Not to scoff, but what is the merit of print journalists appearing on TV to discuss the day’s events as part of a panel of pundits? If they have facts to report that didn’t make their print deadline, there is substance there, but their opinion of facts isn’t newsworthy (at least no more or less so than all the other talking heads I try to ignore), and in most cases it isn’t even interesting. They aren’t the ones who make news, merely report it (or purport to). Proffering opinions to Rachel Maddow is the last thing a journalist ought to be doing, especially in 2019.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 11:08 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/31/msnbc-is-surging/ > > I know many here (e.g., Kevin) will scoff, but in the Age of Trump I find > that MSNBC has been the platform for some of the best news accessible on > television (and I get most of my news from papers and magazines). Yes, it > is still more opinion-heavy and ideologically driven than I would prefer, > but it is also where, on a daily basis, many of the top newspaper and > online journalists come to discuss stories published that day (and often to > be published the next day). Most of the time, both the hosts and the guests > are impressively knowledagble, and the guests are able and willing to push > back on any narrative the host might be trying to impose. And, as the > linked article explains, MSNBC almost never has one of the clowns from the > WH on to do their circus act, so viewers are spared both the butt kissing > from Fox, or the ritualized combat of CNN (though MSNBC is quite willing to > show the juicier clips from CNN and Fox when warranted). > > Rachel Madow has really distinguished herself over these last two years; > she is at her best when a story is breaking just as she is coming on air, > and she is able to think through its complexities, live, with the viewer. > She is not always right, but she is right far more than anyone has a right > to be, and she has a stable of legal, historical and policy experts that > she brings in after her explanatory segments and invites them to correct > her. She asks the best questions in all of journalism - not of the > prosecutorial, Tim Russert, gotcha variety, but of the kind I use to love > from smart students sitting in the front row, designed to shed light on > neglected dimensions and further and deepen the conversation. I would also > highlight Brian Williams show, at 8:00 pm PT (the last three shows are > repeated out West) which is both a great recap of the days news, and often > where newspaper reporters come to discuss stories which have just been > posted online for the next day’s paper. But I also give high marks to day > time anchors like Nicole Wallace and Katy Tur (though I dont get to see > them as often). > > Part of what has enriched MSNBC during the Trump Occupation has been its > decision to open its doors to Never-Trumpers and other refugees from the > Republican Party. Not only does this add credibility, eloquence and > expertise to the overall critique of Trump (former Republican strategies > Steve Schmidt will go down as the Poet Laureate of the Trump Resistance), > but it brings a welcome balance to their overall coverage. Bill Kristol and > Jennifer Rubin are still very conservative, and while they may be coming to > MSNBC to bash Trump, they stay to articulate their new-con, pro-market, > anti-progressive agenda (which is fair enough). I would not be surprised if > one of the top three phrases in any foreign policy panel on MSNBC over the > last two years is literally something like “Eight years of Obama leading > from behind was bad enough, but...”, while discussions of the health care > debate on MSNBC are often peppered with “ACA is deeply flawed, but what > Trump is doing is even worse....” I will be interested to see if these > traditional Republican voices stick around once the long Trump night is > over. > > Yes - weekends at MSNBC are a lot more reminiscent of the pre-Trump > liberal echo chamber (though it does at least provide a forum for POCs > (“Pundits of Color”) to get more attention than they otherwise would, some > of whom have important things to say. And Morning Joe is still a surreal > shit show that SNL is incapable of exaggerating. But I encourage those who > have been disdaining MSNBC based on its aroma in the post Bush v Gore era > to sample it again. It is far from perfect, but I challenge anyone to cite > a better TV source of news not PBS. > > > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
