Conservative commentator Jack Hunter, aka “The Southern Avenger,” posted a column called “Media-ocrity” focusing on the sad changes to journalism he has seen over the years, particularly when it comes to covering politics.  According to the post, it was broadcast on a local talk radio station as well.

He points out that covering the campaign trail is much more often about covering appearances and photo ops, the clever soundbites that candidates hurl at one another, and the occasional take on what the candidates’ spouses are up to. What’s missing, he says, is the meat on the candidates’ positions:

“What should be peripheral news is not only the predominant news – but the only news. We hear more about Hillary crying during the campaign than how her policies might make voters cry if she were to become elected. We know Rudy fancies himself as ‘tough’ on terrorism, but how tough would he be on America as president, as evidenced by the scores of NYC policemen and firemen who consider him a failed mayor? Take even an issue like the Fair Tax, which is of interest to many voters and has been a hot topic this election year. If you’re lucky, a voter might understand that it means beyond abolishing the income tax and replacing it with a sales tax, which excites some and scares others. Wouldn’t offering a detailed analysis help voters to form a more informed opinion?”

He certainly makes good points about the superficiality of broadcast news. And it is superficial in many ways. Journalism has evolved over the years, and it has made many changes that are definitely not for the best, prompted by ever-increasing competition in a sea of channels that have diluted viewership to the point that each one is desperately trying to do anything it can to reach as many as possible.

That’s not the way it should be, and I don’t know anyone in the business who thinks otherwise.  I don’t attempt to make excuses for it, but I do at least understand why it has happened — and there’s a big difference.

The problem is, more than anything else, missed opportunity.

It’s those moments, like Hillary Clinton getting a bit weepy during a campaign stop, that lure people to the screen. Those are the moments I’m more likely to focus on if I’m trying to promote a newscast. But you have to understand: my job is to get people to the newscast; it’s the news people’s job to keep them there with content that matters.

Does it matter to anyone that Clinton teared up in New Hampshire? Well, that’s up for debate, since it appears that it might have “humanized” her enough to get her a win there…but in the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t matter much at all.

But in our zeal to get viewers to watch, we are more likely to show the short clip of her show of emotion, and then move on to something else without taking time to focus on the fears of voters and candidates alike that have gotten us to that point, or what Hillary (or anyone else) is specifically planning to do about them…if they’ve even made such plans public, yet.

Granted, there are media sources out there — and I’m not talking about “citizen journalism” — where you can get more detailed information. I suspect that those who really want it are more than aware of where to find it.  Newspapers, news magazines and news websites, by their very nature, are better equipped to cover stories in greater detail than television’s nightly news can. But imagine the news magazines that do the best job of in-depth reporting on stories that are really important, and refer to that thought the next time you’re at the grocery store watching someone pulling copies of National Enquirer or Soap Opera Digest off the shelves instead.

It is little moments like this that drive me crazy.  But part of living in this country, with all of its problems, is having the option not to give a damn.

The media can only do so much, but if the customers are more interested in the superficial, one of two things will happen: either the customers will go elsewhere until they find the superficial, or the superficial will begin moving its way in. It’s the nature of the beast: as I’ve said before, television news is like a mirror: it evolves as the concerns of the audience evolves. If no one were interested in the celebrity meltdown du jour, I guarantee you no media outlet would make any mention of it at all.

The sad thing is, for those of us who work in the media, that when we do spend time trying to produce the kind of “in-depth” report people feel we should only be doing, a good portion of the audience tunes out:  they’d rather watch some crap like Dancing with the Stars or Jerry Springer or American Idol.  Another missed opportunity.

It occurs to me, however, that there’s another opportunity that is missed here. Since the “Southern Avenger” seems to be part of the media — particularly when he used the airwaves to make his point — he had an important choice when he wrote that column: he could have devoted the space to an explanation of what the “fair tax” is and what voters need to know about it. Or a look at how each candidate plans to deal with terrorism. Or a “detailed analysis” of Hillary’s health care plan.

You know, the kind of story he says is so blatantly and appallingly missing from today’s media.

He chose, instead, to take time in the media to preach to a choir of readers and listeners who are likely to shout “Amen” to the rafters.

Missed opportunity.

Look at it this way:  If you’re a nurse in a hospital, and you see someone being handed the wrong medication, do you let that patient become even more sick, then head to some staff meeting and complain about how many errors are being made? Or do you first do your part to fix the problem, then explain, in detail, what you’ve done to be part of the solution?

If you’re a politician who sees a loophole causing families to lose a lot of money they need to keep food on their table, do you file that piece of information away and wait for the next press conference to complain about the growing problem of poverty, or do you fix the problem, and then campaign about how you did fix the problem?

It’s only natural: we like to complain. But complaining about something doesn’t change anything. I suspect even the Southern Avenger doesn’t feel any better about the state of the media now than he did before he sat down at the computer.