Sarah Palin's New TV Show: Polite, Professional and Oh So Boring

Love her or hate her, we saw a side of Sarah Palin last night that must have caught observers at every end of the spectrum by surprise.

That would be her boring side.

And while some of us thought that America was going through tough times – what with towering unemployment, bank bailouts and a tidal wave of foreclosures – it turns out that nope, everything’s going just honkey dorey. Or at least it is in the version of “Real America” we were presented by Palin and Fox News last night.

Thursday marked the debut episode of Real American Stories, an hour-long concept so lukewarm and innocuous that the network is only committing to air it “periodically.” If the aim of the show was to remove Palin from a political context, and present her in a rosy light, then mission accomplished: Only a couple minutes into the premiere, she was flanked by a dozen or so preening grade school students from impoverished areas, all now on a path to a better future thanks to a generous philanthropist who’s committed to hep pay for their education. It was vintage hallmark.

The show is so soft and cuddly, in fact, that there’s almost no variation in the texture worth discussing. It is slick, smooth and wafer-thin. Give it five minutes and it’ll evaporate right in front of your eyes.

Playing the part of host, Palin was gracious, poised, present – and supremely uninteresting. The same could go for the rest of the show, which postures itself as a gaggle of feel-good American tales but then runs at a pace and rhythm so brisk  that we are unable to dive into any single story. It’s less Real American Stories than A Collection of Real American Short Stories, and it’s because of this superficiality that my indifference turns to frustration.

I do not subscribe to the theory that all we get in the mainstream media is bad news. There are plenty of good headlines to go around – viral stories that are cute, soft features that warm the heart, even hard news headlines that are celebratory and reaffirming. The problem with so many TV news shows is not an absence of “happy” or “good” but a shocking lack of depth. Things are simplified and streamlined, into sound bites and polarized extremes. Everything is presented as red state vs. blue state when in fact most of us are gradations of purple.

So my only real analysis, in terms of Sarah Palin’s puff program last night, is that it’s less irrelevant than it is insidious. Real American Stories represents the latest news program to chip away at both the quality and depth of our public discourse. In the first story alone last night, where we heard of a generous white donor and the black kids he is helping to get to college, the show just breezes past the fact that only 25 percent of this given school’s students are college-bound. Just 1 in 4. That’s a horrific statistic. And yet the tempo of this show, which is determined to only tell the happy and harrowing side of the story, prevents us from looking at the real issues. Why are these students so disadvantaged, in the first place? Why are they reliant on a failing school system, and generous philanthropists?

Just as I would complain about Glenn Beck spewing panic, or Keith Olbermann issuing his proclamations about the Worst Person in the World, I don’t see Real American Stories adding much to the conversation. The worst thing happening to broadcast journalism today is the shrinking of the deep end. Almost everything now is shallow and quick-hit, and that goes for the more cheerful Real American Stories too. If this series doesn’t have the time, or inclination, to address failing urban schools while praising the donor that saved a few of the hopeless, then what good is it? Here’s an hour of primetime TV which tells all of us that in “Real America,” good people are doing good things. End of story. Period.

Well in my world, things are just a little more complicated than that. And any show that ignores that fact – whether advocating euphoria, fear or hatred – is doing us all a disservice. If they retitled this show Real American STORY, and took the time to flesh out the good, the bad and the ugly, then I’ll be back, ready to really learn something. You betcha.

Related Topics: chipper but shallow, fox network, real american stories, sarah palin, TV Networks
  • Latest on Entertainment

    Fashion Week Spotify Playlist

    Listen to TIME’s Fashion Week Playlist on Spotify!

    It’s Fashion Week in New York City and Manhattan is crawling with eccentric designers, stylish socialites and hungry models looking for next season’s big trend. It seems that our invitation to Marc Jacobs’ show got lost in the mail, so to console ourselves we’ve put together a stylish Spotify playlist.

    "The Woman in Black": A Good Old Fashioned Scary MovieSlate

    Jasmin Marla Dichant / Sony Pictures Classics

    In Darkness: How a Swindler Became a Schindler

    Agnieszka Holland’s Oscar-nominated film tells the true story of a Polish-Catholic sewer worker and thief who kept Jews alive in Nazi-occupied Lvov

  • JCRHoo

    You and I (and most of James’ readers) would tune in “to really learn something,” but aren’t we in the distinct minority? For so many people, thinking is to be avoided whenever possible. “Learning something” loses out almost every time to mindless entertainment that allows viewers to feel good and turn off their brains. (Why turning off your brain is fun, I have no idea.)

  • JCRHoo

    And this demographic includes plenty of intelligent, accomplished people who think hard all day at work but find no joy in using their brains on their own time.

  • Steven James Snyder

    True, true. I’m all about the escapism – but when we’re talking about a NEWS network, and a NEWS show, shouldn’t there be some expectation of depth? Maybe a foot? Or even a couple inches?

    I don’t need everything to be Shakespeare here, but this show just didn’t even bother telling the full story. It’s Real American CliffsNotes

  • anon76

    Give it five minutes and it’ll evaporate right in front of your eyes.

    I believe the word you want is sublimate. I normally wouldn’t care, but you do work for the successor to a blog called nerdworld, so, you know, I encourage nerding it up.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    I missed the episode since I had to work. I wasn’t sure I was going to watch; I had a feeling it was going to be a disaster anyway. LL Cool J said they wanted to use an old interview of his. And Toby Keith said the same, Keith’s manager though reported the FOX didn’t even inform them of their intention to use the interview in such a way.

  • olivececile

    I think of this as the brussel sprouts problem – do you give people what they want or what they need? I think the news has an obligation to the latter, and shrinking standards on that end circle back into a shrinking public appetite for intelligent discourse, which leads to shrinking standards, natch.

    I get that this is Fox News, though, and this is probably part of the 19 hours a day of “opinion” they intersperse with their “news”, so maybe there should be no standards at all! Sigh.

  • beerbaron

    Yeah, but she looked hot.

  • Steven James Snyder

    actually, i meant evaporate. Though sublimate’s a wonderful word.

  • Steven James Snyder

    :)

    I should have mentioned: The new test for every big league newsperson

  • deodeosil

    Well, $arah gets to PRETEND she IS Katie Couric…………….

  • mjwilstein

    you could tell from the first 30 seconds of her debut show that this was not worth watching:
    http://bit.ly/deZgH7

  • laughwell

    Just plain boringgggggggggggggg—The hypes are getting old—along with Palin—–Turned it off—the set up was pure phoney!!!!

  • anon76

    No offense intended- just nerd-snark. I would still submit that “slick, smooth and wafer-thin” are properties of a solid, not a liquid, and so sublimate would be the more appropriate term compared with evaporate.

  • carpevis

    A slight incongruity here:
    .
    “Love her or hate her, we saw a side of Sarah Palin last night that must have caught observers at every end of the spectrum by surprise.”
    .
    Um… If someone hates her, why on earth would they watch her?
    .
    No one politically left of George Bush is going to watch her unless they receive some kind of compensation for their time. Being uncompensated for my time to watch that (insert derogatory adjective of your choice) individual, let along support the sponsors of Fox with my viewership, the event passed blessedly unwatched in my household.
    .
    And will continue to so pass in the future.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Why can’t that woman just go away?

  • drhoads4112

    She is not boring.

    Government pay, needs to be cut by 30% per
    $ 100,000.00, all government travel by air needs to be by commercial, except the President, no family or friends flies at tax payer expense, term limits, same health care as the public for all Federal employees, no retirement, no paid vacations for the President down, for the first year of office, balance the Federal Budget now, stop all Aid to other countries tell the Federal Budget is balanced, cut all tax payer help for the First lady.

    All Federal income taxes should be by a set percent.

  • http://gayconservative.org steveflesher

    You know, I don’t think the intention of the show is to state that everything is hunkey dorey. America is a shambles now. The only reason Americans play part in that was by trusting Barack Obama and foolishly casting their vote for someone simply because he had an Ivy League education.

    To be a great leader, one should have ample experience at knowing what it’s like to be an American. Americans overcome adversity, we suffer through hard times, and being that we are part of the most exceptional country on the planet that owes no countries any apologies whatsoever, we always beat those challenges and come out on top – better off and wiser, something an Ivy League education fails to provide its students.

    That’s precisely what this show is about. And while some (not all, but some) people may love focusing on the dire straits we are in as a country, I am thrilled that someone with Palin’s star power (which trumps Katie Couric’s anyday) is bringing to light specific examples of the kind of heroic and inspirational individuals fully responsible for turning this country’s cranks.

    Moreover; you’re going to see the intrinsic wisdom of Americans come out in November.

  • ztitans1

    I am curious if you liberals ever get tired of your own condescension. You should read your own posts and think about how they sound to others. I wonder how you will react this November when your party loses control of Congress.

  • skannel

    I read your comments, and I must say that although I agree with you when you say “Americans overcome adversity”, there are many things on which I strongly disagree:

    First of all, “America doesn’t owe any apologies to any country”, I hope you are not forgetting countries such as Viet-Nam, or more recently, what about going on war on false pretenses (namely Iraq) So far I haven’t heard anyone saying “after all, the French were right” (remember that stupid idea: let’s call those fatty things freedom fries) The States is way too far to be a universal example for all people to follow. This messianic view of the US must disappear in my opinion.

    Secondly, “trusting Barack Obama and foolishly casting their vote for someone simply because he had an Ivy League education” well, do you suggest that we vote somebody resembling George Bush again? have we learnt nothing about voting for someone who affirms that “God must be on our side”? Shall we erase 8 years of Katrina, Iraq, financial meltdown, diplomatic debacle, and international shame? Can we afford 4 years of “you betcha” politics? You talk about experience, but you’re proposing to follow someone whose sole international experience is the fact that she sees Russia from her backyard” or that she “reads all the newspapers there are”… please.

    I think that Obama is doing way better than his predecessor, albeit imperfect decisions he’s made until now.

  • http://gayconservative.org steveflesher

    Skannel,

    We were fighting communism in Vietnam and we owe no apologies for doing that. Regardless of collateral damage that liberals get all girly over, it saves much more damage in the long haul when one nation does not stand up to show the rest of the world precisely why it is we cannot keep illegal aliens away from our borders. Everyone deserves those rights, no matter what part of the world you live in. Americans owe no apologies for the involvements, none whatsoever, and that is why Barack Hussein Obama is the fast dropping approved-of President since 1953 according to GALLUP.

    Yes, George Bush was a fifty-times better president. Better at dealing with our foreign enemies, better at our economy (unemployment was no higher than five percent during his years and people actually HAD capital gains to report.).

    Iraq was a worthy mission. One so worthy that even Joe Biden now is claiming credit for the fruit its begininng to bear. So before you reach back to smack down GW, smack down your own VP for trying to take credit for a war that Bush laid all the groundwork for.

    Saddam is gone. No more rape rooms and torture chambers, women have rights like the ones here have, homosexuals are no longer at risk of being executed under law for being gay. Plus, in a post 9/11 world one of the craziest dictators ever has been killed/executed and as a result millions (yes, MILLIONS) of people in our lifetime will benefit, all while we acquired the much needed ally of an Arab-Israel in that god awful section of the world.

    Bush didn’t cause any Hurricanes. Liberals were only hysterical about it because they needed something to further their Bush derangement syndrome. When Obama admitted that he was doing the best he could with Haiti even though people went five full days with no food, water, and with broken bones, you did not see the American right reacting in a way that expected him to be a God. (Even though liberals believe he is).

    Yes, Bush was a better President. He warned Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and their respective banking committees about the dangers of sub-prime loans. Which party developed the Fair Housing Act? Which party does Carter belong to again? Which party thought it was a good idea to set up government entities to back loans with taxpayer money? Not the Republicans.

    You need to do your homework. Because clearly, the wisdom of Americans is rising above and beginning to scream louder than the anti-Bush and pro-socialist era occuring right now.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Fighting communism? Perhaps, but the South Vietnames didn’t want us in their country in the first place. For that we owe them an apology.

    When you say the economy was better under Bush, you must be forgetting that it was largely the deregulation that though it started under Reagan, it continued all the way through to Bush, and that deregulation is THE cause of the economic meltdown.

    Yes, Saddam is gone, dead and buried. He was a tyrrant. But even many people in Iraq say that life under Saddam was better than it is now. And the only ally we gained was the installation of a Bush pick for prime minister of Iraq. We all know how that is going.

    Nobody said Bush caused the hurricanes. But he couldn’t even be bothered to go down to New Orleans, except for a “fly over”. And then he told us all what a great job his FEMA director was doing. That would have been hilarious if it weren’t so sad. In contrast, aid to Haiti was swift, and yes there have been some problems getting the supplies to the people, but the US got them to Haiti. And we aren’t even responsible for those people. Humanitarian aid is wonderful, but don’t compare apples to oranges. New Orleans was apples; Haiti oranges.

    Um, a lot of loans are backed with tax payer money. Unless you went to college on a full scholarship, or paid for it yourself or your parents’ money, you probably got a student–backed with tax payer money. It wasn’t that loans were backed with tax payer money that was the problem. It was the selling of these mortage loans and darivatives that was the problem. Fanny and Freddie played that game but they weren’t the biggest players. Which is why so many other banks failed as well,.

    Obviously, you need to do your homework. Educate yourself via means other than Fox network.

  • http://gayconservative.org steveflesher

    Erie,

    Saying the south Vietnamese didn’t want us there is like saying all iraqis didn’t want us there. You illustrate your point by saying that “some” say it was nice under Saddam Hussein. Meanwhile, Biden is claiming credit for its successes. Meanwhile, millions of Iraqis rushed to the polls recently to partake in something we take for granted — and some even lost their lives because they instinctively prefer freedom. We gave them that groundwork and if some Saddam loyalists reject the idea of women and gays having a voice of their own, so be it. There will always be good and evil, even in the most functioning democracy. The idea is to allow the civility to have the reigning voice. We owe no apologies to Vietnam nor to the Iraqis. The liberal complaints about both wars are not reasons to back out. They merely illustrate why the phrase “war is hell!” was invented. George Bernard once said “Freedom incurs personal responsiblity, that is why so many men fear it.” This brings me to the next two points to respond to:

    Katrina: The red cross was there. The people WERE informed and warned. New Orleans had been 24 feet below sea level since the Louisiana purchase in 1803. Yet every president since then ignored the levies and miraculously it all fell on Bush’s watch. Just as years of ignoring Bin Laden and Muslim enemies fell on him. The local government (Blanco and Nagin) were the ones with the responsibilities to be on the spot. They were ineffective. The President should not go into a disaster area and hold their hand through it. Ask Mississippi’s Governor. The residents didn’t listen to the warnings. The mayor did nothing. The governor did nothing. And yet, Bush caused the chaos somehow.

    In Haiti, you must not have heard about the thousands that went for days with broken bones, without water and food, medical care, etc. Even Obama admitted it. Yet, you didn’t hear conservatives attacking him over it. Enormous tragedies occur and we simply do our best. In Haiti — like with New Orleans — you had unprepared governments. You do what you can, but you don’t use it as a political tool against your ideological enemies.

    The financial crisis was not caused by deregulation. Liberals love to encourage government intervention into the free market so they can control the amount of wealth created, to control the taxation — yet when the government’s dealings in the free market like with the setting up of Fannie and Freddie encourage irresponsible lending practices, I cannot blame those in the market for taking it for granted. They didn’t set up those policies, LIBERALS DID. Somehow encouraging folks to build up adequate credit, save up 20% to put down, make responsible and conservative spending decisions was too much to ask. So suddenly, everyone started getting 300K homes with no money down and with shady credit. No moral hazard whatsoever. What big government did is exploited the bad apples. The bad apples should have gotten scutiny as anyone else in the free market from the people, but the government acted as their cushion and irresponsibly allowed them to dig the mess deeper. You take away that cushion and the corruption would have stopped. Regulation accomplishes only one thing – wasting taxpayer dollars.

    Nobody deals with irresonsibility in the market better than an angry people.

    And a free market without bankruptcy is like religion without hell.

    The bailout (under Bush) resulted in a liberal win. The only times Republicans lose is when they stop being conservative. Then we got a stimulus which further rewarded failure. Now we have a health care disaster that will take mammograms away from women under 50, raise premiums and force free individuals to buy something or pay a fine.

    That’s not freedom. That’s not liberty. If it doesn’t get repealed, it WILL eventually be overturned by the Supreme Court. The biggest value to it all though is precisely why it took a full liberal government only a year to result in a Scott Brown victory and why you’re about to witness the biggest political slaughter in history come November.

    I’ll even out money on it. I predict the number of seats picked up by Democrats in 2006 and 2008 combined will be topped by Republicans in this single year.

  • laughwell

    Sounds like your brain is between your legs is that from drinking to much beer?

  • hdhines6797

    Yes, I agree with you I don’t think you think! Although, you are entitled to your own thoughts that doesn’t make them to be true. Similar, to Sarah your thought process seems to be on the lower register. Here’s a new bit of information for your limited thinking, not all voters voted for President Obama because he came from an Ivy League College. Sarah brings it up because she was such a terrible student and is insecure about who she is as a person. Deep down inside she wishes she could have attended an Ivy League School and accomplished 1/8 of what Obama did.

    You’re close to being right when you say, “To be a great leader, one should have ample experience at knowing what it’s like to be an American.” A better way to express this thought would be, To be a great leader, one should have ample experiences at knowing what it’s like to be an American. However, you were wrong when you concluded that Obama could not possibly be a good leader because he received an Ivy League education, because his school couldn’t have provided this for its students

    I wouldn’t be surprised if this blog were composed by Sarah, herself. Palin may be a novelty star power right now, but where will she be in the next 5-10 years? She’s a joke, a quitter, a proven poor excuse of a mother lacking leadership skills, and worst of all a greedy user getting rich off of innocent unsuspecting oppressed individuals.

    Yes we will see the wisdom of Americans come out in November. No Republicans!

    Read more: http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/04/02/sarah-palins-new-tv-show-polite-professional-and-oh-so-boring/?xid=rss-topstories#ixzz0kBhait9N

  • marktodd888

    Snyder seems so desperate to disparage Palin’s new show, I’m surprised that he didn’t mention the color of her dress as he threw in the kitchen sink. This is so typical [yawn] of the liberal press that follows those rules… you know, the PC rules that means more to them than the constitution or ten commandments?… those rules. How dare Palin mention someone that is black without mentioning his or her plight. You know, it IS written. Clearly, Palin wasn’t following the rule, hence she’s boring.

    At least the Olbermann name was thrown in for PC “BALANCE.” Did you know he’s a Bad, Bad, Boy because he has a ‘Worst Person in the World’ segment? Well he does, and that’s not nice… almost behaves like a CONSERVATIVE, at least in that one segment of his otherwise insightful show for discerning viewers.

    Moreover, Snyder’s liberal friends must have promised him controversy. Just like the time she said she could see Russia from her house, that she never said, but the liberal press has convinced each other that she really, really, did.

    I feel your pain and know how discouraging it must be not to find someone to hate as much as Bush, so Steven I prepared an outline for you the next time you are faced with a situation such as this:

    1) State Palin is a do-do head.
    2) Explain that if Bush was doing the show everything would not be honkey dorey (or in non-racist terms, “hunky dory”).
    3) Then fill with about 800 words of what Bush would have said during the show.

    That’s it! See how easy that is? You still have someone to hate and can speculate on the terrible stuff Bush would have said. This really isn’t rocket science Steven, and you will gain support from all 57 states, red, blue and green.

    I tend to think that most people got that she wasn’t a Geraldo Rivera or a Oliver North before the show aired.

    You’re welcome in advance,

    -Mark-

    PS: Pretty cool preview page… A+ to the web designers!

  • wpindygirl

    I think this show is absolutely perfect for Sarah Palin. FOX News, don’t change a thing! If you make the content one half inch deeper it will be waaay over her head, and you’ll have to get a new host.

    Keep up the good work!

    *wink*

blog comments powered by Disqus