Back to normal at MSNBC, which is to say, dysfunctional
- From: jose <josefsoplar@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 07:45:37 -0800 (PST)
Back to normal at MSNBC, which is to say, dysfunctional
While some are asking what "The Daily Show" will do now that we have
entered the post-Bush era, the folks over at NBC News have already got
their game plan mapped out: They're going to keep kneecapping each
other.
This morning, Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews had their first post-
election exchange on "Morning Joe," and it kinda reminded me of some
of the tension-filled ones that became such popular web clips during
the campaign. That, combined with a new insider quote comparing Rachel
Maddow to Ashleigh Banfield -- no, really -- suggests that NBC will be
supplying some of the drama in a No-Drama Administration.
Clip's below.
Things got off to a bad start as Scarborough rolled over Matthews'
first attempt to answer a question. When Joe asked what Rep. Rahm
Emanuel's motives might be in not immediately accepting the job offer
of chief of staff, Chris blurted out, "I don't question motive ...
it's the worst thing you can do in journalism." I'm not sure even
Chris buys that -- I would think reporting nonexistent WMD in Iraq
might be a bigger sin -- but Joe let it go, kind of, until Matthews
followed that up with an even bigger whopper that reminded me of Dan
Rather's "just tell me where" declaration during his post-9/11
appearance on David Letterman's show.
CHRIS: I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new
presidency work.
JOE: (incredulous) Your job as a journalist is to make this presidency
work.
CHRIS: And to make this work successfully. This country needs a
successful presidency more than anything right now. ...
MIKA: Uhhh, well, I'm a little confused what the job is here, because
we all want to make things work, but I'm not sure it's our job ...
CHRIS: How can you not root for the success of a new president?
MIKA: Um, you know what? I just think it's going to be important to
ask questions. (CHRIS smiles, suggesting he might be pulling
everyone's leg here, but you never know)
JOE: As Americans, Chris Matthews, we're all rooting for the success
of Barack Obama. America's at a perilous time. But you just talked
about being a journalist and your job as a journalist is not to
question motives and then two seconds later you said your job was to
make this presidency a success.
CHRIS: Yeah.
JOE: I think that's curious. ... We just don't think it's our job to
make this any more than it was our job than to ensure the Iraq War has
a successful launch.
Yow. The clip cuts off before Chuck's Todd's priceless reaction that
said: Leave me out of this!
Of course, Chuck Todd is going to be in the middle of an internal s---
storm right away himself. Already, the bored Washington press corps is
playing that parlor game of who will succeed Tim Russert as host of
"Meet the Press." (Tom Brokaw said he would take Russert's job only
through the election.) Chuck Todd has already been the source of one
unflattering comment by an NBC insider who told a reporter --
anonymously, of course -- that he didn't "break through the glass"
enough for his liking.
The reality is that you gotta think a little outside the box to name
Chuck Todd the guy in charge of "Meet the Press." I think it would be
a pretty bold move by NBC and the right one, if Beltway chat shows are
to have a future. Chuck Todd would be the first moderator of such a
program from my post-boom generation. His style is generationally
different from the solid old warhorses currently running Sunday
morning newsmaker shows. He may be perceived as not bare-knuckles
enough, the way George Stephanopoulos was at first. As I say, I think
it'd be the right move, but there always seems to be somebody inside
NBC who's unhappy with any move the news division makes.
And then there's Rachel Maddow. Now, before I quote this, let me just
say consider the source: a little-known journalist writing for PageSix
Magazine, owned by the corporate sister of the Fox News Channel. It's
a gossipy little piece that mostly retreads the famous on-air blowups
during DNC week at MSNBC. But deep inside it there's this:
Some compare the network's love of Maddow to the flurry of excitement
over Ashleigh Banfield, who was given the ax in '04 after bashing the
network's coverage of the war in Iraq. "They constantly try to create
another media darling," says an insider. (via TVNewser)
Nice. Not misogynist at all. Because as we all know, Rachel Maddow and
Ashleigh Banfield are exactly alike. They both have had shows on
MSNBC. And they both have vajayjays.
Look, Banfield seems smart enough, but on-air stardom was forced upon
her and she had little support from MSNBC in tailoring a show to her
talents. Maddow, on the other hand, started as a guest on Tucker
Carlson's show, became a reliable talking head for Keith Olbermann,
increased her air time at MSNBC gradually, added David Gregory's panel
show to her list -- meanwhile she was holding down a national daily
radio program, always good prep for a nightly TV show -- filled in for
Olbermann (as KO has attested, no substitute ever worked as hard to
get it right) and then, and only then, did she get the job. Her show
is getting impressive cable numbers in the 25-54 demo, and no wonder:
It fits her talents (geeky, plays well with guests), she has a great
lead-in and lead-out and she's very, very watchable.
Which is why she is a rising star on cable ... and whoever gave that
quote to the competition isn't.
============
Chris Matthews: I want to do everything I can
to make...this new presidency work.
.
- Prev by Date: Palin Aide Fires Back at Reported McCain Camp Slams
- Next by Date: The Cowardly Character Assassination of Sarah Palin
- Previous by thread: Palin Aide Fires Back at Reported McCain Camp Slams
- Next by thread: The Cowardly Character Assassination of Sarah Palin
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
