±±¾©Èü³µpk10

Every now and then you really see the point of multi-channel

television - when a minority channel suddenly stands out from all the

moving trivia to become essential viewing.

There are obvious occasions, such as Stevenage against Newcastle, and

for insomniacs, the Super Bowl. Emotional cases involving nannies in

jeopardy can seize the public imagination owing to multi-channel TV’s

ability to just clear the schedules and watch.

For the past ten days, and probably for many weeks to come, the best

place to find out about what is happening in the US, and whether the

skids are really under Slick Willie, was to tune in to the CBS news at

11.30pm on Sky News. Naturally, I have to declare an interest - a

hilarious interview with Kelvin MacKenzie can be seen at 12.30am on

Sunday on Sky News.

Last Monday’s CBS news was particular fun. The Monica Lewinsky story was

just starting to run, while America’s journalistic elite were in danger

of over-populating Cuba. In half an hour you got two fresh perspectives,

which must be something of a record for a single news programme.

There was the US view of Cuba, then the first obvious signs that Monica

plus possible perjury could add up to disaster for Clinton. Then the

word ’impeachment’ was mentioned for the first time and Dan Rather plus

assorted heavyweights all deserted the Pope in favour of a sleazy guy in

Washington.

Of course, the political implications are enormous: two more Democratic

years under President Al Gore, the man from the electronic

superhighway.

Ironically, the Internet is now playing a key role in unmasking the

scandal.

By airing sensitive information and almost unpublishable details for the

prudish US media, the Internet gives the main networks permission to

talk about unspeakable things. It is difficult to imagine the American

media talking about semen-encrusted dresses being taken away by the FBI

- did she keep them as souvenirs? - if the information hadn’t hit the

Web first.

There is another, more mundane, point. Isn’t there an opportunity for

the marketing community here? They think nothing about spending huge

amounts on a predictable event such as Stevenage or the Super Bowl.

Should a small taskforce be ready to increase ad spend around less

obvious events, such as evolving US political scandals? These ads will

undoubtedly attract a large audience of up-market males, all interested

in the future of democracy rather than reports of blow jobs.

Clearly we are not talking about airline ads around coverage of Jumbo

Jet disasters, but media departments should keep someone on their staff

who reads newspapers and can spot the emerging political soap.

Of course, not all multi-channel television crosses the Atlantic. Who

could have foretold that the Weather Channel would go belly-up in the

UK? Maybe the mistake was not having it in Norwegian.

Raymond Snoddy is Media Editor of The Times.