Via the NYT: MSNBC Takes Incendiary Hosts From Anchor Seat
MSNBC tried a bold experiment this year by putting two politically incendiary hosts, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, in the anchor chair to lead the cable news channel’s coverage of the election.
That experiment appears to be over.
I know why MSNBC tried it, as the name of the game is ratings, and being different sometimes gets ratings. In truth, MSNBC was clearly trying to replicate Fox News’ formula, which is to appeal to a specific ideological block in the viewing audience. However, I think they miscalculated in two ways. First, Fox News came into the mix to target a demographic that was not represented in the coverage of news (and one that was rather self-conscious about its exclusion–a perception that has not gone away, if one notes the current McCain strategy vis-à-vis the media). Second, it is one thing so have hosts who are thought (or known) to have partisan preferences and then again another to have known commentators in charge of anchoring a news event.
One wonders, too, if the loss of Tim Russert didn’t exacerbate the situation, as he lent a certain gravitas to the MSNBC broadcasts that have been missing since his death, and one presumes he asserted significant influence behind the cameras as well. The MSNBC coverage (and I tend to flip among the three cable new providers during events) has seemed to become more childish at times in Russert’s absence, with the well-publicized sniping event between Olbermann and Jor Scaraborough being a prime example.1
What’s especially interesting is that the situation appears to be creating tension between NBC and MSNBC, even though the on-air distinction between the two have been steadily blurring for some time.
Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams, the past and present anchors of “NBC Nightly News,” have told friends and colleagues that they are finding it tougher and tougher to defend the cable arm of the news division, even while they anchored daytime hours of convention coverage on MSNBC and contributed commentary each evening.
If anything, this is an interesting turn of events, given the role that The Media was accorded by the RNC last week and that will be amplified by the McCain campaign going forward.
Sphere: Related Content- If you are unfamiliar, it is mentioned in the article. [↩]
September 8th, 2008 at 10:13 am
I have to disagree with your take on this.
Keith Olbermann was the canary in MSNBC/NBC’s decimated coal mine.
Until he came along, both of their ratings and popularity were terrible. Williams and Brokaw may have appealed to their corporate heads but not to the public. Not long ago NBC thought of dumping Williams, his ratings were so poor.
Only Shuster and Olbermann give to you like it is in that syndicate -Olbermann was distinctly of the Left and Shuster was the bi-partisan young cub -which upset Matthews and Scarborough’s tabloid and partisan rants. Those two report precisely on the stories they’re their other heads dictate. Scarborough is an obvious Republican partisan - where Matthews pays his way by simply making trouble -he likes to insult the Left as often as possible.
A great example of precisely what I mean was in his reporting of Rolling Stone Magazine putting Obama, a political figure, on it’s cover - an historic first for them . ‘Someone’ in a decision making role ordered the sifting through of all previous covers to find two of the most incendiary ones. They found the nude John Lennon cover and the semi-nude Janet Jackson, with just hand covering the breasts.
Matthews then starts off his ‘news’ show with an offended tone by twisting a rather normal story into this:
“The magazine that brought you this [insert one nude photo here] and this [insert other nude photo here], now brings you this [insert Obama cover here].”
Matthew entire demeanor was solely to impugn and downgrade the value of the cover and Obama, for even allowing himself to be put there.
That wasn’t journalism that was as hard a core hit piece as you can get.
It was Olbermann they had to get rid of Steven. The heads of our media outlets are hard liners, first and foremost.
For them “It’s a hardliner in the White House- or Bust.”
September 8th, 2008 at 10:56 am
I agree that Olbermann has been, overall, good for MSNBC.
I think that the issue is his anchoring, which could put off more casual viewers.
It isn’t like Olbermann is going away-apparently he and Matthews will featured on the election coverage, just not anchoring it.
And Matthews has been pretty pro-Obama as well, to be fair.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Consummate BS artists, whose diminished roles are well-deserved.
September 9th, 2008 at 4:40 am
both the original post and the response make good points, but i don’t see them as mutually exclusive.