Wit & Attitude Quote by Neil Cavuto

Cavuto’s line lands like a shouted aside from inside the newsroom: half complaint, half diagnosis. The profanity isn’t ornamental; it’s a credibility cue. It signals impatience with the performance of outrage and, just as importantly, distance from it. He’s not asking for a philosophical treatise on significance. He’s asking why the machine keeps inflating the trivial until it crowds out the consequential.

The intent is to puncture agenda-setting by naming it. “We” is the giveaway. Cavuto doesn’t let the audience off as passive victims of media melodrama; he folds journalists, viewers, and the broader attention economy into the same culpable plural. That collectivizes the problem: this isn’t one bad headline or one foolish trend. It’s a habit. The phrase “big deal” is deliberately blunt, almost childish, which makes the indictment sharper: if the language we use for importance is this flimsy, maybe the standards behind it are, too.

Subtextually, it’s a critique of incentives. In cable news and social media alike, the smallest provocation can be monetized: conflict is sticky, nuance is slow, and boredom is death. The question implies a missing category of civic hygiene: the ability to downgrade. To decide, publicly and repeatedly, that some things deserve less oxygen.

Context matters because Cavuto operates in a media ecosystem that profits from urgency. The line reads as an on-air moment of self-awareness, but it also functions as brand positioning: the straight-talker calling out the circus while still standing under the same tent.