MSNBC: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Vaulted)

[NewDigs]

I woke up this morning to hate-watch Morning Joe and was annoyed to find Brian Williams breathlessly narrating the terror porn of the Brussels bombings.

He has no business doing this work. Credibility is a precious currency in journalism and he blew all of his. He is fabulously wealthy and could comfortably retire. His need to come back to do this work after that humiliating incident indicates some sort of perverted need to be on television.

And 10 hours later he is still on. ugh.

I changed channels this morning when his ums and ers and uhs got to me.

[maraleia]

I've completely stopped watching this channel except for Democratic debates because I can't stand the direction it's going. For breaking news I've turned to CNN because I Brian Williams doesn't deserve to have any viewers after what he pulled with the lying he did. Not even Rachel, Lawrence and Chris can keep me tuned in.

[Padma]

Giving Williams his due, his coverage -did- make a little news yesterday when after the segment on Cuba he thanked "communist" Gene Robinson (corrected of course, but I loved that he looked a lot less competent than Thomas Roberts and Kate Snow, whom he had bumped).

[WendyCR72]

I know the move to MSNBC is supposed to be punishment for Brian Williams, but the fact that he is still on TV at all to stroke his ego tells me that "punishment" is all but just code for a slap on the wrist, since BW still gets exposure.

 

I can only hope once this so-called penalty is done, he does not get to go back to NBC Nightly News: I think Lester Holt is doing a great job and should not be used as a stop gap guy for such a narcissistic jackass. And because Holt seems like an actual professional journalist and not just a frustrated "entertainer".

[Medicine Crow]

I know the move to MSNBC is supposed to be punishment for Brian Williams, but the fact that he is still on TV at all to stroke his ego tells me that "punishment" is all but just code for a slap on the wrist, since BW still gets exposure.

 

I can only hope once this so-called penalty is done, he does not get to go back to NBC Nightly News: I think Lester Holt is doing a great job and should not be used as a stop gap guy for such a narcissistic jackass. And because Holt seems like an actual professional journalist and not just a frustrated "entertainer".

Couldn't agree more!!!

[Jaded]

I wonder if NBC  (Comcast) didn't want to buy him out of his contract and thought that putting Bribri on MSNBC might humble him a bit? If that's what went on then it seems to have backfired. I think there'd be too much outcry if they tried to replace Lester Holt with Bribri. 

Sorry for repeating some of what had been said already.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Jaded

[Lexx]

Is it just me, or is Tweety on a LOT more now?  As someone who can't stand the guy, this is not a good development.

[maraleia]

Is it just me, or is Tweety on a LOT more now?  As someone who can't stand the guy, this is not a good development.

Stop watching...they will only learn if they lose viewers.

[jjj]

I know BW has been on the air off and on for over twelve hours, BUT cm'on:

 

Just now, as the polls closed in Arizona, Brian W showed up at the end of Rachel's show for the Big Reveal about the primary. He droned for a minute, then said "now, we can see the special election title........" [no change in the view, as Rachel smiles gamely], BW: "and NOW......." [ten seconds seems like an eternity] Finally, the "PROJECTION 2015" title shows up and he intones "Donald Trump and Ted Cruz"........."TOO CLOSE TO CALL" the screen tells us and him.   BW:  "Let's go to the Democratic side"  and the screen tells us and him "TOO CLOSE TO CALL". 

 

So, that was a LOT of buildup to nothing. 

[Jaded]

I tried tuning in after NCIS: New Orleans because I couldn't find anything else I wanted to watch. I didn't think Bribri would be on since he had been on so much today already. I was wrong so as soon as I saw his face and Rachel kind of giving him the stink eye I tuned out. Is he living in the studios now? 

[jjj]

Brian, just because you were not up at 4:00 AM does not mean the rest of us were sleeping.  He just intoned, "No. One. Knew. when this day dawned on the East Coast, the tragedy that would occur overseas." 

 

In fact, MSNBC started its breaking news coverage exactly at 4:00 AM, well before dawn, because I was waiting to watch the start of Rachel's show in rerun, but it went to breaking news exactly then.  Brian W showed up about 2-3 hours later (after dawn).  They were providing excellent impromptu coverage up to that point. 

 

How on earth did Chris Hayes get to Brussels by this hour (10:30 PM EDT)?  He did look weighed down, but of course the events would do that even without the sleep deprivation. 

[shok]

And Hillary and Trump don't give the same speech/interview every time??? ("We're gonna make American great again." "I'm a progressive who knows how to get things done.") If the criteria was only showing a politician speak when they say something new, we would never hear from any of them again.

 

 

Actually, no. Hillary changes hers up all the time and inserts references to current events. Sure she's got a few of the same mottos like 'not building walls but breaking down barriers' and such but she's got a ton of things to say about various subjects.

 

Trump, well, he doesn't actually give a speech. He just opens his piehole and out flows a stream of consciousness that's at about the level of an eleven year old. I listened to about twenty minutes of an editorial board meeting interview he had with the Washington Post the other day and it was astonishing how little he says while talking for 10 straight minutes regardless of what the question that is posed to him.

 

Sanders is a bit like Trump in that he doesn't have much in the way of solutions for current day problems besides 'revolution' although he certainly has some cogent points to make in his speeches but when his audience is repeating what he's going to say word-for-word before he says it, making a game of knowing his lines and what is coming ahead of time, a good campaigner would know that he should be changing it up and refreshing it a bit.

 

 

But when it comes to objectivity, the difference between MSNBC and Fox seems to be getting slimmer all the time.

 

This I can absolutely agree with. MSNBC has more right wing pundits and commentators and Republican operatives and guests than Fox does. Liberal media. HAH!

[33kaitykaity]

MSNBC just keeps finding new ways to piss me off. (As if having hardcore Republican hacks like Ben Ginsberg and Rick Tyler as "MSNC political commentators" isn't bad enough).

 

Tonight they cut away from a live feed of Bernie Sanders addressing a rally in Arizona to have Lawrence O'Donnell interview Kassie Hunt about the reasons for Bernie's appeal (so much more enlightening than actually hearing him speak). And then, even worse, we get two of MSNBC's army of mainstream political journalists tell us (for the thousandth time) why Bernie Sanders can never be elected President and that HRC is the Dem's only real option. And it was especially frustrating, because while having to less to this vacuous punditry they continued to show Bernie speaking in split screen, with the sound off.

 

I was just coming in to complain about that.  It was such bullshit and so frustrating.  We got to hear maybe five minutes of what Bernie was actually saying, but then came the talking heads and the talking points and you had to be a lip reader to "hear" what Bernie had to say.  I'm doing my damnedest to try and tolerate what MSNBC has become, but at this point I can't watch it -- except for Rachel -- is because it's become all Trump/Clinton all the time.  

Edited March 23, 2016 by 33kaitykaity

[NextIteration]

is because it's become all Trump/Clinton all the time.  

 

Sanders was interviewed by Maddow on Thursday night and Hayes on Monday night.  Coverage between Clinton and Sanders seems to be fairly balanced, but doesn't come near matching tRump coverage.

[33kaitykaity]

Sanders was interviewed by Maddow on Thursday night and Hayes on Monday night.  Coverage between Clinton and Sanders seems to be fairly balanced, but doesn't come near matching tRump coverage.

Yeah, nothing can compare to the nauseating tRump coverage -- great nickname, BTW -- but Clinton got a full matching segment of tRump covering their respective AIPAC speeches.  That left a lasting impression on me.  

[NextIteration]

Yeah, nothing can compare to the nauseating tRump coverage -- great nickname, BTW -- but Clinton got a full matching segment of tRump covering their respective AIPAC speeches.  That left a lasting impression on me.  

 

Well, Sanders chose not to go to AIPAC.  He did get an interview with Hayes and then later on the Last Word got speech coverage on Monday night which is good the night before yet another primary.

[33kaitykaity]

Well, Sanders chose not to go to AIPAC.  He did get an interview with Hayes and then later on the Last Word got speech coverage on Monday night which is good the night before yet another primary.

Hillary had been on Rachel's show twice before Bernie got the chance to be on again, this by Rachel's own accounting.  And the Last Word muted Bernie -- which I thought was insulting and obscene -- and then let the talking heads spew their talking points about how Hillary is inevitable and he should start getting ready to get out so that Hillary can start going after tRump by naming names instead of just alluding to "candidates."  

 

I have a feeling we can both come up with endless examples to buttress our own POV, so let's just agree to disagree before the "hey people, you're killing me, stop talking about politics" post shows up.  ;)

[potatoradio]

My. God. BriWi. So much for being flexible. He was rambling on about what was coming up on his all mighty coverage of the results last night and all of a sudden, he says, "Oh! Hello, Senator!" Yeah, smooth. Also, way to recover by rushing the "interview" as much as you could. Because, it's the senator's fault you flubbed the intro and had to pull your head out. 

 

I want this election over with for many reasons, but getting rid of the BriWi on every MSNBC talking table is topping the list.

 

Rachel won my heart the other night when she started drumming on the desk to that godawful "election news intro" music. She has to be positively insane from listening to that. Plus, BriWi probably has it set as a ringtone. 

[bad things are bad]

damn. used to love B. Williams when he'd show up on The Daily Show. WTH happened?

[Padma]

I have hated FOX News for years. But currently Megyn Kelly's show is often far more watchable than Chris Matthews'. I'm convinced that Chris--on one of those days when he sees Trump with a "strong appeal to the white working class male that Hillary just doesn't have"--could absolutely vote for Trump.  (And then there's the travesty of "Citizen Trump).

 

Kelly has plenty of pro-Trump people but also critics and often asks better questions--and listens better--than Matthews. An added bonus of the Kelly File? You know that Trump isn't showing up there, not in-studio or by phone. They're not on at the same time, but sometimes if I have time, Megyn Kelly's show really isn't that bad an alternative to the worst of MSNBC.

[Mumbles]

damn. used to love B. Williams when he'd show up on The Daily Show. WTH happened?

Funny enough, I think that was a big part of the problem. Williams *adored* doing shows like The Daily Show, Letterman (it was his Letterman appearance where he started telling the fake stories that got him in trouble.) He also did bits on SNL and "30 Rock." He just *loved* being on television. As evidenced by his eager willingness to do as much MSNBC as he has been doing. Which is why he *shouldn't* be doing it. It's a drug to him.

What drives me nuts - other than the plagiarism stuff and the orange tan - is the fake Ted Baxter "anchorman" voice. Most other anchors and hosts avoid that crap like the plague these days - an interesting exception is Luke "Kent Brockman" Russert, who also doesn't belong on TV.

Oh and while I'm ranting I'm still pissed that Allison Williams got the lead in NBC's Peter Pan in a world (nay, a city) full of actors and singers so much more talented than her, and that he actually reported her casting on the nightly news.

[jjj]

My. God. BriWi. So much for being flexible. He was rambling on about what was coming up on his all mighty coverage of the results last night and all of a sudden, he says, "Oh! Hello, Senator!" Yeah, smooth. Also, way to recover by rushing the "interview" as much as you could. Because, it's the senator's fault you flubbed the intro and had to pull your head out. 

That was the weirdest moment -- Brian W suddenly saying: "oh, look we have a Congressman!" -- and then there was an inset of the Congressman drinking something or combing his hair, but clearly was not ready for the camera.  It happened when Brian was going on about introducing the "newest member of our court" -- which then did not happen for another 20-30 minutes.  I assume the "newest member" was the former Fiorina consultant, who actually did a good job last night.  The producers must be going nuts trying to keep this circus from spinning out of control. 

Edited March 23, 2016 by jjj

[jjj]

Loved the Lawrence O'Donnell segment on the Real Housewives of the Republican Primaries, with the history lesson on John Quincy Adams dissing Andrew Jackson's wife.

 

When I heard about the feud Wednesday morning, and that Trump would "spill the beans" about Heidi Cruz, I was thinking, what's the dirt?  "Heidi buys cupcakes at the supermarket and passes them off as her own at bake sales"?  Because I doubt Trump would take the time to acknowledge her career at Goldman Sachs. 

[33kaitykaity]

Chris Matthews was at it in spades last night regarding Hillary and foreign policy, talking to his roundtable of parrots about how Hillary is "ready to rumble" and it's not that Bernie's not intelligent or anything, but the implication is, of course, insert your own stereotype of Bernie as another effete, limp-wristed, anti-war Northeastern liiibbruull.  

 

Fuck you, Tweety.  

Edited March 24, 2016 by 33kaitykaity

[bluepiano]

Not wanting to beat a dead horse, but after showing just a snippet of Bernie's address the other night, MSNBC gave us HRC's "speech on terrorism" at Stanford in its entirety, and then did an extensive post-speech analysis, including showing multiple clips.

 

Well, I guess you wouldn't expect less when the President speaks on a timely, critical subject like the Brussels attacks, and...wait, what's that? You say Hillary's not President? Well you can see how I would be confused. Because if she isn't President, and is no longer Secretary of State, then I guess she was just a candidate making a campaign speech. Yet it was covered with all the gravity typically given the major policy speech of a President or cabinet member.

 

And in case we missed the point, Lawrence O'Donnell had to tell us more than once how Mrs. Clinton was very Presidential.

 

I have no doubt that Hillary is "ready to rumble." As ready as Trump and Cruz are to denounce Muslims, as ready as Dubya and Cheney were to invade Iraq after 9/11. Hillary lives for war and conflict. How horribly cynical am I to think that she's secretly happy about the Brussels attacks? Because for her, that should seal the deal.

Edited March 24, 2016 by bluepiano

[shok]

I'm just thankful that at least there is one person running for president who is knowledgeable and capable and will be able to do the job when she is elected. The rest of them scare the shit out of me.

[Ohwell]

All I know is, if Hillary and Trump are what we have to choose from come November, there will be a lot of nose-holding by voters of both parties.  

 

I plan to get drunk and wake up in a haze the next morning to find out who won.  I am not joking.

[tenativelyyours]

I can honestly say I never found Williams to be charming or entertaining.   Instead I saw a lot of false deprecation and heavy handed disingenuous attitudes as he preened and quivered as the likes of Jon Stewart and Tina Fey among so many others blew smoke up his ass.  And I always had a hard time that he took Brokaw's self-serving attitude of towing the Bush II White House line post 9/11 under the false belief that they needed the White House more than the White House needed a free press. 

 

 

And he was hardly the first anchor to jump at every chance to bolt and be the star of the breaking story no matter where it was.  But he had a smarmy and pompous way of always making himself not just part of the story but the bigger part of the story than the correspondent who spent years in the area and the face many of us who watched NBC news at all, the face we recognized and trusted.  He was horrible in Cairo with Richard Engel.  A man who lived there for years as well as throughout the Middle East and Williams had to insert all his 'overwhelming' expertise on the region and matter in long winded rambling and mostly meaningless monologues.

 

I always preferred NBC's foreign correspondents since they tended to be up from other networks.  They had a nice range of the three slightly different takes.  But I hated Williams as anchor.  But mostly that was simply him.   And MSNBC let me enjoy the field expertise as well as the up and coming pundits, like Maddow, Capeheart, Wolfe and Olbermann on his own show.  So I never realized how bad Williams is until he keeps cropping up here like he thinks he is on E! and he is a Kardashian (just not the fat male who is hidden away apparently).  He really is the William Hurt character from Broadcast News isn't he?  Only that character did want to do better to some degree.  Williams clearly thinks he is perfect the way he is.  He really seems at a loss at some of the basics.  Like he thinks MSNBC is simply live television for him to pontificate in that weirdly stumbling manner.  If I heard anything that sounded like a slurring of his voice, I'd think he was coming into work sometimes a bit blotto.

 

I wonder how much of a boost in ratings a certain segment would get it they aired right below the LIVE graphic : "Brian-Williams-Free".   They could have a countdown clock to when he next appears so those of us interested could skip to something else right at the moment he is set to appear and truly be Brian Williams Free. 

[NextIteration]

I was annoyed last night with O'Donnell and his inferences about Clinton regarding "hot spots" without showing us that part of the speech in context.  She was referring to neighborhoods in Europe like Saint Denis in Paris and Molenbeek in Brussels, and focusing on them because they've been shown to have clusters of radicalized terrorists.  It was part of a larger point about how to fight radicalization, I don't understand why it was so controversial, or offensive.  (Around 18.5 minutes.)  I was waiting to hear something blatantly bigoted or racist, but what I heard was logical.

 

She goes on in the speech to talk about the Somali community in Minneapolis and the hard work that has been done there to work within the community to identify youth that is at risk of being radicalized.  I would extrapolate from her often repeated example of this, that it is something that she'd suggest that Europeans adopt.

 

I'm flummoxed about O'Donnell's inference.

[Padma]

Hillary lives for war and conflict. How horribly cynical am I to think that she's secretly happy about the Brussels attacks? Because for her, that should seal the deal.

That is pretty harsh, I think,  Her speech was very important, imo, and she didn't mince words in reminding us that  Cruz and Trump, want to carpet bomb the Middle East, reinvade Iraq, and persecute Muslims even in the U.S. -- and how wrong that is, even when people are afraid.

 

Sadly, I think Brussels attacks--like San Bernardino and Paris--stoke the fears that could just as easily benefit Trump or Cruz's fear-mongering in November as they could benefit Hillary's diplomatic experience, especially as they will portray her--subtly "the woman", and with Obama--as weak on terror.  

 

"Secretly happy"? That so many innocent people were blown to bits and so many others were badly wounded? All "happy news" for her because she might become president from it?  She'd have to be some kind of monster to feel that, and I don't believe she is. (And it was Trump's tweets that seemed to possess that kind of political calculation yesterday, if anyone's did. It took him 7 hours to not make it all about him, and instead express some sympathy to the people of Brussels. And then with Heilbrunn and Halperin he basically struck out at NATO. Hillary seemed very thoughtful to me, especially in comparison.) 

Edited March 24, 2016 by Padma

[WendyCR72]

This is straddling a line, as I realize these news channels function through talking heads and politics, but let's try to keep the discussion to the news personalities and keep respect for both sides of the political spectrum open.

 

Especially as the board basically frowns upon the whole politics deal as a whole, hence line straddling.

 

Thanks! Any questions, PM me.

[NewDigs]

Bolding mine.

I was annoyed last night with O'Donnell and his inferences about Clinton regarding "hot spots" without showing us that part of the speech in context.  She was referring to neighborhoods in Europe like Saint Denis in Paris and Molenbeek in Brussels, and focusing on them because they've been shown to have clusters of radicalized terrorists.  It was part of a larger point about how to fight radicalization, I don't understand why it was so controversial, or offensive.  (Around 18.5 minutes.)  I was waiting to hear something blatantly bigoted or racist, but what I heard was logical.

 

She goes on in the speech to talk about the Somali community in Minneapolis and the hard work that has been done there to work within the community to identify youth that is at risk of being radicalized.  I would extrapolate from her often repeated example of this, that it is something that she'd suggest that Europeans adopt.

 

I'm flummoxed about O'Donnell's inference.

Wow! You mean Morning Joe handled it better? Kind of.

They had Keith Ellison on this morning and he spoke of some Oslo officials who had recently visited Mpls. to watch and learn how that population has managed to assimilate Somalis as well as they have.

Hopefully O'Donnell was watching.

And learning from MJ? Say it isn't so!

I haven't seen BW at all today. Hmm.

[NextIteration]

Wow! You mean Morning Joe handled it better? Kind of.

They had Keith Ellison on this morning and he spoke of some Oslo officials who had recently visited Mpls. to watch and learn how that population has managed to assimilate Somalis as well as they have.

 

I <3 my congresscritter. ;)

 

As a bit of trivia, the Cedar Riverside high rises where a lot of our Somali neighbors have settled is the same apartment complex that Mary Tyler Moore moved into back in the day.

Edited March 25, 2016 by NextIteration

[jjj]

Chris Hayes seemed rather pugnacious with the election supervisor of Mariposa County in AZ -- and although the voting conditions were deplorable and insufficient, I thought she completely took responsibility for the errors, and seemed to indicate there would be over ten times as many polling places in November.  She apologized several times, and I thought it was genuine. 

 

Former Governor Jennifer Granholm still looks amazing (shallow reaction, but I always thought she had the star power and super intellect for national office -- just not President [ Canadian for real!]).  I'd like to see her more on MSNBC.  She actually won tough elections in a swing state (Michigan).  And I'm laughing as I see stunning Jennifer Granholm rightly attacking what Trump has said about valuing women's appearance above all else.

[Mumbles]

Am I remembering correctly or was there some issue about Granholm doing a speech at the convention while loaded?

[xaxat]

That was something conservative operatives were pushing about her DNC 2012 address. You can judge for yourself.

 

 

 

[nowandlater]

Former Governor Jennifer Granholm still looks amazing (shallow reaction, but I always thought she had the star power and super intellect for national office -- just not President [ Canadian for real!]).  I'd like to see her more on MSNBC.  She actually won tough elections in a swing state (Michigan).  And I'm laughing as I see stunning Jennifer Granholm rightly attacking what Trump has said about valuing women's appearance above all else.

 

I believe she was a nominee for the Supreme Court. She went to my alma mater (UC Berkeley). It would be great to see somebody with a public school background on the Supreme Court again. Now it's exclusively Ivy Leaguers (even Granholm is a Harvard Law School alum). But one of the most important Supreme Court justices, Earl Warren, is a UC Berkerley grad.

[jjj]

That was something conservative operatives were pushing about her DNC 2012 address. You can judge for yourself.

Thanks for that link!  I see a lot of her theatrical background in that speech, but not alcohol.  I've seen her give speeches in person, and she has very different styles of presentation -- all well rehearsed -- depending on the crowd and the topic.  She is an amazingly effective public speaker, and knows a whisper can have more impact than a shout.

 

She does seem to bounce around different MSNBC programs as a guest, but she could add a lot to some of those panels on election nights.  If they let her make intelligent points -- she is a thinker, although certainly knows how to create sound bites.  

I believe she was a nominee for the Supreme Court. She went to my alma mater (UC Berkeley). It would be great to see somebody with a public school background on the Supreme Court again. Now it's exclusively Ivy Leaguers (even Granholm is a Harvard Law School alum).

Good point about her public university background.  I had not heard she might be under consideration for the SCOTUS.

[33kaitykaity]

Almost ready to forgive MSNBC for their up-to-now-near-total-blackout of Bernie.  MSNBC is playing Bernie's speech at Safeco Field in Seattle in full right now, Friday night, 8:30 PST.   Squeeee.  I've never heard his whole stump speech before. 

 

Waiting for Rachel's replay so I can see her reaction to Bernie and Portland and the little bird.  Squeeee.  

 

Wow, I really am having a happy Friday.  

Edited March 26, 2016 by 33kaitykaity

[jjj]

Almost ready to forgive MSNBC for their up-to-now-near-total-blackout of Bernie.  MSNBC is playing Bernie's speech at Safeco Field in Seattle in full right now, Friday night, 8:30 PST.   Squeeee.  I've never heard his whole stump speech before. 

 

Waiting for Rachel's replay so I can see her reaction to Bernie and Portland and the little bird.  Squeeee.   

Was wondering if anyone got to see that they provided the speech uninterrupted!

Where you watched, did the second airing of Rachel's show suddenly end six minutes before the end?  Where I watched, she was in the middle of a sentence, then suddenly there were six minutes of commercials, then:  LockUp!   Bummer. 

Edited March 26, 2016 by jjj

[33kaitykaity]

Was wondering if anyone got to see that they provided the speech uninterrupted!

Where you watched, did the second airing of Rachel's show suddenly end six minutes before the end?  Where I watched, she was in the middle of a sentence, then suddenly there were six minutes of commercials, then:  LockUp!   Bummer. 

I got to see Bernie's speech from beginning to end, too.  And, yes, I'm in Portland and Rachel's show ended mid-sentence here, too.  I'm going to have to go and find another replay somewhere.  Rachel had been talking about something all show that actually "made me mad."  I want to know what that was.  

[jjj]

She was mad about this (her example was from the Southeast, I believe, but the same deceptive mailing) -- and I heard this part before the commercials took over!

 

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/overdue-bill-hype-and-fear-cross-the-line/

[Medicine Crow]

She was mad about this (her example was from the Southeast, I believe, but the same deceptive mailing) -- and I heard this part before the commercials took over!

 

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/overdue-bill-hype-and-fear-cross-the-line/

Beyond contempt!!!

[NextIteration]

I just wanted to comment about all of the coverage of Brussels in the last week, by far the best people anchoring and reporting have been Chris Jansing and Ayman Mohyeldin.  What a shame that the peaceful day was interrupted by a bunch of racist hooligans.

[bad things are bad]

I have it from a well informed source that Granholm will be working a lot with HRC's campaign. 

 

She has charisma. And she's a better speaker unrehearsed, IMO. She might make a good MSNBC host someday but if HRC wins, I could see cabinet or SCOTUS. 

[Mumbles]

Ugh. The network is covering a shelter in place situation on Capitol Hill. Brian Williams is oozing rhapsodically about the cherry blossom season and Luke Russert is calling in from a shelter-in-place in aAenate office building. Perfect storm of blowhardy suck.

Of course part of me wonders if Russert is in a shelter in place or if someone just finally shoved him in a stairwell.

[Padma]

Ugh. The network is covering a shelter in place situation on Capitol Hill. Brian Williams is oozing rhapsodically about the cherry blossom season and Luke Russert is calling in from a shelter-in-place in aAenate office building. Perfect storm of blowhardy suck.

Of course part of me wonders if Russert is in a shelter in place or if someone just finally shoved him in a stairwell.

It's been , what?, 30 minutes since they announced no one was seriously injured--just one person slightly hurt maybe by flying debris--and the suspect was in custody. Would it be too much to hope they could have kept Brian at home, let Kate and Thomas report updates as needed, and just carry on with the regular programming with scrolling updates as needed and interviews when they're actually something to report.  Luke Russert interviewing little kids, finding they hadn't been afraid and rather aggressively asking, "Why not?" He seemed a little disappointed that no one in the group could describe feeling very afraid. Then back to Brian to add... nothing new at all.

 

What are Kate and Thomas doing when Brian bumps their coverage like this (with NO acknowledgement of them at all)? Does Brian  wave them off, as if to say, "You can go now. Your services are no longer needed here."? These people are colleagues -- and professionals. The way he takes over from others is always  so rude.

[NextIteration]

Where is Kate?  Does she have small children?  Are spring breaks really two weeks long?

 

I don't even like Kate but I'm horrified by the amount of BriWi.

 

Mumbles, you win the day. 

[Mumbles]

Luke Russert interviewing little kids, finding they hadn't been afraid and rather aggressively asking, "Why not?" He seemed a little disappointed that no one in the group could describe feeling very afraid. Then back to Brian to add... nothing new at all.

Ugh. Fear is a powerful tool (hence the power of terrorism) and it drives me crazy when legitimate news organizations try to crank it up, both to justify their coverage, but also to advance the agenda of some in the government who want the rest of us scared. And Russert especially seems to buy into that mindset particulary well. He is ultimately the face of the DC establishment down to his Saint Albans school necktie.

I switched from Williams and Russert's terror porn double act to Shepard Smith on his regular show on Fox and found Smith being very measured, reasoned, and quick to report when the threat was over.

[NewDigs]

No Brian um, er, uh, Williams for awhile now. Did they have to get the hook?

Luke doesn't seem to have grown into his father's shoes. No surprise there. I couldn't believe when they tried to shoehorn him into the coverage after his dad died.

I didn't know he was wearing his preppy tie. Blech.