I disagree to an extent. We agree on that fact that people are willing to pay for content that is perceived as valuable to them. Part of the issue is that CNN

I disagree to an extent. We agree on that fact that people are willing to pay for content that is perceived as valuable to them. Part of the issue is that CNN is not exactly news. It is mostly opinion pieces ( please don't think I am being biased -- same is true for FOX, MSN and so on ). There is a reason for that, it sells and can gather quite a following as some personalities do show in terms of ratings. With that in mind, the issue is that 'personalities' on CNN do not offer an 'opinion' that is palatable to a large or valuable segment of population. Amusingly, they seem very much out of step with those. We can argue over why, but I don't think it will help discussion here. In terms of analogy, Tucker might offer you a Big Mac type opinion; it is a drive-by, easy and rather unhealthy long term, but CNN is not sushi, it is not a gourmet steak.. it is a guy telling me I should try cauliflower dropped quinoa - you could argue it is good for you, but not exactly broad appeal. My point is.. CNN, if you want to do opinion pieces, you DO need to cater to the lowest common denominator. If you want to be above it all, then do news and abstain from putting a finger on the scale of public opinion.