The Young Turks Announce Candidacy for MSNBC Slot | 31 comments (31 topical, 0 hidden)
Cenk on MSNBC (none / 0)
I love TYT but I dont think Cenk has much a chance of landing a gig on MSNBC. If Cenk could not hold onto a timeslot at small time Air America radio; if he cannot convince "starving for air talent" satellite radio to keep his radio program...how is he gonna convince a giant national TV network like MSNBC to give him a show?

by mrogi on 02/03/2009 05:16:10 PM EST

Because... (none / 0)

...you're thinking in terms of old-school media models.

 Having a strong web presence is HUGE in today's media world. Being within the top 100 channels on YouTube is an amazing feat, especially considering just how many MILLIONS of channels there are on the site.

 Besides, other people have made the point that they would readily pay - and will continue to pay, come hell or high water - to hear Cenk talk. Advertisers like to hear that sort of thing, because it means people will be more predisposed to support advertisers who appear on a show they've already invested in.

As for XM's decisions: Cenk has made the point that XM has no real way of measuring their ratings - which begs the question, how can they ever quantifiably know what may or may not be popular? How will they know that Bill Press is, to put it mildly, a HORRIBLE replacement for TYT? ("Obama Generation" my ass.)

I would argue that, through good times and bad, Cenk's brand of political/social discourse has clearly proven to be popular with a wide cross-section of the public - look at the variety of opinions on this board for proof. Being a progressive moderate, Cenk has the ability to pull back some of MSNBC's current "all-liberal" stigma and allow voices from all sides to be heard.

 I think adding Cenk Uygur to the MSNBC lineup would make for a powerful block of political personalities. 1600 with David, Hardball with Chris, Countdown with Keith, Rachel's show, and Turks with Cenk to round out the evening's festivities.

I'd watch the vast majority of that block, and I know others would too. (I don't know when I'd find time to eat, but I'd watch.)

 Cenk, you have my vote. In fact, you had me at "Oh no, not again!!"

 TYT in '09!

by Duncan1800 on 02/03/2009 07:50:08 PM EST

[ Parent ]
MSNBC's Decision (none / 0)

Did MSNBC specifically say that they were looking for a Progressive/Liberal host for their 10PM slot?  Yes, I know that MSNBC has about 8 consecutive shows a day of either overtly liberal or Left-leaning pundits, so it makes contextual sense.  But there is only so much news from a Liberal point of view that needs to be covered in the course of a day, no?  If MSNBC bills itself as "the place for politics," and then presents exclusively partisan-Left hosts, are they not as guilty as FOX absurdly calling themselves "fair and balanced" while replacing Colmes with...nobody?

Don't get me wrong.  I thought that double-sandwiching Olbermann's show with a new show from Rachel Maddow as the entire cast of their primetime lineup was a giant step too far toward screamingly flagrant bias (more so than even Dan Abrams' terrible show had been).  As it turns out, Maddow's show is excellent and (other than ideologically) quite different from Olbermann's.  (So I was wrong.)  But doubling down and happening to strike gold is still different from..._tripling down_ (as it were) and adding another Liberal voice.  I think that Cenk's show is different from almost everything on television, where (he is correct when he says this) the media is trained to be even-handed rather than honest (CNN essentially does nothing other than this).  So I don't think Cenk's voice, if he is allowed to keep it without restraint (which is a big "if"--Imus was fired for mimicking hiphop lingo in what was obviously a throwaway attempt at irreverent humor, something Cenk does all the time at TYT) would be redundant to the voices of Olbermann or Maddow (or Matthews or others).  But if I am a programming head at MSNBC, I might think:  "You know, I probably have most of the Liberal news analysis viewer market, and I can probably get a larger new audience with an entertaining Conservative host [yes, I'm sure I can find one] than with another progressive.  Especially when I am going up against Van Sustern, who is hardly a magnet for Conservatives looking for red meat (she might be the most liberal host on the entire FOX schedule).

Best of luck, TYT.  But those handicapping your odds should not IMO be restricted to just comparing you to the Stephanie Millers of the world.   There are 150 Conservative talk show hosts who would love to bash Liberals right in the heart of the "lion's den".

by Milltycoon on 02/05/2009 03:52:41 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Exactly, there ARE 150 conservative hosts (none / 0)
Having three non-conservatives on MSNBC doesn't make it a left-wing propaganda network. Especially considering the fact that Cenk is a former Republican with some pretty moderate stances on domestic issues.

I think the former Republican/left of center moderate angle IS unique from both Olbermann and Maddow. Conservatives already love Fox News, Morning Joe and a zillion radio shows. That market is over-saturated, and that demographic is pretty much tapped out.

Cenk would bring in a *younger* demographic that is largely untapped, and that includes many of the enthusiastic youngins' and minorities that just got involved in politics for the first time in 08'. Not to mention that TYT is a bridge between old media and New Media.

by Tom Hanc on 02/05/2009 11:16:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Have Ben, Wes, and Michael On Video Campaign (none / 0)
Cenk has some very unique skillsets but the tactics of this campaign to be on MSNBC (a la this Cenk video) appears somewhat desperate.

Sorry.... I tuned out TYT after 6 months of following the show when  Cenk became the exclusive host.  What made TYT originally entertaining was when the show regularly had on other co-hosts and guests (i.e. Ben Mankiewicz, Wes Clark Jr, Michael Shure) on the program which made the show balanced, analytical, dynamic, and entertaining.  Having a moderate Democrat like Michael Shure especially helped to counter Cenk and Ben's oftentimes too left-leaning liberal perspectives.  Cenk by himself exclusively tends to go off on over-the-top rants, and veering off into& nbsp;inappropriate and non value-added sexual topics, etc.
Therefore, I cannot in good conscience give support to the campaign for TYT on MSNBC unless the format reverts to old co-hosting format including less sexually filled innuendo subject matter.
Jonathan from Cali

by jon from cali on 02/05/2009 10:02:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I also enjoy the co-hosts (none / 0)
But I think the majority of TYT fans agree when I say that Cenk is the main talent. He's the meat and potatoes of the show.

Sure, it's fun to have a side dish here and there, but a side dish does not a meal make (or something like that, man I need to eat dinner).

Also, I happen to enjoy the (in)appropriate and (non)value added sexual topics, etc. But of course appropriateness and value addedness (?) is in the eye of the beholder. With that said, I really enjoyed when Sam Seder co-hosted because he brought a different perspective on domestic issues.

You know, like when he argued with Cenk on Bill Clinton and Free Trade. I wouldn't mind more of that type of thing.

by Tom Hanc on 02/05/2009 11:11:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Bring Back Ben, Wes, Michael & a Female Host (none / 0)
I respectfully disagree.  I would argue that the highest ratings periods of TYT program coincided with shows that had presence of Cenk's cohorts/co-hosts. Cenk is not yet a big enough talent to carry a major radio show (TYT even not among top rated progressive radio talk shows) let alone a major television program. 

Again, I am of the opinion that what made the TYT a good/successful show to date (relatively speaking) is not because of a single personality (Cenk Uygur) but rather the dynamic personalities (plural) which made up The Young Turks (plural).

by jon from cali on 02/06/2009 12:58:01 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I disagree 1,000% (none / 0)
When I first got turned onto TYT, I immediately found Cenk to be the one who entertained me, and the others just played off of him.

Again, I *like* most of the others (I started listening shortly after Jill had left and based on what I've heard I'm not a huge fan), but almost none of THEM could carry a show on their own. Cenk is by far the funniest, most animated and most interesting and *unique* host of the bunch.

He's intelligent, but there are plenty of intelligent people. But try finding intelligent and *funny* people who are witty with viral catch phrases (like "of coooourse" and "waseekda") and it takes it to a different level. Throw in his legendary and entertaining rants, and of course his ability to distill complicated issues into something that even non-policy wonks and non-experts can understand and you have a recipe for success.

PS---Wait a minute, how do we know you aren't Jill Pike?!    ;)

by Tom Hanc on 02/06/2009 11:53:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Jill, Jill, Jill........... (none / 0)
Yes, Jill Pike, the gone but not forgotten Trust Fund Babe.  It's too bad b/c Jill could have worked out well as a female counterpart to Cenk, but she  just wasn't the sharpest or sufficiently well-read diva (disclaimer: Jill may be one now after her stint in DC).  But eye candy Jill definitely was!!!

Back to Cenk and TYT, if as you say Cenk is such a unique talent, as is the show so great, how can it be that TYT aren't doing too well?  Hmmm...from your adoring endorsement, Ihavenobias, Cenk should be one of the most sought-after personalities right now.  Last I checked, Cenk got let go by Air America, then also by satellite radio, so something's not adding up.  Sorry Cenk, just want to offer a voice of reason here among the choir here.

For MSNBC to give Cenk/TYT a shot, they'd have to take on a huge leap of faith.  Cenk if you're reading this, call me. I'd manage you and together we'll charter a more successful path for TYT.  Yes you are intelligent, funny, talented, and with sufficient gravitas....but this just ain't been enough buddy.  Right strageties and business plan matter !

P.S. How do we know this aint Cenk, aka: IhavenoBias?

by jon from cali on 02/06/2009 05:33:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Nope (none / 0)
How is it that the youtube channel has EXPLODED (that's not rhetorical, it's a direct question)?

Here's another question since you fancy yourself as being media savvy:

Which format has the brightest future going forward:

A)-TV
B)-Radio
C)-The Internet
D)-Print

If you answered "C" you're correct! New Media IS the future, and the other formats are either slowing down or outright dying. So if you put two and two together, the most important fact is that the youtube channel (which represents New Media) is thriving.

You know who agrees with me? The main Editor of Talker's Magazine. He was on Ed Schultz a few weeks ago, and he said that the future of talk radio is (drumroll) The Internet. Live video, pictures, blogs, chats, etc.

I knew that *before* that particular segment, but it's nice to know that a leading voice in the industry backs me up.

PS---How many poor decisions has Air America made? How are Malloy and Randi Rhodes doing these days after getting booted from Air America? How is Lionel (who's still with Air America doing)? Oh, and Thom Hartmann is is going to be gone soon as well.

And tell me, how is the financial situation over at XM/Sirius? Last time I heard they weren't doing so well. That either means the format is dying, that they made bad decisions or BOTH.

Finally, if you truly are media savvy, you know how much of the business boils down to hype, connections and perceptions. The most talented cream does NOT necessarily rise to the top (Glenn Beck anyone?), but if you can change one of the 3 items I mentioned it can happen overnight.

by Tom Hanc on 02/06/2009 05:47:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]

The Young Turks Announce Candidacy for MSNBC Slot | 31 comments (31 topical, 0 hidden)