MSNBC’s “news avoidance” issues?
The Wrap’s Frankie Stone rips MSNBC with a snarkily laced piece on the network’s news operation…and in my opinion incorrectly singles out MSNBC PR for criticism…
First, the most obvious: After the first few times when news viewers discover a network isn’t covering the moment’s big story, it’s tough to bring them back.
I have recent first-hand experience: While spending Christmas with my parents, avid TV news junkies with non-denominational viewing habits, intently following the terrorism situation, not one of us thought to switch over to MSNBC.
As viewers vanish, so do advertisers. But newsmakers do too. What official, expert or politician wants to appear on newscasts that audiences don’t know exist? Most networks wage quiet PR campaigns to woo such bookings to their shows. A series of decisions such as last week’s can set these efforts ’way back.
And a big news story is the single best place for networks to promote their stars. One reason the top anchors are paid so well is because they are, in essence, firemen: on hand mainly for showing off their incredible skills when the big fire erupts. No coverage? No starmaking.
Bad PR trickles down to broader employee relations. It’s tough for journalists to stay competitive or even enthusiastic when they’re not called in for the breaking big ones. It’s worse when they see what should be their airtime turned over to the residents of a Tennessee women’s prison, the 40th repeat of the Jeffrey Dahmer interview or “The Vampire Killings,” a documentary where “a self-described leader of a vampire cult murders a couple in Florida” (coming Saturday, Jan. 2 at 3 p.m. on MSNBC).
One of a publicist’s toughest tasks is convincing management that the best spin in the world can’t erase bad executive judgment.
PR doesn’t operate in a vacuum. PR is a reflection of the thinking of management. Has anyone read a story where PR goes off the reservation and departs from the official “company line”? I don’t think so. Anyone who does that gets fired. So blaming MSNBC PR for putting out a story that nobody buys, particularly in this industry where such incidents happen more often on all the networks than one would like to believe, is like blaming a quarterback for running a bad play the coach called. It’s the coach’s fault the play was run.
December 31, 2009 at 7:47 am
Well it’s true – who in their right mind would turn to MSNBC for breaking news, especially during a weekend or holiday?
As a dittohead, I have been looking anywhere for updates on Rush’s condition, and went to MSNBC (as a last resort) at 5 a.m., as CNN and FNC were both in taped programming. While MSNBC was live (for once), they didn’t even mention El Rushbo!
But the writer of the article is certainly justified in stating that people typically don’t go to MSNBC for breaking news. It’s becoming a niche network, oriented solely for those politically aligned toward the left.
December 31, 2009 at 10:00 am
^And those with erotic prison fantasies.
December 31, 2009 at 10:09 am
I was hoping Comcast would rehabilitate MSNBC. It’s under utilized in a business sense. It works fine, if it’s meant not to build a viewership or show a profit.
December 31, 2009 at 3:47 pm
“I was hoping Comcast would rehabilitate MSNBC.”
They haven’t even officially purchased them… its still another year or so until the deal goes through and is finalized. But, still, MSNBC has rehabilitated itself by moving Ratigan to 1pm and putting more news in morning/daytime hours.
December 31, 2009 at 4:27 pm
^Yeah, but they still dragged Tiger Woods out at 2pm est today. Kiss MSNBC goodbye ’til Monday.
December 31, 2009 at 4:45 pm
5pm est. That ‘new math’ is killing me..
January 1, 2010 at 8:30 am
joeremi Says:
^Yeah, but they still dragged Tiger Woods out at 2pm est today. Kiss MSNBC goodbye ’til Monday.
Yes the network needs attention, they need more news on the weekend, even if it is an HLN format.