• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

CNN killing Piers Morgan's show

gregg75

gregg75

I wonder if Dylan Ratigan would be interested in taking over that slot ??

I say this because with two politically-charged shows on Fox News & MSNBC, maybe CNN needs is a show that DOES NOT try to mix politics with entertainment, but rather takes a more business-like approach. Dylan would certainly fit that bill

But if they wanna remain with someone with a British accent, there's always Martin Bashir (Who recently departed MSNBC)

Beyond that, the only people I can think of that would even remotely interested would be Cenk Uygur & The Young Turks crew (And we all know how Cenk feels about the corporate media)

Other possible replacements anyone ??

Cheers & 73 :)
 
umfan said:
Yeah, but how do they know whatever they replace it with won't do worse?
Click to expand...

I agree. I really think the main problem with this show is it was TOO stiff. And it didn't take phone calls. Sure, I know that's what C-SPAN does. But I really think that was the attraction of Larry's show, and it's been missing with Piers. I really think the audience involvement thing is important. People just don't trust journalists any more, and they want to ask celebrities and officials real questions that often don't get asked.
 
umfan said:
Yeah, but how do they know whatever they replace it with won't do worse?
Click to expand...

They don't know. No one ever knows until they try. But, it shouldn't be difficult to be better than Piers Morgan.
 
What if CNN tried putting hard news programming into the Piers Morgan slot? How about a newscast, which does a deeper dive into the day's issues called Deeper Dive? Rather than relying on pundits, it would actually talk to experts in the various fields.

Nah, bad idea, someone might learn something! Better to just degenerate into a nation of idiots!:rolleyes:
 
formeraa said:
What if CNN tried putting hard news programming into the Piers Morgan slot? How about a newscast, which does a deeper dive into the day's issues called Deeper Dive? Rather than relying on pundits, it would actually talk to experts in the various fields.
Click to expand...

You mean like the PBS NewsHour?
 
formeraa said:
What if CNN tried putting hard news programming into the Piers Morgan slot? How about a newscast, which does a deeper dive into the day's issues called Deeper Dive? Rather than relying on pundits, it would actually talk to experts in the various fields.

Nah, bad idea, someone might learn something! Better to just degenerate into a nation of idiots!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The challenge for such a show would be finding "experts" who had adequate, meaningful credentials who also had good camera presence. There's a good reason why so many experts in all fields write about things rather than talk about them on-camera. Sit through some videos of experts talking about their fields of speciality some time. The experts who are also good on-camera communicators are quite often already working, as pundits!

CNN has established its niche in the news world. Whoever they get will likely be someone who fits in with the rest of CNN. CNN's target market is liberal-leaning news watchers. They'll replace Morgan with a different liberal-leaning personality. I see nothing wrong with that. If a country music channel had to fire one of their personalities for one reason or another, they'd replace him with another country music personality. They wouldn't go out looking for a hip-hop or heavy metal personality. Why should news channels operate any differently?

As for an indepth, hard-news show, I think at that hour it would fail. I suspect that when viewers are in the mood for in-depth information, they'll seek it on the internet rather than wait until a show starts on TV. I think people tune in to shows like Morgan's because those shows are a slightly more intellectual version of train-wreck reality shows. They don't want to learn new things. They want to hear their existing opinions reinforced.
 
The 3 news neworks run talk shows in prime-time because they're relatively cheap, and attract viewers - generally of the like minded political persuasion. For example, I'm sure Hannity doesn't have many liberal viewers - just Republicans who think like he does. Same with Maddow on the left. CNN was trying to take the middle road with Morgan - who defintely has a political bent (liberal), but also discussed a wide variety of topics and interviewed celebrities and people in the news for other than politics. My guess is that CNN will let the other 2 networks take the right and left wings, and try a similar show to King's and Morgan's, only with a more magnetic and likeable host.
 
People here keep stating that CNN leans liberal. I don't see that at all. In almost every case, they have both a conservative and a liberal point of view on their shows. In fact, they have more honest discussions from both sides than either MSNBC or FOX. Frankly, I don't find Piers Morgan particularly liberal or progressive. He seems to try to draw emotion and hype out of every situation.
 
formeraa said:
He seems to try to draw emotion and hype out of every situation.
Click to expand...

I think his mistake was becoming an advocate for a particular point of view. That's when he crossed the line. Not to say that Hannity and O'Reilly haven't done that. But that's not the CNN way. It's hard to be a talk show host and not become an advocate. On the other hand, a straight, non-confrontational interviewer is not very interesting to watch. So in a way, that's the challenge for CNN. How to make news coverage interesting without actually taking a side.
 
I think his mistake was not in bringing in ratings. Had he done so, I think he'd still have a job no matter what POV he put forth. You could be right, however. CNN is managed by the same fools that let Lou Dobbs go.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom