"Our emphasis on political coverage from the day we were born here was well-founded, and we believe there were opportunities there that we could do it in a more interesting, appealing and balanced way"
About this Quote
Hume is doing what veteran journalists do when they want to sound both principled and insurgent: he frames a business decision as a civic mission. “From the day we were born” casts political coverage as origin story, not strategy. It’s a founding myth designed to justify attention, influence, and audience capture as if they were simply the natural outgrowth of institutional DNA.
The key word is “opportunities.” In newsroom language, that means market gaps: dissatisfaction with existing outlets, a hungry audience, and a chance to differentiate. Hume’s claim that political news could be done “more interesting, appealing and balanced” is a rhetorical hat trick. “Interesting” and “appealing” signal that politics is being treated as narrative and entertainment - conflict, personalities, stakes - not just policy. That’s not inherently corrupt; it’s how mass audiences engage. But it also hints at the incentives that can turn governance into sport.
“Balanced” is the most loaded term here. It’s less a measurable standard than a cultural password, especially in modern American media wars. It implies that prevailing coverage was tilted, that neutrality is being restored, and that the speaker’s platform is the corrective. Subtext: we can be trusted because we’re not like them. The brilliance of the phrasing is its double appeal: it flatters viewers who feel underserved and reassures advertisers and elites that this is responsible journalism, not agitation.
Context matters: coming from a prominent broadcast journalist associated with politically inflected cable news, the line reads as both aspiration and brand positioning - a promise that the product will feel fair while remaining emotionally sticky.
The key word is “opportunities.” In newsroom language, that means market gaps: dissatisfaction with existing outlets, a hungry audience, and a chance to differentiate. Hume’s claim that political news could be done “more interesting, appealing and balanced” is a rhetorical hat trick. “Interesting” and “appealing” signal that politics is being treated as narrative and entertainment - conflict, personalities, stakes - not just policy. That’s not inherently corrupt; it’s how mass audiences engage. But it also hints at the incentives that can turn governance into sport.
“Balanced” is the most loaded term here. It’s less a measurable standard than a cultural password, especially in modern American media wars. It implies that prevailing coverage was tilted, that neutrality is being restored, and that the speaker’s platform is the corrective. Subtext: we can be trusted because we’re not like them. The brilliance of the phrasing is its double appeal: it flatters viewers who feel underserved and reassures advertisers and elites that this is responsible journalism, not agitation.
Context matters: coming from a prominent broadcast journalist associated with politically inflected cable news, the line reads as both aspiration and brand positioning - a promise that the product will feel fair while remaining emotionally sticky.
Quote Details
| Topic | Vision & Strategy |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Brit
Add to List

