

The JFK assassination was a landmark event in TV news history.

By Dr. Michael J. Socolow
Associate Professor of Communication and Journalism
University of Maine
Introduction
In journalism, bad news sells. โIf it bleeds, it leadsโ is a famous industry catchphrase, which explains whyย violent crime,ย war and terrorism, andย natural disastersย are ubiquitous on TV news.
The fact that journalists and their employers make money from troubling events is something researchers rarely explore. But even if it seems distasteful, the link between negative news and profit is important to understand. Asย a media historian, I think studyingย this topicย can shed light onย the forcesย thatย shape contemporary journalism.
The assassination of John F. Kennedy 60 years ago offers a case study. After a gunman killed the president, television news offered wall-to-wall, nonstop coverage at considerable cost to the networks. This earned TV news a reputation for public-spiritedness that lasted decades.
This reputation โ which may seem surprising now but was widely accepted at the time โ obscured the fact that TV news would soon become enormously profitable. Those profits are due in part because awful news attracts big audiences โ which remains the case today.
The JFK Assassination Made Americans Turn to TV News
Shortly after Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, the TV networks demonstrated their sensitivity to the tragedy by canceling commercials andย devoting all their airtime to the storyย for several days. CBS President Frank Stanton would later call it โthe longest uninterrupted story in the history of television.โ At one point, 93% of all U.S. TVs were tuned into the coverage.

Estimates vary, but the networksโ decision to forgo adsย may have cost them as much as US$19 millionย โ which is $191 million in 2023 dollars.
For decades, the networks presented their assassination coverage asย the epitome of public service. And over and over, network executives and journalists argued that TV news was uniquely protected from the economic pressures found elsewhere in broadcasting.
TV news in the early 1960s was โthe loss leader that permitted NBC, CBS and ABC to justify the enormous profits made by their entertainment divisions,โ ABC Newsโย Ted Koppel reminiscedย in The Washington Post in 2010. He added, โIt never occurred to the network brass that news programming could be profitable.โ
The public-service narrative that took root in November 1963 ignored the fact that the huge audiences turning to TV news for information and comfort would soon become very lucrative.
How TV News Became a Money Machine
Only two months before Kennedyโs assassination, in September 1963, the networks expanded their evening newscasts to 30 minutes. They had previously been 15 minutes, offering little more than headlines. The expanded newscastsย sold out all their advertising opportunitiesย immediately, as television news drew the predictable daily mass audiences that sponsors craved.
The Kennedy assassination coverage, combined with the expanded newscasts, significantly increased the commercial value of TV news. Throughout the 1960s, broadcast journalism began to mature into the most lucrative genre of programming on American television.
By the 1965-1966 television season, NBCโs โThe Huntley-Brinkley Reportโย generated $27 million in advertising a year, making it the networkโs most lucrative program โ out-earning even โBonanza,โ the top entertainment show. โThe CBS Evening Newsโ wasย drawing in $25.5 millionย in advertising, making it the second-most profitable program on U.S. television.
Around this time, networks were telling regulators that they had sacrificed millions of dollars for public service through journalism. For example,ย in 1965 testimonyย before the Federal Communications Commission, executives from ABC, CBS and NBC said their news divisions had loftier motives than simply making money.
But they were making money, and lots of it. By 1969, โHuntley-Brinkleyโ wasย earning $34 million in advertisingย on a production budget of $7.2 million, making the program โ according to Fortune magazine โ โthe biggest source of revenue that the N.B.C. network has โ bigger than โLaugh-Inโ or โThe Dean Martin Show.โโ A decade earlier, โHuntley-Brinkleyโ had been making just $8 million in ad and sponsorship revenue.

The networks didnโt tout their profits, though. Instead, theyย continually promoted their effortsย covering the Vietnam War, civil unrest and the assassinations of the 1960s as service in the public interest. They also claimed that news production cost them millions, and theyย hid ad revenuesย accrued by news programming elsewhere in their corporate budgets. Doing this gave them a leg up on regulatory privileges, such as station license renewals.
The Birth of Modern TV News
Ultimately, the chaotic, cacophonous and confusing decade of the 1960s would end up launching the hyper-commercial media world we live in today. Chasing sensational investigative stories, such as Watergate and the Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scandal, wouldย generate higher ratingsย andย more advertising revenue, and turn broadcast journalists into national celebrities.
The original values animating network broadcast journalism at its inception would surrender to more lucrative formats. โ60 Minutesโ โ a CBS News production โ eventually became the most valuable network-owned programming propertyย in the history of American television, and by the 1980s almost every local news station hadย launched its ownย โI-Teamโ investigations group.
Eventually, the professionalism that drew audiences to TV news in the wake of the Kennedy assassination in 1963 would be supplanted by audience growth strategiesย sold by TV news consultants. Audience analytics, minute-by-minute engagement metrics and Q-scores calibrating anchor โlikabilityโ wouldย standardize formats and homogenize newsgatheringย in the drive to maximize profits.
Yet through the decades, one constant remains: Bad news sells. Itโs a media-industry truism whether weโd like to study it or not, and the news broadcasts airing today, 60 years after the events of November 1963, prove it.
Originally published by The Conversation, 11.20.2023, under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution/No derivatives license.


