Its a discussion over CNN and something that even I came to realize back in March and April of this year (2017).
Hour by hour.....CNN will march out some discussion panel of 'experts' who have the job of dumping upon anything that relates to President Trump. For a few weeks, they might have carried some interest with people....but after a full month of this type of journalism....most viewers eventually lose interest. If the group would have gone and analyzed forty different political people every day....from US Senators....to British or German foreign ministers....it might have carried on some public interest. But they didn't go by that angle.
Here's the thing which Scott points out, and I totally agree upon....it's the cheapest method to run some news network.
You gather and run some marginalized news network with reporters and journalists based around the world....then you take your prime-time hours....mid-morning....then 6PM to 9PM, and you have twenty-odd 'experts' who wander in.....chat for most of an hour.....pause for an hour, then repeat with another group of experts. Money-wise, it's the best way to fill up the time-slot.
If the experts were smart....they'd start to demand more money, and make this whole CNN-agenda method less-affordable....but they never seem to be that smart....or CNN is smart enough to keep finding new 'experts' hanging off various parts of the journalism 'tree'.
The problem I see....long-term....no one has ever had this type of business plan developed and worked it for possibly eight years. So in effect, we are stuck having to imagine four hours a day.....seven days a week....365 days a year....times eight years. 11,648 hours of anti-Trump talk?
You can imagine some historians sitting there in the year 2217...reviewing this vast collection of eleven-thousand hours of anti-Trump talk and trying to come to some conclusion how this was sponsored....and kept going....week after week, and month after month.
That much worthless chatter? Oddly, they probably will sit down and note for historical purposes....that the word "Hitler" was mentioned at least 94,288 times over the eleven-thousand hours.
Scott Adams is correct in his analysis, but it won't really change much of anything.