MSNBC…Post 2012…

In a marathon must read, The New Yorker’s Kelefa Sanneh gets extensive access to MSNBC’s primetime talent in a story that focuses on MSNBC trying to find itself after the 2012 election. (sub req.)

The only thing I find fault with is Sanneh’s inference that MSNBC’s current incarnation can be traced back to 1999 when Hardball moved from CNBC to MSNBC. I disagree. I trace it to 2006 when Olbermann started really getting under O’Reilly’s skin.

Hayes is popular at MSNBC, but even people rooting for his success wonder how long he will be given to fix the show. Griffin has every incentive not to rush him: if Hayes fails, the decision to give him Schultz’s slot will seem like an unforced error, proof that the network still hasn’t figured out its new identity. One of the truisms of cable news is that a network depends on just a handful of big personalities: each “show” is essentially a single person, or a few people, sitting at a desk. When people talk about the dominance of Fox News, they are talking largely about the dominance of O’Reilly, without whom the network might never have dethroned CNN. In an odd way, this takes some pressure off Hayes, because it suggests that it would be futile for him to radically overhaul his program. Still, he says, he talks to Griffin every day, and meets with him once a week, to review focusgroup data.

Hayes wouldn’t say exactly what the data were telling him, but in recent months he has often adopted a more vehement tone, and this summer he occasionally indulged in one of Olbermann’s favorite pastimes: baiting his higherrated rival. One night, after playing a clip of Bill O’Reilly holding forth about crime and drugs and out-of-wedlock births in African-American communities, Hayes accused him of delivering a “cheap, crack-like high” to his “old, fearful white audience.” Another time, Hayes referred to House Republicans as “a bunch of really ideologically zealous teen-agers—teen-agers who have just discovered politics, and view politics as a means of self-expression.” Frowning into the camera, he tapped his desk to emphasize each word. “Get. It. Together,” he said, doing a pretty good impression of a traditional cable-news host.

Despite the ratings trouble, Maddow and Hayes have remained close; his handoff to her, at nine o’clock, is the warmest and often the funniest on the network. On June 10th, he made one conspicuous change to the show: after more than two months of open-collared broadcasts, he wore a tie. During the handoff, Maddow smiled mischievously and raised her eyebrows. “Chris,” she said, “am I allowed to congratulate you on the tie?”

He grinned and reddened slightly. “Yes,” he said. “I’m all grown up.”

54 Responses to “MSNBC…Post 2012…”

  1. Hopefully MSNBC will continue to search for identity and drift back to covering news.

  2. “When people talk about the dominance of Fox News, they are talking largely about the dominance of O’Reilly, without whom the network might never have dethroned CNN.”

    I can’t comment about the second part of the sentence because for a really long time we didn’t even have cable TV. But as to the first part it really isn’t just about O’Reilly at this point in time, is it? FOX does well in just about every time slot – day and night.

  3. Well, wasn’t that Hayes to Maddow story cute and cuddly. Adopting a more vehement tone, not so much. Name-calling, that’ll draw ’em in. Sigh.

  4. “Hayes wouldn’t say exactly what the (focus group) data were telling him…”

    The audience absolutely hates conservatives and wants them all to be painted at Neo-N@hzi racists. Not the biggest secret in the world.

  5. “as” not “at”.

  6. savefarris Says:

    “Hayes wouldn’t say exactly what the (focus group) data were telling him…”

    “Who are you?”

  7. “Someone find his mom”

  8. savefarris Says:

    MSNBC-related: Ezra Klein admits he’s a terrible journalist. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/23/al-gore-and-category-6-hurricanes/

    Apparently it’s now accepted practice at the WaPo (and by extension MSNBC) to report not on what a person said but what you THOUGHT they said.

  9. The channel’s insistence on referring to itself as “Theeee Place for Politics,” is a real turn-off. Hell, “Lean forward” was better than that.

  10. They still use both, and I like politics. I disagree that the “place for politics” tag dissuades politics junkies.

  11. savefarris Says:

    The problem with “The Place for Politics” is when you then turn around and bemoan the lack of bipartisanship and wonder aloud why everything today is so politicized.

    Uh … because of you?

  12. imnotblue Says:

    I dislike the “place for politics” slogan, because occasionally they discuss other things than politics. It shows they’re liars and can’t be trusted.

  13. If nobody is eating the food, I suppose you could blame the customers.

  14. Uh … because of you?

    Yes, the problem with politics is that I like to watch political chat on MSNBC. I’m sure the fact that you choose the same on another channel is completely different.

  15. Hopefully MSNBC will continue to search for identity and drift back to covering news.

    Not likely. There are too many sources for hard news nowadays and one of them is NBC News, so there’s no good reason for MSNBC to go back to being a news channel.

    “The Place For Politics” is an honest slogan. It’s primarily left-leaning but that’s ok, and those “other things” they cover still have a political component – because everything in life has some level of political value.

  16. savefarris Says:

    not “you” as in joe. “You” as in MSNBC.

    PS: In the past 8 years, I’ve watched FNC exactly once. Way to go, genius…

  17. Right, Farris. You’re a conservative who comments on a cable news blog, but never watches the conservative cable news channel. Got it.

  18. imnotblue Says:

    Totally disagree, Al.

    Sometimes they’ll talk about things that are entirely non-political. For example, Morning Joe talking about the VMA’s from yesterday. That’s not political at all.

    Because of their faulty slogan, I must conclude that MSNBC is a sham.

  19. I think what’s said during a morning show is irrelevant. If all they did was stuffy politics at that hour no one but the hard core pols would watch.

  20. savefarris Says:

    You’re a conservative who comments on a cable news blog, but never watches the conservative cable news channel.

    What can I say: I like yelling at the TV.

    Go ahead: take a look back at the archives. You’ll constantly see me commenting on “Did Ed/Al/Chris/other Chris/Rachel/Lawrence just say/do that?”, but the only time you can find me saying “I just saw this on FOX” was Election Night 2012 and Megyn Kelly’s walk of shame.

    YOU made the accusation. Prove me wrong, Einstein!

  21. I’ll take your word for it, Farris, but you’re pretty good at reproducing FNC talking points without actually watching The Mothership. You must be a genius, Einstein!

  22. Nixon - niila niihpikiiookani Says:

    I’ve been known to moon the TV. I’ve got a lot of problems.

  23. “I’ll take your word for it, Farris, but you’re pretty good at reproducing FNC talking points without actually watching The Mothership. You must be a genius, Einstein!”

    “farris is great at research Joe, but only on right wing blogs. You can comment here as much as you like and never watch cable TV. Anything interesting is discussed on the blogs. Trouble is right wing and to some extent left blogs are fact free zones. 🙂

  24. Miley Cyrus was the top story on Morning Joe – meanwhile all hell is breaking loose in Syria and… simply put, we are going to war in some capacity. The Place for Politics my ass.

    I used to love MSNBC until Al Jazeera launched and made everyone else look like a cheap comic book.

  25. imnotblue Says:

    How is it possible, Al, to have a network that makes such a definitive statement like, “the place for politics,” and not uphold that slogan 100% of the time?

    /attempting even more overt sarcasm

  26. According to Johnny $, MediaBuzz with Howard Kurtz will debut on 9/8 at 11 a.m.

  27. ^ There ya go, Blue. I enjoyed the subtle sarcasm, but I can see how some folks checking the internets while busy with other things may not have picked it up. 😉

  28. I though it pretty obvious, but I’m working on my Einstein Genius merit badge.

  29. What a terrible name, ‘MediaBuzz’.

  30. Picked by a committee including Ben Smith.

  31. Wasn’t it Kurtz who basically invented “Reliable Sources”? He should have found a way to own the rights to it, so when he moved to go to another network, he could still use it. I would think that’s fair, especially since he was the host since its inception.

    Kind of like “Countdown with Keith Olbermann”, which Olbermann took to Current, I would think it’s a good way to maintain your brand.

  32. “How is it possible, Al, to have a network that makes such a definitive statement like, “the place for politics,” and not uphold that slogan 100% of the time?”

    FNC slogan is ‘fair and balanced’ Need I say more. 🙂

  33. After bleating for a week about Hardball moving to 7 without a single mention of Ed Schultz, Chrissy taped the stupid thing. Nice.

    Btw, Ed gave Matthews a nice, heartfelt promo at the end of his show tonight.

  34. Chrissy Tinglelegs is a bloviating moron.

  35. What hacked you off, Andy?

  36. savefarris Says:

    RE: Matthews on tape

    Did I call it or did I call it?

    Early nominee for the NOT file: News Anchors incorporating the word “twerk”.

  37. Nixon - niila niihpikiiookani Says:

    “How is it possible, Al, to have a network that makes such a definitive statement like, “the place for politics,” and not uphold that slogan 100% of the time?”

    FNC slogan is ‘fair and balanced’ Need I say more.

    For what it’s worth, I’m fairly unbalanced.

  38. Kevin E., I think Bernard Kalb founded Reliable Sources, not Kurtz.

  39. The Place for Nodding.

    Hunter Schwarz ‏@hunterschwarz
    “Conservatives are far less visible on MSNBC than liberals are on Fox News” MSNBC: Must-agree TV http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/08/26/msnbc-must-agree-tv/

  40. Wemple is correct: FNC does the same sorta-liberals thing as MSNBC with the sorta-conservatives. The headline is quite misleading. I’ve watched a lot of FNC, and when liberals are presented they tend to be comically “fair”, or completely drowned out. Or both.

    Both networks know their viewers, and both know neither is particularly interested in a full-blown defense of the opposition.

  41. I don’t think Sally Kohn or Alan Colmes count as “sorta” liberals. Of a type who won’t change anyone’s mind, perhaps. Not that anyone watches either net to have their mind changed.

  42. Nixon - niila niihpikiiookani Says:

    Alan Colmes is very annoying. He would be no matter what his politics.
    Sally Kohn, on the other hand, comes across as a reasonable person. I may seldom agree with her, but she presents her point of view very well. Others on both sides of the aisle could learn from her.

  43. I didn’t say every lib on FNC is “sorta”. Neither is every conservative on MSNBC. My point is that Fox gives much time to folks like Kirsten Powers and Juan Williams, who like to present their ‘independent’ bonafides by criticizing the left. Or they bring on Tamara Holder to be ridiculed.

  44. Yeah, the way elements at Fox treat Tamara Holder pretty much negates anything on MS.

  45. Olbermann back tonight.

  46. I don’t think Kirsten Powers plays to an audience. I think she is who she is. She definitely goes after O’Reilly and others from time to time.

  47. I think Kirsten can be relied upon to attack liberals fairly often, and was hired because of it. I didn’t say she was dishonest in her views, anymore than Steve Schmidt, Michael Steele or Nicole Wallace are.

  48. Kirsten says something liberal on occassion and even then that’s when she’s attacking Democrats and President Obama. She sold out a long time ago.

  49. Nah, she’s just an impressive liberal with a mind of her own. Pretty impressive one at that.

  50. If Kirsten was reliably liberal, you wouldn’t be impressed. That’s the point. Liberals think Nicole Wallace is swell, too..

  51. Nah, she’s just an impressive liberal with a mind of her own. Pretty impressive one at that.

    Conservatives like “liberals” like Kirsten Powers because they’re more critical of Democrats than Republicans. And liberals like “conservatives” like Joe Scarborough and Nicolle Wallace because they’re more critical of Republicans than Democrats.

    How often do Democrats praise Chris Christie? Then the second he does something they don’t like, they slam him relentlessly. Same with Republicans when they praise someone like Max Baucus when he says something they like.

    The second Kirsten Powers says something semi-liberal, Megyn Kelly will shout her down, Hannity will scream over top of her, other guests on the network will disrespect her and FNC viewers will send her tweets saying things about her that I wouldn’t even dare say about Miley Cyrus.

    It’s the exact same shtick MSNBC has with people like Joe Scarborough, Steve Schmidt, Abby Huntsman, Nicolle Wallace and Michael Steele.

    Difference is, Scarborough is actually a Conservative. Ten years ago, he would’ve been described as “far-right”. Now, even he’s considered a “left liberal” by Republicans. Same thing with liberals and Juan Williams.

    That’s how polarized we are as a country.

  52. I love Kirsten Powers… but she used to date Anthony Weiner and claims he was a great guy… you have to wonder about her judgement in all things…

  53. Or Hillary Clinton for that matter. Her chief adviser married Weiner. There’s judgement for you, Tom.

Leave a comment