Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

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

Jaded

By Jaded
in Political Network Talk

Recommended Posts

33kaitykaity

33kaitykaity

(edited)

What did Chris do?  Push back in search of detailed answers from the candidate?   How biased.

Chris asked the same inside-the-Beltway questions and would not listen to any of Bernie's answers because they weren't what Chris the inside-the-Beltway-bias machine wanted to hear.  Did Chris ask what might happen if the Democrats get back control of the Senate?  No.  He just wanted to play gotcha so people could dismiss Bernie's ideas as impossible and bunkum and pie-in-the-sky.  

 

Yup, that's bias.  

Edited by 33kaitykaity
  • Love 2
  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ruby24
ruby24

Lauer should be ashamed of himself. He was a disgrace and he was totally sexist in the way he treated Trump vs. Hillary, imo. Fuck him. I've been remembering 2008 lately and the absolute glee the

pennben
pennben

So, the lady should just smile more and be pleasing to the male gaze.  I just don't have the strength anymore.......

alias1
alias1

Rachel is just reporting the facts.  There is no chance for Bernie.  I think she's appalled (and frustrated) at the level of discord in the democratic party right now.  Rachel has been fair to everyon

shok

shok

Chris asked the same inside-the-Beltway questions and would not listen to any of Bernie's answers because they weren't what Chris the inside-the-Beltway-bias machine wanted to hear. 

 

Or maybe Chris' questions and Bernies' non-answers weren't what Bernie's fanatics want to hear. Chris was speaking for an awful lot of people outside the beltway too.

  • Love 6
Egg

Egg

Chris was right - the people you need to pass new taxes are inside the beltway, so you do need to have something of a beltway strategy. Obama, too, thought you could change Congress' mind through people power. Many of us believed that until 2011 proved that decisively incorrect.

Unfortunately, Sanders doesn't seem to have learned that lesson, and Chris's questions demonstrated that. If he is so effective, and knows how to bring about a revolution, why didn't he create this groundswell in favored Obama when the country needed it, in 2011? He was nowhere to be found until Elizabeth Warren came along.

I think Chris demonstrated that Bernie is all hat and no cattle, and many undecideds will sour on him. The True Believers aren't going to change their minds based on this interview, but then, there were never as many True Believers as we've been led to believe (his bs answers on decreased turnout so far notwithstanding).

  • Love 5
NextIteration

NextIteration

I guess it's really mean and nasty and "beltway insider" (as well as spittle licked biased) to ask "how are you going to get it done".  Matthews again and again agrees with Sanders (who often states the obvious from the "liberal" prospective) but what Chris keeps asking is how?  And then Bernie slightly changes the topic and answers with more bromides about his "revolution" (which is not forming by most critical measures, like turnout).

 

I thought it was a good exchange.  To bad once again, we fail to get details about how Sanders will accomplish his goals - besides millions of people rising up in his revolution.


Unfortunately, Sanders doesn't seem to have learned that lesson, and Chris's questions demonstrated that. If he is so effective, and knows how to bring about a revolution, why didn't he create this groundswell in favored Obama when the country needed it, in 2011? He was nowhere to be found until Elizabeth Warren came along.

 

In all fairness, Bernie has been doing the Thom Hartmann show for years speaking about all these issues, and how he thinks they should be addressed.  I've been a recipient of his newsletters for a decade I think.  But where Bernie was in 2011 was talking about someone to primary Obama because Sanders was disappointed in Obama's ability to get the things done that the far-left want.  (I agree with most of them, but I know I'm far-far-left.)

 

The math on Sanders single payer plan on his website is sketchy at best, sure all these economists agree with him - but what detail are they seeing that we can't see on his website?

  • Love 3
shok

shok

 

The math on Sanders single payer plan on his website is sketchy at best, sure all these economists agree with him - but what detail are they seeing that we can't see on his website?

I'm too lazy to go digging for the citations that contain this info but there aren't really "all these economists" who agree with him. Yes, there is a list of some who do but over half of them are professors at the same university as one of Sanders' biggest supporters Robert Reich. The 'math' has been roundly discredited by any number of prominent distinguished economists who are generally considered the best in the business.

 

Someone else has written that it is very unfortunate that Bernie is promoting these pie-in-the-sky plans because it really limits how much the Democrats can mock the crazy budget and economic schemes that the Republican candidates are throwing around when one of their own candidates is doing the same. I've long griped that the pundits, especially those on MSNBC, have been giving Sanders a free ride because they're not demanding answers from him so I was really glad that Matthews grilled him a bit.

  • Love 2
Kemper

Kemper

I thought Melissa Harris Perry was a professor at Tulane, but I think the article said Wake Forest.  I am probably wrong.  It is too bad about her show, I liked her.  I also really miss Steve Kronacki on weekends, too.  Although he is being used a lot during the rest of the week, so there is that.  I hope MSNBC doesn't rue the day it went all in for the election and more right-thinking voices...although maybe I will think they got just what they deserve.  Ann Coulter (!) and Bob Barr (!) are now commentators...Barr has been on for a couple of days now.  Stephanie Miller and John Fugelsang used to be on every once-in-awhle, but I haven't seen them in weeks/months.  Up is down and down is up.

  • Love 5
junemeatcleaver

junemeatcleaver

Melissa Harris-Perry's Twitter profile says she's a professor at Wake Forest.

 

MHP's show's virtual cancellation comes as no surprise.  First Andy Lack strips MSNBC of most of its liberal branding and identity minus Rachel Maddow, and then MHP's show started to get preempted for breaking news that she was capable of handling and now this.  Oh well, her show was good while it lasted.

  • Love 2
xaxat

xaxat

"“I will not be used as a tool for their purposes,” she wrote. “I am not a token, mammy, or little brown bobble head. I am not owned by Lack, Griffin or MSNBC. I love our show. I want it back.”

Ms. Harris-Perry is black, and Mr. Lack and Mr. Griffin are white. In the phone interview on Friday, Ms. Harris-Perry clarified her remarks and said she did not think race played a role in her recent absence from the air.

“I don’t know if there is a personal racial component,” she said. “I don’t think anyone is doing something mean to me because I’m a black person.”"

 

I like her, but I'm not buying it. She's a very smart woman and she knew exactly what she was implying when she used those terms.

Jaded

Jaded

  • Author

I quit watching MSNBC for the most part last Summer when my Mom got really ill and have tried tuning in since she's passed away and there just isn't anything I want to watch on the channel anymore. It seems like everytime I stop to tune in when flipping through the channels they are talking about Trump. I know it's election season but geeze. I liked MHP's show because it covered stories that may not have always been told elsewhere. I don't seem to like any of these 'news' channels anymore and what they've turned into.

  • Love 4
Padma

Padma

Chris hammered Sanders--pummeled him really--on "how will you get it done? HOW?"  I didn't mind that much, even though I like Bernie (in the Senate not WH) because his answer was so awful and we needed to know that, "When senators look out their windows and see a million millenials and maybe their parents, too, all demanding change, they will vote for it."

 

Uh, no.  And also, millenials didn't do a good enough job of showing up for him to give him a win in Nevada, why should we expect a "million" of them to descend on Washington basically demanding socialism? That's just not going to happen,. And a "social and political revolution" isn't going to happen by electing one 75 year old social democrat without a party to the WHl.

 

So I didn't mind that. But I DO mind Chris on the subject of Trump. There, he throws critical thinking out completely and can't stop talking about style and process (all in Trump's favor). Today, after the Tx. debate, he spent such a long time talking about how people don't care about Trump's taxes "who cares?" and ignoring any of the problems about his businesses--his hiring undocumented workers to build Trump tower, his hiring guest workers NOW at Maralago rather than giving jobs to qualified Americans, his anti-union stand in LV, the fraud allegations at Trump University... the list from last night goes on and on. But, no.  All Chris wanted to talk about--for such a LONG time--was how Trump was still winning, how Rubio didn't land a glove on him, Cruz either, and recounting his past successes in debates how dominant he is.

 

Chris has such a strongman fascination and has decided he likes Trump's ties to the working class. He doesn't care if his business practices AREN 'T like that at all. He'll grill Bernie, but his coverage of Trump is puff piece after puff piece. It's getting so the only ones I can watch are Hayes and O'Donnell. Otherwise, FOX is even doing a better job these da ys.

  • Love 10
NextIteration

NextIteration

(edited)

 

This really disappoints me, I have learned so much from MHP over the years that I never would have without her.

 

I caught Steve Kronacki interviewing someone this morning.  I don't even remember who because Steve came across as a ridiculous attack dog.

 

I never liked him as much on Up as Hayes, but he's now been molded into a Todd lackey and become completely unwatchable.  If all he did was monitor the magic board it would be okay - but he's now in his GWB mode all the time when on air, unwatchable.

Edited by NextIteration
  • Love 1
Padma

Padma

(edited)

So MSNBC is going to continue showing Chris's puff PR piece, "Citizen Trump", the weekends before every freaking primary or caucus?  I call such "foul" that I can't stand it!!!! Every candidate should invoke the equal time law and make it stick.  What a disgrace!!  (Especially as I just read that MSNBC decided to show their hour-long (free) pro-Trump commercial and FOX spent their time talking about Trump while Sanders was having a huge live rally in, I think it was, Minnesota. To their credit, CNN at least DID cover it.)

Edited by Padma
  • Love 13
Wax Lion

Wax Lion

Equal time still exists. A few NBC stations had to carry Kasich (and someone else) ads because of Trump's SNL appearance but it affects broadcast not cable and individual stations had to be dealt with, so it's a lot of effort for a small amount of time (technically equal but NBC isn't required to have all the other candidates host SNL, just for any station that gets complaint to give an equal amount of time, after hosting SNL, the candidates that applied got a 30 second ad run repeatedly for the same length of Trump's screen time).

 

I used to be a regular MHP viewer but then my schedule got too busy. Lately I've been wanting to catch an episode but whenever I try to set a recording, it's been preempted. It's sad to lose one of TV's smartest shows.

  • Love 1
Andyourlittledog2

Andyourlittledog2

(edited)

Anyone at all:  "Now, Hil---"

 

Andrea Mitchell:  "Email! She's got an email problem! Email! Email! Email!"

 

I don't know what bug got up Andrea Mitchell's butt but she is absolutely relentlesly bringing up this subject the minute anyone brings up Hillary for any reason. She can't stop talking about it. I'm getting sick of AM at this point. I wish she was less visible but she's got her own show plus seems to be booked on a lot of panels lately. And it's always the same. Email!  There's email!  Eeeeemaaaaailllll! 

 

MHP leaving is unfortunate although I personally found her unwatchable. She has this tone and cadence which I call 'speechifying' that she does when she hosts her own show or subs for someone else that is like nails on a chalkboard to me. When she is a guest she speaks more normally and I really like her. But the speechifying voice when she's the host is awful. 

 

MSNBC seemed to have moved, or attempted to move, all its hosts of color to the weekend mornings then relentlessly preempted them. I'd be pissed too. 

 

I have this vision in my head of Alexandria Witt standing in a closet back stage at 30 Rock somewhere, recharging, while waiting for her next stint at anchoring some long and out of the way period on the schedule. She can't possibly go home or have a life, she's on all the time, day and night. It's almost like she's doing penance for some sin we know nothing about. 

 

I have another vision of Brian Williams roaming free range through the halls, bathrooms, break rooms, parking lots, anywhere he could find someone who has the authority to get him on air. He'll corner them and pitch whatever the latest 'big story' or potential news of the day is and offer to do a special anchoring job for hours about it, non stop. He shows up to special anchor all the time when the reg hosts could easily handle whatever is happening that's so 'special' that day. I used to really like him but now he just seems like a skeezy lightweight famewhore. How the mighty have fallen....

Edited by Andyourlittledog2
  • Love 7
Jaded

Jaded

  • Author
(edited)

I have this vision in my head of Alexandria Witt standing in a closet back stage at 30 Rock somewhere, recharging, while waiting for her next stint at anchoring some long and out of the way period on the schedule. She can't possibly go home or have a life, she's on all the time, day and night. It's almost like she's doing penance for some sin we know nothing about. 

 

Quite a few years ago she did borrow a large amount of money from a friend and then said friend had to start legal proceedings to try and get paid back. I never have been able to find out online if there was a resolution to that matter. Ever since I found out about it the whole thing made me see her in a different light.

http://nypost.com/2011/03/20/tv-anchors-away-with/

Edited by Jaded
  • Love 2
NextIteration

NextIteration

Equal time still exists. A few NBC stations had to carry Kasich (and someone else) ads because of Trump's SNL appearance but it affects broadcast not cable and individual stations had to be dealt with, so it's a lot of effort for a small amount of time (technically equal but NBC isn't required to have all the other candidates host SNL, just for any station that gets complaint to give an equal amount of time, after hosting SNL, the candidates that applied got a 30 second ad run repeatedly for the same length of Trump's screen time).

 

You're right, my apologies.  I confused equal time with the fairness doctrine.

M. Darcy

M. Darcy

(edited)

Its official - MPH is out.  And, apparently it was over Beyoncé  http://jezebel.com/msnbc-official-cuts-ties-with-melissa-harris-perry-over-1761809936

 

I had vaguely noticed that there was more Joy Reid over the weekends and less Melissa but hadn't really put the pieces tegher that she wasn't on.  Since Up ended, I have spent less time watching the 4 hour block.

 

but he's now been molded into a Todd lackey and become completely unwatchable.

I can't stand Steve Kronacki since he left Up.  Honestly, you are on national tv - put on a nice outfit - no more sweatshirts.

Edited by M. Darcy
Peace 47

Peace 47

I used to watch MHP pretty regularly, but within the last little over a year, my weekend schedule changed, and I didn't tune in very often. I did notice that when I would get a chance to watch, MHP herself often seemed to be gone. Maybe that was just my bad luck of missing her repeatedly. I never enjoyed any of her substitutes trying to do her shtick, though, as they just didn't seem to have the flair for it. When I heard this most recent news, I wondered if the network hadn't written her off already as "not a team player" (if she had been taking off more than some others), and if that exacerbated anything. I didn't see any of these articles mention anything about that, though.

I was a bit surprised at how confrontational MHP's public response to all of this was. I mean, I guess it's not surprising because it's not like she "needs" the show (in the way that others who are trying to make their living in broadcasting need to stay in the good graces of the networks). MHP has a good job in an entirely different field, and the show was only a platform to explore her ideas. But still, that statement was a pretty thorough burning of bridges if all that was at issue (thus far) was one month's worth of editorial content. If the network suits picture-and-picture an episode and then take her off for two weeks in favor of election coverage, is the answer to insinuate racism (no matter how she walked it back, that's how that statement reads)when it looks more like desperate ratings ploys by a network on life support? She's a perceptive lady, though, and so if she saw fit to call it like that, I don't know that I necessarily doubt her all that much.

NBC and its subsidiaries always seem to have odd public crises with their talent that other networks don't. I don't know if that's because I have tended to pay more attention to NBC over the years, or if they just kind of stink at managing their talent. They're really terrible at it, though.

  • Love 1
xaxat

xaxat

The ratings for all of the news networks will go down after the election, but I have a feeling that MSNBC will absolutely crater.

 

They slowly abandoned their liberal perspective and have replaced it with Trump coverage. In the short run, they probably increased their ratings (I know Morning Joe did), but once Trump is done, CNN will still be known for breaking news, Fox will  have their legion of conservative watchers and MSNBC will have what?

  • Love 11
Ohwell

Ohwell

Jeebus on a cracker, now they have the lizard Ben Ginsberg as an analyst.  He absolutely triggers fury in me, between Bush v Gore and the Franken/Coleman recount I cannot stand him.

Oh yes, I remember that turd from Bush v Gore.  I switch the channel when I see his face.

 

MSNBC whored themselves out to Trump and there will be a price to pay after November. 

  • Love 5
Padma

Padma

There was a moment, about 40 minutes into tonight's election coverage, when I found myself kind of enjoying Brian Willams, snark and all.

 

Then the evening went on, and I realized that while he and Rachel are supposed to be co-hosting, he never, ever, allows her to lead to commercials or open when they come back. He is always very much "Il Supremo" , more like "Brian Williams with an assist from Rachel Maddow--and sometimes with a snarky toss to Chris Matthews, stationed at a conveniently remote location where he can't reach over and deck Williams" (Chris -does- have the best "this guy's irritating me" faces, though. Rachel always looks pleasant and even watches Brian at times as if she's been studying Mika on MJ).

 

Even I feel a bit nauseous when Brian goes on about introducing the "newly-arrived-at-the-table member of our close family."  Nice try, but I think he's about as popular with that group as Ted Cruz is in the Senate.

 

MSNBC has a good stable of hosts. They don't need BW to take over.  LOD and Rachel would probably be more interesting, more informed and more genuine.  (Plus LOD is on my "fav" list at the moment for his excellent essay in defense of Robert Byrd last night. Great points, excellent writing. He has it all over Brian Williams in both insight and in writing, imo.)

  • Love 9
Padma

Padma

It's kind of annoying that they only identify Rick Tyler as "former Cruz Communications Director" rather than "the CD that was forced to resign over dirty tricks for Ted Cruz."

 

However, Tyler used to be a commentator on MSNBC and he very likely was just doing Cruz's bidding on the dirty tricks, but someone had to take the fall on the third time Cruz was called on it.  Probably he's still getting paid by someone and is still advising Cruz (plus doing double duty as an "analyst" while being well positioned to spin things for Cruz.

Andyourlittledog2

Andyourlittledog2

I remember Tyler was working for Santorum in 2012 so he's been around a while. I think he's a true believer and honestly I don't mind him much.  I think he's honest and not just talking points guy. It's just that his point of view is a Santorum/Cruz worldview.  I've heard him give his honest opinions whether they conform to the repub/tea party talking points plenty of times. That is much better than most of these people on the repub side who seem to have a memorized list of points to get across no matter what the subject or question is.  I also doubt he was the actual dirty tricks guy on Cruz' campaign, he just took the fall for it like a good soldier. The last thing, the thing he got sacked for, he wasn't the one who made the mistake on the captioning and when it was pointed out he apologized and took it down immediately. That's very different from the other two dirty tricks Cruz's campaign staff perpetrated.  Tyler's was a real mistake not of his own intentional making, the other two were very purposeful.  I can't believe I'm defending a Cruz or Santorum campaign guy but honestly he seems straight to me, always had done.  Wrongheaded but comes by it honestly.  

  • Love 2
shok

shok

Jeebuz, MSNBC has more Republican strategists/operatives now than Fox News does and the only Democratic ones they have on are those that will bash Hillary.

 

I so totally agree with those upthread who said that MSNBC is toast once the election is over. From what I'm reading at a number of sites they've already lost a good portion of what used to be their audience. I know I find myself flipping to see who they've got on and switching off again in short order. They've lost me already.

  • Love 7
NextIteration

NextIteration

(edited)

I watched an awful lot of CNN last night.  John King was much better with the magic board, showing the counties of states, I didn't see Kornacki dive that deep once, and frankly, I got bored with MSNBC analysis.  I think it's Bri-Wi.  Plus, it's frustrating that Chris is remote, I really enjoy the dynamic and respect between he and Rachel, additionally, I hate Mrs. Greenspan.

 

CNN also had much better analysis of the freakout of the GOP establishment and the possible planned superpac to take down Trump.

Edited by NextIteration
  • Love 6
pennben

pennben

Welp, MSNBC is in the Congressional Record now.  Methinks it's not the way they intended.

 

 

“Well, forgive me for not noticing just how much progress NBC was making on diversity when some of the most visible people of color at NBC — like Alex Wagner, Melissa Harris-Perry and José Díaz-Balart — are disappearing….Journalists of color bring a different texture, a different perspective on what issues matter and what should be discussed and debated on television.”

tenativelyyours

tenativelyyours

I know that they are supposed to separate.  But I wonder how much we are seeing the slow influx of the Comcast controlling interest seeping in?  If so, Andy Cohen who might not be still with BRAVO but still pretty much depends on them for a living must be shitting his pants. 

 

Still it would add some sense to the trajectory Scarborough has had even before the Drumpf campaign took off. 

NextIteration

NextIteration

(edited)

Aiyee what a flustercluck.  First Thomas gets the city wrong (he said Tampa the mayor is from Tallahassee) and then the mayor says that the Democratic primary is winner takes all.

 

Erica Hill just said that Florida and Ohio are winner take all states for the Democrats - don't these people have producers in their ears?

Edited by NextIteration
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...