How MSNBC Can Rule Cable News

Of the three major cable channels, MSNBC is my runaway favorite.

Part of it is history.

Before I had two digits to my age, I knew every nook and cranny of NBC in Manhattan's Rockefeller Center. I was a city boy with city smarts and when I could not get through the front entrances, I went up back stairs and found another way in.

Eventually, I made friends with a child radio actress named Jimsey Somers and ended up watching her perform shows like Let's Pretend from exalted perches in RCA Building studios.

I have never lost my childhood love of the place, and, in that spirit, I offer MSNBC a few suggestions on how it might rule cable news even more than it already does.

1. Actually be a 24-hour news outlet.

All the current prison filler may have a certain justice, as our society is a prison society, owing to factors which this year's election has addressed obliquely if at all. But these incessant prison shows on MSNBC have the appearance of filler.

There's a better way.

2. Do intelligent global reporting.

I realize this is expensive. But you have a global reach and intelligent reporters and there is a whole realm of unreported, important news at the fingertips of anyone who can click a mouse. There is nothing wrong with reading news.

It would be a welcome relief from the terrible error I shall next discuss.

3. Stop dumb "reporting."

Lately, all it takes is a good wreck or a shooting somewhere, or rough weather anywhere to make a "story," with hapless "anchors" trying to tell us what is happening, having no real idea themselves.

News as it happens? No. This is reality TV. The rule should be, if you do not know what is happening, find out first.

4. Be A Little Less Transparently Strapped

At present, almost all the news on MSNBC is structured with an eerie similarity. For hours in the morning and in afternoon and prime evening hours the shows are virtually repeats of each other, often with no relief in the talking head department.

I have kept MSNBC on in the background and marveled at the fact that the same talking heads will sometimes be asked the same question on different shows.

OK

Let me say what I would do if I were to walk the mile from where I live to the studio and take the reins.

I would first install Rachel Maddow as the successor to Tim Russert. In all roles.

Next, I would zap the prison telecasts and include in my news coverage attention to the scandal all this coverage manifests.

I would run a 24-hour news operation, built on the selection of about five times the number of stories currently featured.

I'd limit talking heads to one appearance on one show a day and vastly expand their number. I would expand their speaks -- sometimes ordinary people, sometimes "characters," sometimes academics who are never given a voice, etc.

I would at least threaten to cut out the tongue of any TV host who dares interrupt anyone else. In addition, I would ban taking heads guilty of extended interruption. Likewise surrogates who lie -- using FactCheck as a benchmark.

I would run each of the major hour-long shows more than once, perhaps up to three times in a 24-hour period. This would add up to 12 hours. This is done with a few already. It is better than the CNN practice of running the same news segments ad nauseum.

A nice thing about Huff is that comments are often highly intelligent. So I fully expect comments on this to be a fund of good suggestions. I cannot believe MSNBC does not have some freedom to improve itself.

Comments

[BillORights1776]

I pretty much agree.

They need, also, to bring back Dan Abrams. As much as I like Rachel, he brought a legal perspective to the network that's different than the others. There's plenty of hours in the day...just give him one.

[Jaman2009]

I agree that MSNBC should be more diversified. They should scrap the prison shows. Take a leaf from CNN and do shows like Hugely (not sure of the spelling). Get Chris Matthews(and I like him a lot) to stop interrupting his guest when he ask a question. Give more minorities a chance another one of CNN strengths.

[mwestorca]

YES! This is the formula for MSNBC to take the lead. I especially would appreciate a network that didn't allow shout-downs between talking heads. I can't believe that public discourse has come to shouting matches and attempts to drown out the opposition.

Bill O'Reilly and Hannity are the worst of these. But it happens on MSNBC too, and I wish it wouldn't

[tedling12]

I agree a more international approach to the 24-hour news cycle would be better. I watch BBC World News on the PBS channel and BBC News and Newsnight on the BBC America Channel. These programs are interesting and informative and not US-centric.

[BackInNewYork]

Forgive me if I am wrong, but polling and ratings have been the norm for as long as I can remember. Yet I know no one personally of any race/demographic that has been involved in the ratings system. Keith and Rachel are good for MSNBC. They get so much attention in the blogs, web sites, fan sites, you name it, so someone must be watching. These polling/rating systems seem to go hand in hand with the electoral voters polls a large percentage of the population is not being counted, pretty unfair.

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Wow. I am watching MTP online. Am I wishful thinking or is Brokaw telegraphing the ultimate destroyed McCain supporter, contemplating the wreckage and grasping at straws?

[NotBeatenYet]

I, too, would support every change you suggest, but being first in the ratings isn't job one in the corporate handbook. NBC and MSNBC are owned by General Electric, which makes Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow's presence on their air fascinating to me. A liberal/progressive network ambience will be restrained by the real business of GE -- supplying materiel to global conflicts.

One example is Tom Brokaw harpooning any hope for the changes you suggest by having Olbermann and Matthews disappear after bickering during the convention coverage. That sort of back-and-forth would have been encouraged only a few months ago.

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Actually I am hoping that there will be a NEW channel on Cable and that it will be progressive but with Rachel's capacity to look at all sides and ask Socratic type questions. I agree there are severe limits on freedom in commercial media. For example I believe that automobile culture is deleterious in the extreme but if Keith and Rachel started on that particular track they would be off the air in a week.

If Barack is elected it will remain to be seen if the sea change in our culture presaged by his statements that have generally been regarded as fluff (regarding the end of the oil economy and something approaching fulfillment of the Millennium goals) is for real or a pipe dream.

Incidentally, if I had to choose between Keith and Rachel as the soldier we have needed to at least maintain some sort of backstop to McCain and Co. I would pick Keith. Rachel is the future. But to win this one, we need the uncompromising toughness of as many of us who have ever imbibed tear gas or had at least some of sentiments attributed to those who did the heavy lifting in the 1960s.

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

i have relatives in southwest missouri and the cable company (comcast) offers only fox and cnn. no one there even knows what MSNBC is. is this the agenda of big biz? no access = no knowledge.

[BillORights1776]

our Comcast (Colorado) moved it to the digital only band. They said at the time they'd be doing this to all their stations...that was a year and a half ago...no others have moved.

Moved with MSNBC? A home shopping channel and TV Guide Channel (you know, the show listings).

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

i once saw MSNBC cover a house fire --- in New Zealand! there was nothing special about it, just one single family dwelling on fire. and the banner said "breaking news." maybe if you lived in new zealand?

[ruffmama]

I have been hooked on MSNBC from it's INCEPTION. I remember the black guy with the long dreadlocks (he was soooooo beautiful!) who used to be one. I can't even remember his name....but I was so young and just married back then in 1996...I have always been a loyal fan...telling everyone to watch. I have to admit that they have let me down in the past (Ashleigh Banfield) , but I have stayed with them....and things are looking up again....we have Keith and Rachel...and MSNBC has always been a staple in my home....my kids refer to the entire channel as "Hardball" because I guess Chris Matthews is what stands out for them even though it is pretty much on in the background of our home 24/7.....In fact one year on the 4th of July, we were in the grocery store and there was a mylar balloon of the American flag and my 3 year old said "look Mommy, they have Hardball balloons!" LOL! That pretty much says it all right there. My kids also call the NBC peacock "Hardball"...I guess Chris would be very proud! :)

[generationyes]

THE number ONE priority is to GET RID OF Pat Buchanan. The man is a cancer to all humanity. A race man from back in the back who peddles the same shite as often as he can, as shrilly as he can, in all of the appearances he is given. He lies with abandon and drips poison in the body politic to advance his own twisted political agenda - one which is rooted in dividing the country along demographic lines so that he and his cabal can better rule. I tell you, the man gives me hives. We are, hopefully, moving as a country toward a more mature version of politics, one where cooperation between people, and commonality of purpose move us instead of hate and fear of the other. Pat Buchanan is trying to strangle that infant effort before it matures. He cannot be allowed to further contaminate us with his vileness. In fact, once he (by natural causes of course) bite the big one, he ought to be shot into the sun, so that the earth can heal after he is gone.

[BachelorJohnnyCool]

Excellent points! I watch MSNBC for Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, and grit my teeth and watch Hardball because every once in a great while a piece of useful information escapes from the vortex of inane chatter (BTW, did anyone catch Tweety's bizarre comparison of Obama and McCain roles in the Wall Street bailout to Raymond Burr in "Godzilla" the other day? It was priceless!).

However, I'm also sick and tired of seeing the same pundits appearing on every show day in and day out and wish they would make the effort to find some fresh faces. And I especially agree with RedStateBlues about Pat Buchanan. I've long suspected that he has a cot somewhere in the studio, because he seems to be available twenty-four hours a day.

And I remember when CNN actually was a cable news network and the talking head shows were just a small part of its programming. I would love to see all the cable networks return to that model some day. We definitely need more real news and fewer prison shows, car chases, and celebrity meltdown coverage.

[Aby]

Tim Russert set high standards for Meet the Press. At this point, Rachel Maddow is the only one who could do justice to the show.

It seems strange because she hasn't been on TV that long. But she's sort of a "Barrack"...a person who's talent, intelligence, and promise makes up for their lack of experience.

Her warmth and intellectual curiosity would make MTP worth watching again.

But no matter what they do about Maddow....Brokaw has to go. He's boring and far too biased.

[Colleen08]

MSNBC is my favorite cable channel, I love Morning Joe, even when Joe is annoying, lol especially this morning I hate when he does that to Mika, she is allowed to have an opionon....I love Tamryn Hall, but the rest of the anchor's not so much, I don't usually watch again until 3:00 when Nora O'Donnell is on, she is great, very refreshing and honest.

I am loving that they are finally repeating their shows and not showing soo much prison stuff although I do like to watch those also, just not during the week.

I also agree they need way more than Pat B, Chuck T, Mike B., etc on ALL of their shows, it does get redunant.

[ruffmama]

YES! Tamryn Hall is wonderful and I predict that she will be a big rising star in the News business. She is just fantastic!

[Gtownguy]

YES YES YES! I LOOOOVE TAMRYN HALL!
YES YES YES! I LOOOOVE TAMRYN HALL!
YES YES YES! I LOOOOVE TAMRYN HALL!

I think she has the makings of a great journalist and will be a huge star for the network and NBC News. Does anyone have more background info on her?

[FogBelter]

Steve, when CNN first came out they had this amazing International Show that allowed journalists from around the world to report local stories from their countries. It was a great way to experience other cultures and get an understanding of what was important from their perspective, as well as, what we had in common with them. I really missed it when it stopped, it was truly a Ted Turner innovation. Americans need to be less myopic and stop seeing the world's people as little more than future enemies or terrorists. Understanding others is the best way to peace and prosperity for all, and a limited, calcified, anglo saxon journalistic approach to the world is barren and limiting.

I want to know what unmet friends are doing and thinking in Peru, or Finland, or Brunei, etc ... I want my kids to know as well.

As for the Prison Shows, they are pure exploitation. I know, I know they are bad guys, but I find nothing uplifting in the endless cycles of human zoo programming. I find it as distasteful as rubbernecking an auto accident to view a fatality ... it's sick.

[robiform]

You mentioned CNN's International Show--if you travel overseas and stay in places where they have a satellite dish, you can get CNN International. It's totally different (and better) than the domestic CNN. Only problem is that like most 24-hour news channels, everything gets repeated at least twice an hour!

[Tonto2]

I too am an MSNBC fan, but of late I have cut way back on watching their programs. During the coverage of the primaries I especially liked watching Keith and Chuck Todd so I preferred watching the coverage on MSNBC. However, during one of the last primaries, every time I put MSNBC on there was two people talking and Pat Buchanan screeching simultaneously. I finally gave up and watched CNN for the rest of the night.

I really like Rachel Maddow, but I can’t imagine why anyone thinks it’s a good idea to have Pat Buchannan on with her. In fact, I can’t think of any reason why anyone thinks having Pat on at all is a good idea.

I sometimes watch Hardball; however, I definitely prefer it when someone other than tweety is hosting so it’s not an exercise in rude and I can actually follow the conversation.

My tolerance for Joe Scarborough is in the milli-second range for the same reason. He seems to think that he has the right to talk over anyone else. Once he starts he blabbers on forever, he obviously loves to hear himself talk.

Recently, during the bailout crisis, I have been watching CNBC and the problem there is even worse at times when they have a half dozen people on at the same time.

To base the format of TV talk shows on rude behavior seems to be pretty stupid and I think that’s part of what’s reflected in MSNBC’s ratings.

[anelder]

Totally concurr with opinions positive and lauditory about RACHEL MODDOW.
This is a matter or - once in a gret while someone truly outstanding steps on the stage. Intellect, Integrity, and of course ideology is super. I watch cafefully for any negatiave aimed at her. This allows me to spot those members of society I put a large BEWARE next to them.
Recenlty this happened upon hearing about Bill Buckley's comment about his out of wedlock grandson. Leaving said child out of his will with the words "he is dead to me" (paraphrased). Aha! as the light bulb went off in my head, despite our in common Catholicism I am able to see this man as unworthy of my esteem. Heretofore I was vacilating on this.

Okay, I'll try to explain why Rachel has Buchanon and Morning Joe continues. It's called seeing an opposite opinion. It's called knowing what others are seeing. It's called being aware of all sides and hence making informed decisions to prefer MSNBC not FOX. It's called being able to truthfully say to your friends over on the other side that "yes I do know what your being fed, and I don't agree." One cannot legitamately take a stand without knowing the opposition views. Otherwise we are just as uninformed as those who do nothing but watch, let's say, O'Reilly.

Honestly much as I love to watch Olbermann I could never want to say he was the only show I would watch.

[Dandrea]

The problem is that we all know what Morning Joe are " seeing" because we have to listen to it on all the other shows.