Slate - Why Are the Times, the Post, and MSNBC on a Conservative Hiring Spree?

[TomCADem]

I guess it is not just the NY Times, which I recently cancelled. Even though liberal outlets have been getting their best ratings ever during the Trump era, they are suddenly on a right wing hiring spree.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/05/why_are_the_nyt_wapo_and_msnbc_on_a_conservative_hiring_spree.html

MSNBC announced Monday that it has hired George F. Will as a contributor, adding yet another conservative talker to its rapidly expanding roster of them. Two weeks ago, the cable news network gave former George W. Bush adviser Nicolle Wallace a 4 p.m. show. Former Fox News star Greta Van Susteren took over its 6 p.m. slot in January. And it has reportedly offered talk radio host Hugh Hewitt a show, as well. MSNBC is giving out shows to conservative pundits like Oprah giving out G6s.

Remember when the network embraced its liberal reputation with the tagline “Lean Forward”? These days it’s running ads suggesting that people might accuse it of conservative bias—and it’s only half-joking.

MSNBC isn’t the only major media organization that’s tacking rightward lately. The New York Times’ opinion section infuriated its liberal loyalists last month by giving the former Wall Street Journal never-Trumper Bret Stephens an op-ed column, which he promptly used to question climate science and criticize clean-energy policies. In a sign that demand for prominent conservative pundits has surpassed supply, the same Hewitt that MSBNC is pursuing also landed a major op-ed column two months ago, signing on with the Washington Post.

The realignment would make perfect sense if media outlets whose audiences skewed liberal were struggling in the Trump era. But it’s just the opposite. MSNBC just posted its highest-ever quarterly ratings, beating centrist CNN in prime time. The Times reported record-breaking subscriber growth. The Post is aggressively expanding amid record online traffic and ad revenue. The last two have been running PR campaigns aiming to capitalize on discontent with Trump’s election. And they’re all getting pushback from the left on each conservative hire, with some even publicly canceling their Times subscriptions to protest Stephens.

[sharedvalues]

1. $$$$$

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. Hugh Hewitt is a deal breaker for me

I already switch off Greta, preferring even Wolf to her.

I can handle hearing some views from relatively sane Republicans. I can accept Nicolle Wallace having a show because she can tap into some sources on the Republican side for information that it is harder for a left leaning anchor to access. George Will can be a commentator, I can handle that. But making Hewitt a host? Red line.

What that means for me is that I will avoid MSNBC like the plague prior to 7:00PM Eastern if they give him a show. Currently MSNBC is my default cable news channel most of the day except for shows that I avoid. If they add Hewitt, CNN will become my default unless there are specific MSNBC shows that I want to watch Mostly that's their prime time line up (for as long as that lasts). I tend not to watch TV when AM Joy airs, but I would watch her.

[csziggy]

10. Here, the PBS Newshour is opposite Greta and Wolf

And is a MUCH better option than either of them.

Anytime Hugh Hewitt shows up, I change the channel. Same for Greta and for many of the other right wing "commentators" MSNBC has been hiring. I do watch Nicole Wallace sometime - she is pretty sane for a Republican and I remember how outraged she was at Dolt45's comments about women and some other subjects.

It is a pleasure when Katie Tur substitutes for one of the MSNBC daytime hosts and some of the people they have on in the late morning and early afternoon are not bad. Too often anymore, though, they have Republicans willing to support Dolt45 so I switch to something else.

AM Joy is great and while some weekend mornings I can't watch, they have been re-running her later in the day so I will be making an effort to catch her then.

[docgee]

3. Hewitt is a major douche, but I don't see the downside of

getting more moderate and intelligent conservatives from being brainwashed by faux news. That's less Bundy type standoffs happening when trump and his commrades go down.

[Beakybird]

4. I don't think it's $$

It's the ideology of those in power. Whoever is in charge of MSNBC really likes the opinions of Greta, Hugh Hewitt, George Will and doesn't like the opinions of the left leaning reporters. Unless they have proven themselves like Maddow, they won't be given a chance.

[Thomas Hurt]

5. Tossing this out there....

rightly or wrongly they see a weakening of Fox in the future and want to pick up some more watchers from the right....

[Grassy Knoll]

11. This

[uponit7771]

12. +1

[DAMANgoldberg]

16. Here is your answer.

Fox will get a competitor, so Comcast is free of the shackles that they felt were on them due to POTUS44. Mind you, this would have happened anyway but is accelerated due to the outcome of the GE.

Sinclair buys Tribune

When this happens, CNN will solve their 9p ET problem by hiring Rachel Maddow. They do their homework and would fit in at CNN as they attempt to wean themselves off punditry on every show.

[Warren DeMontague]

6. Hughie Hewitt was banging his plastic cup on the high chair a few weeks ago

demanding that Jeff Sessions SAVE US from the legal pot smokers, ordering him to begin immediately arresting all 60 million of them.

[Kathy M]

7. An article from couple years ago Feb 23 2015

"Publicly, it's worth noting, MSNBC is distancing itself from the "left-wing" quote, emphasizing that a liberal slant is part of not just the network's past, but its future. As an MSNBC spokesperson told me in an email, "We have a great brand," and "we will be staying true to our progressive voice while broadening out the issues we cover through that lens." Those within the network, though, according to the Daily Beast report, see things differently: "Everybody in the food chain from top to bottom," its source says, "understands that the Olbermann era is over."

"You could read the "left-wing TV" comment as a trifecta of political messaging: damage control meets trial ballooning meets dog whistling. Consumers, in general, don’t like to think of themselves as partisan; it’s almost always good PR for a news organization to frame itself as the sane alternative to wingnuttery, whatever the wing may be. And you could also read a shift in lens as a tacit admission of what we know, anecdotally, to be true: that loyal opposition often makes for better entertainment than shruggy agreement. "

"There’s a more structural explanation, though—one that has to do not just with the political context in which MSNBC operates, but with its economic model. MSNBC (which is part of NBCUniversal, which is part of Comcast, which is among other things the subject of Jack Donaghy’s classic satire of vertical integration) comes to most viewers as part of a cable bundle. You know the story: Cable companies generally group MSNBC with Fox News and CNN and also Food Network and Comedy Central and, if you’re especially lucky, the Hallmark Channel. Consumers play a flat fee and get the whole bundle. And the networks, for their part, get relatively steady subscription revenue in addition to what they get from advertisers.

It’s a model that has partially insulated MSNBC and its fellow news networks from the day-to-day business pressures of viewership and ratings; just a couple hundred thousand daily viewers in “the demo”—viewers in the 25-to-54 age range, the people most highly prized by advertisers—can be enough, thanks to the contributions of people who buy the bundle for Guy Fieri, to make the channel profitable. (MSNBC, notoriously ratings-challenged since its peak during the Bush years, was projected to bring in $475 million in revenue in 2013.) "

rest at https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/msnbc-and-the-move-away-from-left-wing-tv/385798/

Sounds like the structure change has been in the works for a while ..... the question will be does MSNBC continue with their change or not

[JHB]

14. It'll stay on the same course until the people signing the checks change

Consider it more fallout from the Comcast merger.

[JaneQPublic]

8. Viewers are flocking to Rachel and Lawrence

So, MSNBC, give them more like that.

Link to tweet

[Tatiana]

13. "We need it."

I can't imagine how tough it must be for them to knowing subvert their bosses' narrative. This seems to imply that they would be canned if not for their ratings.

I will continue to DVR Hayes, Maddow, and O'Donnell.

[Cha]

9. They want to help get rid of our Democracy?

[lovemydogs]

15. I read this a few days ago and find the 5 theories unsatisfying

I don't know why. But, I find the rightwashing as well as the the whitewashing at MSNBC to be disgusting.
Joy Reid is in Lack's sights and he is desperate to fire her.

It seems odd with the uprising on the left, the absolute deluge of anger from the left to NYT over their right wing hire and the resistance to Trump that these outlets are wanting to go right.

Especially with Maddow as the highest rated program in news.

Maybe they are making a play for the mythical white working class voter
Or the heads of these new divisions are just induging their own political leanings.
Or the desire to wipe out the voices the left to keep it from getting stronger