Feb 28, 2016 4 min read

You no doubt already know the outcome of Sunday’s Academy Awards. I’m assuming it was “Revenant”-ial.

That’s unfortunate. Despite its many admirable qualities, especially in the cinematography arena, “The Revenant” was no “Spotlight.” Not even close. If, indeed, “Revenant” was the choice for best picture, in the not-too-distant future, many will wonder what the Academy was thinking; as with the feel-good win of “Shakespeare in Love” over “Saving Private Ryan,” it will prompt raised eyebrows, scratching of heads or demands for a new voting system.

Truth be told, the academy needs much more than recognition of minorities; it needs to recognize the attributes of an outstanding movie.

One of the absurd – but nonetheless accurate – criticisms of “Spotlight” was that it played too much like a TV drama. In other words, it didn’t have explosions, special effects or, um, attacking bears.

May I suggest, then, we shift the spotlight to “Chicago News.”

It’s no secret NBC is considering adding a fourth installment to its successful “Chicago Fire,” “Chicago P.D.” and “Chicago Med” series. Conventional wisdom has “Chicago Law” making its bow this fall. I get that. The network thrived when its “Law and Order” variations dominated it schedule. But why be redundant?

Television could use a compelling newsroom drama, and “Supergirl” doesn’t qualify. Nor did “Everyone Loves Raymond,” “The Odd Couple” or a few other past shows in which a lead character supposedly worked at a newspaper but spent the vast majority of his time otherwise occupied.

“Lou Grant” was a notable exception, and I vaguely remember a Robert Young series, “Window on Main Street,” that featured a newsroom set. It’s understandable, I suppose, that newsroom-focused series have been few and far between.

There’s little excitement in watching someone write an obituary, design a page layout or agonize over an editorial piece. That’s why TV versions of newsroom series too often turned reporters into rogue sleuths or unofficial policemen., a preposterous turn of events that prompted newspaper TV reviewers to immediately cry “foul.”

But thanks to the new “crossover” trend, “Chicago News” would have no such issue. It has the men and woman of “Chicago Fire,” “Chicago P.D.” and “Chicago Med” to provide storylines on which “Chicago News” could then act.

“Chicago Fire” last week continued its story arc on a corrupt politician and focused on a child custody issue as well. Both are prime fodder for a newsroom team investigation.

Likewise, on “Chicago Med.” There are currently a myriad intertwining plotlines about a “no resuscitate” violation and a doctor who, on the flipside, followed a patient’s wishes, knowing full well it meant the patient’s death.

Both are ripe for a reporter’s insight.. And, of course, just about everything on “Chicago P.D.” demands a closer look, including the police department.

The crossover episode potential is enormous, and the current “Chicago” shows so far have an excellent – and unforced – way of intertwining characters, plotlines and sets.

The biggest objection to such a “Chicago News” series, however, may be newspapers, themselves. As correctly depicted in “Spotlight,” newspaper writing, reporting and editing are not glamorous jobs. And today’s newspapers, most of which could never afford a “Spotlight” team, are clearly just a sliver on the media spectrum for the post-baby boomer generation.

Still, television has always adhered to a rose-colored- glasses perception of life. It’s doubtful that any police or fire department or medical staff has such a high percentage of handsome men and women in such a young age bracket. (One sometimes thinks the first name of most doctors on “Chicago Med” is “Doogie.”) I’d fully expect more than half of the staff of a proposed “Chicago News” to be beautiful, under 30 and live in luxury apartments.

Any talk of declining circulation or finance issues would be relegated to subplots. I can live with that.

If the spotlight remains trained on the methodical task of investigation, complete with a few moments of epiphany, it will be worthwhile entertainment.

And, hey, if it draws a few young people back to reading a newspaper, so much the better.