Jay Rosen (journalist, blogger at Huffington Post, and author of PressThink) wrote an insightful post this week that addresses a dirty little secret in the land of talk shows and broadcast tv:

“Look, the Sunday morning talk shows are broken.  As works of journalism they don’t work. ”

The Sunday morning talk show format is, I agree, tired.  The shows themselves (touting the same political analysts and politicians every week) are barely distinguishable from one another.  The same guests, the same questions from the hosts (who look similar, by the way – white, male, middle-aged), and the same canned answers from said analysts and politicians who are painfully partisan.

Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu) doesn’t mince words about the ineptitude of the Sunday talk show domain:

“The whole Sunday format has to be re-thought, or junked so the news divisions can start over with a new premise.”

So what, then, can the producers of the three Sunday political talk shows do to save their deflating model?  In between scathing criticisms of the shows and their hosts, Rosen outlines what he believes is a very reasonable solution:

I propose this modest little fix, first floated on Twitter in a post I sent out to Betsy Fischer, Executive Producer of Meet the Press, who never replies to anything I say.  “Sadly, you’re a one-way medium,” I said to Fischer, “but here’s an idea for ya: Fact check what your guests say on Sunday and run it online Wednesday.”

This is a great idea that can be executed in a number of ways to ensure that all of the shows can adopt the format without being too similar.  One of the biggest problems with Sunday political talk shows is that so many of the analysts (and especially the politicians) unwittingly (and sometimes intentionally) misconstrue the truth.  Having a debate based on misleading or erroneous facts is about as fruitful and satisfying as drinking non-alcoholic beer.  Feh!  Rosen is right in stating that the Sunday shows need a fact-checking system (one that is quick and social) — a way to call these guests out on their gross errors (particularly when it comes to policy debates).

This is something Rachael Maddow has mastered (and it’s the reason why each time she has been on one of the Sunday morning talk shows as a guest, that particular show’s ratings skyrocket through the roof).  Maddow spends a significant portion of her nightly political talk show debunking, calling out and tearing apart the inconsistencies, misrepresentations and out-right lies of any and everyone in the media (particularly politicians).  I find this segment of her show to be insightful and entertaining (yes, fact-checking can be entertaining!).

Rosen, unfortunately, doesn’t go far enough in his suggestion of possible fixes.  Quite the contrary, he seems to pull back with the following statement:

“It might change the dynamic a little bit.  Whoever was bullshitting us more could expect to hear about it from Meet the Press staff on Wednesday. ”

Sure, it might change the dynamic “a little bit”.  But by his own admission, the shows are weighed down by a stale format and need to be “rethought” or “junked” entirely.  He offers one part of the solution that will make the shows slightly better while ignoring the most important element of the equation.  He actually seems to miss the light altogether even though there are hints of it in his own summation:

“The beauty of this idea is that it turns the biggest weakness of political television–the fact that time is expensive, and so complicated distortions, or simple distortions about complicated matters, are rational tactics for advantage-seeking pols—into a kind of strength.  The format beckons them to evade, deny, elide, demagogue and confuse…. but then they pay for it later if they give into temptation and make that choice. ”

The Sunday morning political talk shows’ entire business model revolves around inviting on guests who are (by nature of their profession) evaders, deniers, demagogues and bastions of confusion.  If you want to change the Sunday morning talk show, start with its heart:  the guests.

My point:  too many Washington insiders rot the pot.

Asking these professional pundits and politicians to be truthful, clear, precise and thoughtful is like asking Tiger Woods to back away from a busty cocktail waitress.  It’s not going to happen.  It’s time to bring in new blood (not to replace the old Washington guard, but to debate them).  Besides, how many times can you see the same faces regurgitating the same political positions before you simply tune them out altogether?

If the Sunday morning shows stand any chance of surviving the next five years (let alone the next decade) they’re going to have to (1) incorporate us, the viewer, into the discussion, (2) feature guests who are outside of the Washington politics den of sin, and (3) incorporate Mr. Rosen’s suggestion of a social fact-checking system that incorporates the viewers to correct not just the guests, but the show host, its writers and its producers as well!

Or is it time to cancel the Sunday morning talk shows altogether?