Media reviewers called MSNBC's election night coverage "a liberal whine-fest absent newscasters and even a....?

.....single conservative counter-weight." and "like watching The View without Elizabeth Hasselbeck." Will the Comcast acquisition clean house and address this embarrassment and restore actual news coverage to MSNBC when hard news events (e.g. elections) are underway?

I would counter that anyone wanting the hard news approach can simply tune into to NBC (and the familiar newscasters and news reporters to be found there) while those who want to hear from pundits can tune to MSNBC -- so what's the harm? BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK? Will Comcast address the ratings disaster that is MSNBC by introducing a more balanced cast of personalities (perhaps along the lines of CNN) or should it continue to focus exclusively on a hard-left audience and consider MSNBC just a specialty channel not meant for broader appeal?

Regardless of whether you consider the MSNBC business strategy sound, do you think Comcast will change it? (Or will whining about Fox News continue to crowd out analysis of the news itself? Maddow and Obermann can be entertaining sometimes, but the endless envy and complaining about Fox News' superior ratings gets old after a while.)

Update:

===================================

Interesting observations -- but do you think that Comcast will make major changes?

4 Answers

Relevance
  • Bruce
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I just watched the clip. Not a journalist to be found at MSNBC.

    Hard left "news" reporters see their work as to wage guerrilla theater against conservatives. Remember when Pres. Bush held a news conference, only to be asked by every reporter if he would apologize for the war in Iraq? That was orchestrated guerrilla theater, and they successfully embarrassed the President, who was expecting serious questions.

    Chris Matthews tried to bait Michelle Bachman by repeatedly challenging her about a comment made two years ago rather than covering the obvious story of a sea-change in American politics. Masterfully, Bachman stayed on target and stung Matthews about his "thrill goes up my leg" with Obama comments. Bachman has learned to deal with tendentious "news" reporters--refuse the bait, stay on message, and taunt the leftists for their descent into banality.

    I don't care if MSNBC wants to have a liberal whine-fest, but to call it news coverage is false advertising.

    Cheers,

    Bruce

  • 1 decade ago

    Yeah if I were Comcast I would change it up unless I was emotionally invested in keeping MSNBC with a liberal slant. Now that doesn't necessarily mean adding more conservatives (although it could) but it could mean just adding different personalities who are still liberal or maybe even some "hard" news shows like CNN does with Fareed Zakaria on Sundays. They have to do something, you can't live with low ratings forever.

  • Kini
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Those media reviewers created a portrait of MSNBC in that light which was not valid. I watched that station for most of election night. The right-wing are good at skewing the truth and facts because they know how to hit peoples hot buttons.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    with the aid of fact the MAINSTREAM media could supply the two facets to an argument, allowing the receipent to make up his/her very own concepts. The mainstream media has moved far off from that and frequently in common terms can provide a biased attitude. that occurs on the two facets of the political spectrum. with the aid of fact that maximum individuals get they information from 5 networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX) the cons ought to attempt against the left swaying (4:5) information with their precise swaying (a million:5) information.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.