor does EW's Tucker. ``It's bad all around - I'm surprised at the turn it's taken,'' he says. ``I understand the 24-hour news cycle - they need something to fill the airwaves when there's not an emergency. But to have Chris Matthews (whom Washingtonian magazine recently described as 'smart, articulate, emotional, opinionated, enamored of his own voice, and often rude to his guests') become the go-to guy for NBC News is quite disappointing. It's clear he has a clear political ax to grind.

``CNN has to convey the impression that they are a serious hard-news network and concentrate the resources they haven't cut away to straightforward news.''

Nonetheless, Schonfeld thinks Fox's news-making nemesis is one of the few names out there who would make a compelling news personality.

``CNN should go after Bill Clinton,'' Schonfeld says. ``If Larry King is worth $7.5 million, Bill Clinton's worth $15 million; he'd double their ratings. Clinton's the biggest name in the world, and he'd be perfect to use in a hard-news show. People who love him will watch it, people who hate him will watch it - that's 80 percent of the country. And this is a good time for Larry to move on.''

Clinton is said to have been offered a commentator position at a major network, akin to his former aide George Stephanopolous' role at ABC, but turned it down. Bedingfield says he doesn't anticipate CNN approaching Clinton.

Bianco has a suggestion for all would-be media pundits.

``They should all take the advice of Doris Kearns Goodwin (a pundit for PBS' 'News Hour With Jim Lehrer' and NBC),'' says Bianco. ``She decided she was on TV so much she was sick of her own voice, so she said she'll go off for a year. It's very easy to outstay one's welcome on a medium as pervasive as TV.''

CAPTION(S):

13 photos

Photo:

(1 -- cover -- color) Brian Williams, MSNBC

(2 -- cover -- color) Wolf Blitzer, CNN

(3 -- cover -- color) Greta Van Susteren, CNN

(4 -- cover -- color) Bill O'Reilly, Fox News

(5 -- cover -- color) Chris Matthews, MSNBC

(6 -- cover -- color) Tucker Carlson, CNN

(7 -- cover -- color) Bill Press, CNN

(8) Brian Williams, MSNBC

(9) Wolf Blitzer, CNN

(10) Greta Van Susteren, CNN

(11) Bill O'Reilly, Fox News

(12) Chris Matthews, MSNBC

(13) Tucker Carlson, CNN