Episode 216: Sunday Morning News Shows and the Problem With 'Agenda Setting' Court Stenography

Mar 12, 2025

In this engaging discussion, Julie Hollar, a senior analyst at Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR), shares her expertise on the role of Sunday morning news shows. She critiques their historical evolution and how they often favor established voices while neglecting dissenting perspectives, particularly on critical issues like climate change. Hollar highlights the corporate media bias that shapes public discourse and examines the performative nature of these shows, raising important questions about their relevance in today's media landscape.

Ask episode

AI Snips

Chapters

Transcript

Episode notes

INSIGHT

Government Echo Chamber

Sunday shows mainly host government officials and lawmakers, rarely including opposing voices.
This creates an echo chamber where the government primarily listens to itself, excluding outside perspectives.

ANECDOTE

Rumsfeld's Cave Map

After 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld presented a cartoonish map of Bin Laden's supposed cave on Meet the Press.
Tim Russert accepted this depiction uncritically, showcasing the show's lack of skepticism towards government claims.

ANECDOTE

Pre-Iraq War Coverage

Days before the Iraq War, Face the Nation presented the invasion as inevitable, focusing only on its process, not its justification.
Thomas Friedman predicted the war would be self-legitimating, reflecting the show's pro-war stance.

Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode

Get the app

"It's fair to call the deteriorating situation at the US/Mexican border a crisis," declared NBC's Meet the Press in 2021. "[CNN anchor Dana] Bash presses Netanyahu on Gaza death toll: 'Is Israel doing everything possible to... avoid civilian casualties?'," boasted CNN's State of the Union in 2023. "Principle over party… The latest high-profile Republican endorsement for Harris. And she got another Cheney endorsement," announced ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos.

These shows – ABC's This Week, NBC's Meet the Press, CNN's State of the Union, CBS's Face the Nation – are fixtures of a major genre of television: the Sunday morning news show. Since the 1940s, these weekly shows have featured panel interviews with government officials, lawmakers, candidates, and other political figures, usually from the US, as part of their stated missions to "tackle pressing issues," produce robust discourse on current events, and hold electeds and aspiring electeds accountable.

A relic from a different era, these Sunday News Show still loom large today. No, they don't have particularly high ratings, but much like the role editorial boards of major newspapers play, they matter to people who matter. They shape the agenda and tell lawmakers, advisers, CEOs and other people who wield power across our political, economic and social systems what to care about that week and how to analyze the current moment.

But to what extent do they serve any real journalistic function? To what extent do they actually ask difficult and challenging questions? Do the Sunday morning shows truly illuminate our political moments and interrogate the powerful, or essentially do the opposite? And what effect do these shows, known for "setting the agenda" in Washington, have on policymakers, news media, and the public?

On this episode, we discuss the history, ideology, and effects of Sunday morning news shows, look at how—despite their lofty claims to challenging journalism—they prioritize and revel in prestige and access, flattering existing power structures and further enabling reactionary policy.

Our guest is FAIR's Julie Hollar.