TVNewser Poll on MSNBC Slot | 46 comments (46 topical, 0 hidden)
Mad With Power (none / 1)
I don't know what Cenk is thinking. He's not even on their radar. He's an up and comer, and he thinks he's ready for the prime time title. He's not polished, and they don't like boat rockers. I'm for Donahue, or Michael Moore would be good, if he's not busy making movies. They are household names.

by Cricketmite on 01/30/2009 09:40:11 PM EST

Yeah! (none / 1)
Let's go with another old white guy. That will really motivate all of the those young and minority voters that turned out this last election!

Oh wait...nevermind.

Here's Donahue in studio with Cenk

Here's Rachel Maddow with Cenk

Here's Cenk on CNN-HN defending Gen. Wesley Clark

by Tom Hanc on 01/30/2009 09:52:40 PM EST

[ Parent ]
reply (none / 0)
I guess reason doesn't compare to kneejerk reactions. It's not just what the guy says, it's how he says it, in a calm and measured and authoritative way. Basically a talk show is a trick. A way of mobilizing support. Why else would we even be talking about a tool like Rush, as if he is relevant. He is relevant because he can talk up a storm and fill airspace. Donahue would be a response to that tactic.

by Cricketmite on 01/30/2009 10:13:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Polished? (none / 0)
You originally said that Michael Moore was "polished" and I let it slide. Really? Polished?

Did you see him on MTB with Cenk?

He's interesting, but I'm not sure that "polished" is the word I'd use to describe him.

Besides which, many of the highest rated TV talk show hosts do anything BUT talk in a controlled manner. Many viewers get bored with monotone and or excessively controlled manners. That's probably why PBS gets the ratings that it does.

By contrast, Cenk's irreverent style is unique and interesting, and again, it appeals to a younger demographic which is critical for advertisers and ratings.

PS---Cenk has the ability to be plenty calm, like when he interviewed this crazy neocon who thinks Obama would be a fool to investigate and prosecute anyone for Bush Administration crimes. He also showed he can more than handle his own against other pundits with his appearances on CNN-HN.

by Tom Hanc on 01/30/2009 10:25:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
reply (none / 0)
I didn't say Cenk should not get this job. I said he would not get this job. There is a difference. As a gambling man, I would bet.. the bank.

by Cricketmite on 01/30/2009 10:32:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Oh, he's a long shot for sure. (none / 0)
But my point is that although he's not a bullshit conventional wisdom pick, he's actually the best pick if the goal is to pick someone interesting and unique that will get ratings from otherwise untapped demographics.

by Tom Hanc on 01/30/2009 10:38:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Moore Interview (none / 0)
hm.. if I was this interviewer, I would gently ask, hey whats up man? You seem kind of down.
What is it, I wonder? Has Moore hit the bottle because of stress or something?

by Cricketmite on 01/30/2009 10:51:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I don't know (none / 0)
but he looked homeless.

by Tom Hanc on 01/30/2009 10:58:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Donawho? or even less w/ Moore? (none / 1)
The rulers that be for GE, hate Moore and Donahue, well progressives in general. Donahue was already fired once despite great ratings. If you have seen him lately, he has pretty much lost it. As far as Moore goes, face for radio should cover it. The I-Man has a better shot at it than those two.  

Oberman was an accident which led to Rachel. If your remember some of the other disasters in the evening time slots….. But she is willing to play the sensationalism game, and so was Keith. Notice that he still stays away from hard economics, not to mention the hard core supply siders everywhere else in there programing.

Even Jim Kramer had to walk away from his show with Larry Kudlow because he literally refused to read the talking point memos from the VP’s office. But CNBC is another story.

I would take Cenk and the gang over every single show that NBC has. He is Jimmy Kimmel with a law degree and work ethic. What more could you ask for? David Gregory, please? What a fucking patzi. I can’t believe they gave him his own evening show let alone Meet the Press.

by sisco66 on 01/31/2009 07:37:30 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Dona-"Whom" (none / 0)
I don't get the one part you said that Donahue has "lost it." He just came out with a documentary about wounded vets. I just saw him in an interview, dated This year. He looked as good as ever.

This disagreement isn't about race or politics. It's about age. Kids don't want to listen to old folgies, i.e. grandfathers, reminding them of their enventual decline. Too bad. Old folks watch tv. That makes them a valuable demographic. Ever heard of 60 minutes. If you haven't, it's a show on CBS that old people watch to stay informed.

He was fired from MSNBC 2002 because of his anti war stance, there is proof of this. If he was rehired it would be an act of reconciliation with their viewers who are sick of war. It would be good for business.

Think about this from Cenk's perspective. I saw him interview D and they got along fine. If Cenk backed Donahue, he would have his foot in the MSNBC door. And as Everyone likes to point out, he wont be around forever.

by Cricketmite on 01/31/2009 02:18:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
whom ownssss da chiefs? (none / 0)
Yes, I am aware of all of the above, that is why I mentioned it. I also saw a couple of those interviews with Donhue, he has lost his edge, as in not 100% sharp anymore.  It was not intended as an insult. Sorry for any confusion.

GE, a defense contractor, owns MSNBC, NBC and CNBC. They fired the I-man for making a joke, public verison. The truth is they fired him for going after big pharma, the war and calling the VP a war criminal. I doubt very much that they would bring back Phil so he can thump his chest.

Speaking of 60 minutes,  would rather see Dan that Phil, if I had to choose. 60 Minutes has not been the same since he left.

Also, did you see the show on oil speculation, Enron and the fail of AIG and Lehman? That is something no one is picking up on, the extent of the Enron style traidng.

by sisco66 on 01/31/2009 02:45:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
yer goin a little fast... (none / 0)
If you're saying MSNBC is prejudiced against Phil and the Dems in general, that would stand to reason against Cenks chances. You don't seem to realize that Dems are more popular now, then in Bush's heyday. Cenk has every right to announce his candidacy and good for him. But all he is really saying to MSNBC is that he exists, he is here. Mission Accomplished, now Back Phil.

If you're referring to Dan Rather, I thought he was on the short lived 60 min 2. Whatever.

Imus? whatever, is this a conspiracy theory? It doesn't hold water. Al Sharpton used I-man's terrible gaff to oppose him on the grounds of bigotry. His campaign was successful, there was public outrcy reported on the front pages, and MSNBC along with his radio hoster, caved in, and kicked him off. Imus apoligized sincerely, and now he's on satellite making big money again. I know what I saw.

These value judgements are becoming more and more irrelivent. Phil is a guy. He can talk to left and right. His is lefty. He is a great talker. He is gifted like Larry King is gifted in that he can talk to anybody. People trust him.

Maybe people want to back Cenk, so that when he fails they can lament the corporate crumbs who won't acknowledge him/us.

by Cricketmite on 01/31/2009 04:14:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You lost me (none / 0)
I will spare you the big Al's ties to Fox and his dates with the known racist and sexists Bill’o the clown.  He is nothing more than a con man.  That whole thing was a circus. There is always more than one reason something happens.

You are aware that Imus and his wife led a big campaign against big pharma over lead in vaccinations and down syndrome ? You do know who buys all the advertising? Well, besides the oil companies. So now we are on the same page?  Why would Phil getting fired be any different than Imus? He called the war a disaster as well, and the VP a war criminal.

The original point was that Phil did not part ways with NBC in good terms, for the reason we both mentioned. So I doubt he is coming back. I would not hate if he did.  It would certainly be better than Tucker or Pat Buchanan.

Maybe I should have said CBS on Dan. But 60 minutes has been pretty weak since they got plucked by Rove and the Bush service scam. That story I referred you to should have made a national tidal wave, but they downplayed the most important part.  Even the one they did on the RGD was weak.


Listen I am all for any progressive shows getting more air time. The problem is that the fuckers who own these companies are so caught up in their own greed and ideology they would sooner go under before they give in. But as you said, we are making progress. I would be happy to be wrong.




by sisco66 on 01/31/2009 04:57:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
What can I say? Money Talks. (none / 0)
If this big bad company is like you say, there is no dealing with them. Let's give up. Or maybe you are just confused in your contempt for presumed villainy. The center= Bad. The right= Extra Bad. You ever feel like you're being played?

Sharpton meant what he said. The protesters meant what they said. If MSNBC kept Imus they would have lost...what?... anybody, anybody,.. MONEY.

It's not just greed, it's Commerce. Now that the economy is in the tank people can see how important trade is. The TV channel is selling space for adverts. That's all it is. But there is also space for discussion and entertainment. On top of that there is competition from the Web, which is This. You act like this is personal against your kind. It's business. Phil can trade in ideas for the left. Period.

by Cricketmite on 01/31/2009 05:26:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Closing comments (none / 0)
So I think that since this choice of a TV host applies to commerce, then it's not like choosing a best man at a wedding. A company needs something for something. Quid pro quo. Trade. What MSNBC would get is a way to court the anti-war left, who are now prevalent in the nation, and making amends for basically being in favor of the invasion in the first place, as many were at that time.

by Cricketmite on 01/31/2009 05:44:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]
closing comments (none / 0)
I pray that you are right.

by sisco66 on 01/31/2009 10:19:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Big Pharma Money (none / 0)
Everyone would have been fine with the suspension and the apology. They were looking for a reason to get rid of him just like Phil. As you noted, Phil had great ratings and they got rid of him anyway. No conspiracy. But I guess you think there where WMD? Put it this way, if had not already pissed everyone off, I doubt he would have lost his job, given the commerace and all.

So where the was Big Al after "hey mf'r where’s my ice tea"? or after the Magic Negro? Where was the staged outrage by the media then? Zippo.  He was on Fox's payroll, but ended up doing MSNBC a favor.

That is the power of the media. That is why we still have a large segment that think Iraq attacked us on 911. Do you?

Do you ever watch CNBC, and Larry Kudlow, yep the one that got his talking points from Rove and the VP. Ask Jim Cramer about it.

So much for an intelligent discussion. I guess you did not realize that Moore hates NBC as well?

by sisco66 on 01/31/2009 10:16:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No Proof (none / 0)
I don't know who Big Al is. You mentioned "The Magic Negro." I think that's referring to Rush, right? Rush says offensive things all the time, yet he stays on the air. Why? I dunno. It can't really be explained, why it is a big headline when a celeb, here one who most people had not even heard of, says something really stupid. Imus, Michael Richards, Alec Baldwin, Mel Gibson, and on and on. Headline: A famous person said or did something stupid. You have to stop and say "who the hell cares?" Does one nonsensical disturbing comment define a person? It does matter, a little, if a player in the industry makes offensive remarks, but should the entire culture be collectively offended? Then they/we deserve it.

But I don't believe that the whole media collective went after Imus because of Big Pharma. He does have a radio show at present. Certainly NBC  wouldn't Want to recieve flack. It would be a waste of time to try to convince me.

by Cricketmite on 02/01/2009 11:42:46 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Stupid is as stupid .... (none / 0)
It was more than one thing, for second or third time. Yes the final straw was Nappy Headed Ho's. You win. Do you think he came up with that on his own? It was a comedy bit from somewhere else.

Al Sharpton, your boy, led this huge fake outcry and rallied the troops against Imus, including going after the advertisers,  but did nothing about the "magic negro" which did make it's way to fox. He also did nothing about the comment Bill’o the Clown made about expecting a black restaurant to be full of thugs and gangsters yelling hey mf'r where my ice tea. He was with Bill'o at the time.

He was on Fox's payroll as their token Uncle Tom, and he did their bidding. That how he makes his money, look it up for yourself.

If they canned Phil for anti-war position, why would you think anyone else would be different?Imus had turned on the war and his republican base for the most part. I don't know if you know who runs big pharma, but ain't the boy scouts. Certainly it was not enough to be fired for given the appology and suspension.

I will tell you how fucked up MSNBC is, the day they had the huge media circus w/the the girls team they had Tom Delay on to discuss it and pump some book or web site. Yes that would be the guy that protected the sex slave trade in Mariana Islands.

But in your favor, they have made some moves at MSNBC since all of this happened. So going forward, you may be right. Regardless,&nbs p;David Gregory is a piece shit sell out.

But as you said I have no hard proof just a lot of examples and a money trail.

by sisco66 on 02/01/2009 04:47:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Bill O'reilly did get flack... (none / 0)
for the comment he made. I flipped past the View. They wondered whethe Bill is a racist for making those comments. Bill said his comments were "misinterpreted" not intended as an insult.

Rush is like the unsinkable Titanic. He sticks around because he is a pillar of the rabid right. How can he keep up the blustering day after day? Now we know. Drugs. He won't be around much longer. Now his job is to rant about "socialism," and lurking for a moment to target Obama.

by Cricketmite on 02/02/2009 12:09:36 AM EST

[ Parent ]
sad (none / 0)
I think Imus used the same excuse. But he was a repeat offender. Oberman hated him. I don't think that helped.

Anyway, I think NBC and it's bastard children set the tone over the weekend and this morning. Unless Rachel and Keith are going all in against supply side ecomomics and start countering their other hosts,  we are going to have some issues.

The fucking media is killing this country, and the dems are not helping themselves.

by sisco66 on 02/02/2009 07:49:08 PM EST

[ Parent ]

TVNewser Poll on MSNBC Slot | 46 comments (46 topical, 0 hidden)