Media

When Talent Moves to Cable, Journalism Doesn't Always Follow

A recent episode of 'Race For the White House.'

“MSNBC and NBC are one,” said Phil Griffin. “We’ve said that for over a decade. It actually is true now.”

Mr. Griffin, the senior vice president of NBC News, was speaking on the phone to NYTV on Monday afternoon. He had brought up the unification of the two news operations as a way of explaining the internal politics underpinning the launch of MSNBC’s new prime-time show, Race for the White House, which premiered on March, 17 at 6 p.m., replacing Tucker.

Race for the White House is anchored by David Gregory, a longtime workhorse and rising star of broadcast sibling NBC News.

Mr. Griffin acknowledged that not long ago, when the MSNBC offices were still located in Secaucus, N.J., it might have been hard to imagine a made NBC News correspondent jumping at the opportunity to host a show for its cable news sibling.

But MSNBC’s recent move into 30 Rockefeller Center, according to Mr. Griffin, has changed the dynamic. The denizens of NBC News, he joked, now know that MSNBC staffers “don’t have three eyes.”

“There’s a different sensibility now,” said Mr. Griffin. “These guys are coming to MSNBC. They want to be Olbermann. They want to be on Morning Joe. They want to be on Dan Abrams. Everyone is trying to get on MSNBC.”

Last week, in addition to Mr. Gregory’s new show, NBC executives announced that Andrea Mitchell, arguably the most experienced correspondent on the NBC News team, would also begin appearing regularly on MSNBC, anchoring the 1 p.m. hour of dayside, beginning Monday, March, 24.

“I wish this had happened years ago,” said Mr. Griffin. “You have everybody interacting.”

To be sure, the intensity of this political season has hastened the melding of the MSNBC and NBC News brands, with broadcast stalwarts from Brian Williams to Tim Russert to Tom Brokaw appearing regularly on the cable news channel during debates and on big primary nights; and political director Chuck Todd bouncing back and forth between the two operations.

There have been some awkward moments along the way. And most of the outside analysis of the ongoing convergence has focused on whether the just-the-facts NBC reporters can safely navigate the opinionated wilds of MSNBC (see Shuster, David).

But NBC News and MSNBC have also differed on a more prosaic level in how they approach political coverage. Whereas NBC News invests heavily in original news gathering and highly produced news segments (a relatively expensive undertaking), MSNBC tends to invest in lightly produced talk and analysis (a much cheaper approach).

And the example of David Gregory tends to show that when talent migrates from NBC to MSNBC, those news-gathering budgets do not follow them.

In the forthcoming weeks, those inside the NBC News and MSNBC newsrooms will no doubt be watching Mr. Gregory’s show as an harbinger of what is to come—and presumably rooting for NBC Universal executives to begin directing Nightly News-type resources toward the fledgling show.

The early results appear mixed. To judge by the myriad promotions airing during Meet the Press and elsewhere on TV, NBC appears committed to spending money promoting the new show.

On the other hand, the show’s initial debut featured virtually no news gathering and no interviews with newsmakers and instead filled almost the entire hour with the observations of a pundit panel, consisting of longtime political analysts—Rachel Maddow, Gene Robinson, Joe Scarborough and Chuck Todd—already on the company payroll.

In the weeks to come, one reliable indicator of the investment or lack thereof in the new show will be how many producers Mr. Griffin and company assign to Race to the White House. MSNBC’s most successful show at the moment, Countdown With Keith Olbermann, currently employs upward of a dozen producers.

As of yesterday’s kickoff, according to sources, Race for the White House, employed two full-time producers left over from Tucker, two producers taken from elsewhere at MSNBC, and (as NYTV reported last week) Noah Oppenheim—a longtime favorite of Mr. Griffin who will be splitting his time between Today and the new show.

In short, NBC executives have somehow launched a highly touted new prime-time show (and an NBC News branded hour of dayside) without adding much of anything in the way of outside bodies. Depending on what happens with staff additions in the near future, what looks like corporate synergy in one light could quickly come to resemble something more akin to corporate penny-pinching and consolidation.

Mr. Griffin said that bottom-line considerations were besides the point in launching the new show. The addition of Mr. Gregory, he said, was done solely for editorial purposes.

“I’m not going to get into the money,” said Mr. Griffin. “But think about it. You have David Gregory, he’s on all these different platforms. We don’t have to get other people. From a business standpoint, it makes sense. From an editorial point of view, it makes sense. The guy is going to do the same amount of work whether he does that hour or not.”

“But that’s not the point,” he added. “He wants to do it. He raised his hand. He saw the opportunity.”

“What David is doing is incredibly smart,” he said. “He’s positioning himself beautifully. He’s on all platforms. You can either have your two minutes on the network, or you can have those two minutes and an hour and a Web page about that hour.”

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

Walter Crankcase (not verified) says:

Well since no one watches either network, I suppose what they do is irrelevant.

Maybe if they tried an unbiased tack once in a while, they would garner more viewers. But we shouldn't expect much from the company that gave us Stone Philips and the exploding gas tanks, or Andrea Mitchell married to a major, former government official, or Keith Olbermann (whose low ratings would warrant a termination at any sane network,) or David Gregory, i.e. the little yipping chiahuahua who was so hurt when the tiny newspaper in Texas broke the news of Cheney's hunting accident in early 2006, and not a major network.

This one thing you can agree with O'Reilly on, (MS)NBC is/are a horrible news network.

Alan D. Glasser (not verified) says:

NBC blew it when they didn't replace Tucker with Rachel Maddow. What Cable TV does NOT need is another bland, right-centrist scarf of starchy carbohydrates. Rachel Maddow would have brought a feisty left-wing sensibility to MSNBC that is sadly and grossly lacking on most Cable TV news shows save Countdown with Keith Olbermann which is always nutritious brain-candy and, similarly, food for thought. And Maddow would have offered another quality sadly lacking in most cable TV new shows: High ratings.Alan Glasser, Pittsburgh, PA

Anonymous (not verified) says:

What they need to do is get rid of Rachel Maddow. I used to think poor Pat Buchanan , always paired up with her , but now it's poor Joe Scarborough !! Always equipped with her snide looking fat girl smirk, a look that makes me run for the remote to change the channel / even Fox is better than looking at that!!!

Alan D. Glasser (not verified) says:

I would submit to Walter Crankcase that Keith Olbermann enjoys some of the highest ratings in all of cable news.An unbiased tack, my dear Crankcase (and by which, of course you mean an agenda that overwhelmingly fills the show with right wing dilettantes while utterly neglecting similar punditry as far to the left as your conservatives are to the right while calling the whole mess, centrist, In some insanely unfair places it is even called Fair and Balanced).) would be so boring and bland and filled with patently untrue information as to serve as just another source for the dissemination of government disinformation. No, my dear Crankcase, what we definitely do not need is what you are suggesting. Even a clone of Keith Olbermann would be better entertainment and and would be more informative than the morose, biased, claptrap you are suggesting. And a liberal, true of heart, so much closer to the hearts of many, many Americans than the forlorn Tuckers and Billos and Rushes of the airwaves who appeal really only to a lunatic fringe that shrinks in direct proportion to the amount of truth placed onto the airwaves, would be a welcoming breath of the freshest air imaginable in these days and times.

Alan D. Glasser (not verified) says:

I disagree with your Rachel Maddow comments. What we need in this country is to stop focusing on the superficial. However Maddow may offend you visually (there is plenty of eye candy over on Fox spouting the most insane lies imaginable), it you stop and listen to what Rachel says, she actually makes quite a bit of sense.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

That comment was really about Rachel's personality, not her physical appearance. Even if Angelina Jolie constantly gave that snide fat girl smirk to anyone that, god forbid, has a different opinion than her, then I would change to channel as well. I like to listen to people that have different opinions than me, it gives me a little different view on things. Tucker Carlson was great to watch, and I think that different from your comment about Rachel making a quite a bit of sense, Tucker sometimes made no sense at all to me!!! Thats what was great about his forum, sometimes it's just about hearing different views.

Judge Dredd (not verified) says:

Rachel Maddow does make sense. I can stand looing at that guy David Greggory. Who does his makeup? You all need to check out Linktv with Democracy now if you want insightful un-biased news that's not controlled by corporate big wigs. iget tired of seeing and hearing these "TV news show personalities" who wouldn't know real journalism if you hit them ocver the heads with funky sock.

Judge Dredd (not verified) says:

Rachel Maddow does make sense. I can’t stand looking at that guy David Greggory. Who does his makeup anyway? You all need to check out Linktv with Democracy now if you want insightful un-biased news that's not controlled by corporate big wigs. I get tired of seeing and hearing these "TV news show personalities" who wouldn't know real journalism if you hit them over the heads with funky sock.

Ella (not verified) says:

I was looking forward to the show. Silly me, I thought it would be reporting the news. I tuned in the first night and turned it off before even the first 15 minutes. What a lot of hot air, and the same old hot air. Enough (too much) of full-of-myself Joe Scarborough.

DA (not verified) says:

There's an idea. Go all out. Make Rachel Maddow an anchor. Give Olbermann 2 hours a night. Give all the production jobs to Democrats. (They probably already have them anyway). Put kos in charge of PR. Watch the ratings continue to tank. GE doesn't need the money. Then when the network goes off the air we can replace it with something more interesting. Like a channel devoted to pet fish.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Rachel Maddow is very sharp and should have gotten the spot but Gregory had Tim Russert's approval and support. Always for the "insiders" win. Well, truth be told they went for Tucker ad blew it. Now Tucker has a chance to finish College and stop sung his Dad's connections.

Zach (not verified) says:

MSNBC is bilge. Tom Brokaw is spinning in his grave.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Last thing we need is more feisty left goons controlling the media and hawking the latest position that favors their goal. It is those people who are ruining Obama, The DNC, credilbilty of Journalism, and making it just as bad as when Nixon went after the media. Lets have a real show that is presenting the facts. If MSNBC goes the wrong rout it will crumble with Obama's downfall.

DwightS (not verified) says:

Olbermann has been beaten soundly by O'Reilly for what 90 straight months now? Way to go MSNBC. "We report, you decide not to watch".

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.