Wisconsin Vote Makes MSNBC Anchors Cry

[The Voice of Reason]

Poor Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow and especially Chris Matthews were on the verge of tears when voters in Wisconsin rejected a left-wing, labor-backed effort to recall that state's Republican governor.

Even union members voted to keep the governor.

Now that's what I call CHANGE!

 

[jfrancispastirchak]

Poor Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow and especially Chris Matthews were on the verge of tears when voters in Wisconsin rejected a left-wing, labor-backed effort to recall that state's Republican governor. Even union members voted to keep the governor.
Now that's what I call CHANGE!

I too noticed that tearfest. Ed was red in the face, like he had a hamster crawling around in his trousers.

Last night's MSNBC performance reminded me of the same crew (basically) covering Bush vs Kerry. Andrea Mitchell was beside herself for having to deliver the stats popping up. The "green" board behind her kept sprouting red. Her facial expression seemed to say, "No, this can't be... got to be a mistake..."

Now, if you and I were watching MSNBC at the same time, collectively we probably represented approximately one-ninth of their total viewership.

 

[blizzard59]

"The Ed Show" at 8 PM on MSNBC got around 1,119,000 viewers, compared to 3,108,000 for "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News, 452,000 for "Anderson Cooper 360" on CNN, and 375,000 for "Nancy Grace" on HLN.

The average number of viewers in prime time for all the news networks was as follows:
Fox News 2,968,000
MSNBC 1,080,000
CNN 558,000
HLN 260,497
CNBC 251,000
Fox Business 125,000

The three most watched networks all had prime time ratings about 20-50% higher than average. Full ratings for June 5, including demos, are available at http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/06/06/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-june-5-2012/136983/

 

[PTBoardOp94]

For all the horserace coverage of politics you see on the cable networks these days, you'd think their hosts would understand that pre-election polls are almost always right. No reason for anyone to be shocked about Gov. Walker being retained.

 

[recto101]

Poor Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow and especially Chris Matthews were on the verge of tears when voters in Wisconsin rejected a left-wing, labor-backed effort to recall that state's Republican governor.

Even union members voted to keep the governor.

Now that's what I call CHANGE!

Is that even a surprise that MSNBC will act like this. Wait til November If President Obama wins then the Fox News people will play the Harold Camping card on us. If Mitt Romney wins in November MSNBC will play the same card again. Jon Stewart writers will keep this as evidence for after the Election.

 

[recto101]

"The Ed Show" at 8 PM on MSNBC got around 1,119,000 viewers, compared to 3,108,000 for "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News, 452,000 for "Anderson Cooper 360" on CNN, and 375,000 for "Nancy Grace" on HLN.

The average number of viewers in prime time for all the news networks was as follows:
Fox News 2,968,000
MSNBC 1,080,000
CNN 558,000
HLN 260,497
CNBC 251,000
Fox Business 125,000

The three most watched networks all had prime time ratings about 20-50% higher than average. Full ratings for June 5, including demos, are available at http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/06/06/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-june-5-2012/136983/

Damn I had no idea that Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, HLN have less viewers than all-news radio in the largest cities.
WINS would have 2.5-3 Million listeners in NYC
WCBS-AM 1.5-2 Million listeners in NYC
KNX-AM 1.2 Million in LA
WBBM-AM/FM 1.5 Million in Chicago
KCBS-AM/KFRC-FM 1.0-1.5 Million in San Francisco
KGO-AM gets 400,000-800,000 in SFO
KRLD-AM 400,000 in Dallas
WTOP-FM 1.0-1.5 Million in Washington DC
WNEW-Unknown in DC
KYW-AM 900,000-1.2 Million in Philadelphia
WYAY-FM to be determined
WBZ-AM 600,000-700,000 in Boston
WWJ-AM 600K-750K in Detroit
KOMO-AM/FM 400K-500K in Seattle

 

[in3media_be1]

Some posts from this thread have been moved to Off The Air



http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=213624.msg1916977#msg1916977

 

[FreddyE1977]

Apparently they had faulty exit polling showing that the race would be very tight
and not decided till the wee hours. Then they were calling it for Walker 40 minutes later.
That sort of on-air embarrassment would make anybody want to cry.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

The day after the Wisconsin vote Ed Schultz went on the air and displayed certain election districts in the state that supported the removal of the governor. Sgt. Schultz tried to spin the election outcome to make it appear that the re-call actually had popular support, when the truth is that the governor won by a substantial margin. Journalism is suppose to be about facts.

 

[landtuna]

The day after the Wisconsin vote Ed Schultz went on the air and displayed certain election districts in the state that supported the removal of the governor. Sgt. Schultz tried to spin the election outcome to make it appear that the re-call actually had popular support, when the truth is that the governor won by a substantial margin. Journalism is suppose to be about facts.

Who is saying Schultz is a journalist?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Who is saying Schultz is a journalist?

You are correct about Schultz. He is a former sports jock turned talk show host. Plus he landed his current time slot at MSNBC when Keith Olbermann was let go by the network.

When I mentioned journalism, I was referring to what MSNBC and (in all fairness) the other so-called cable news networks are attempting to portray themselves as. But in reality many hosts of these so-called news shows have their own political agendas.
Case in point: Chris Matthews of Hardball and Rachael Maddow.

FOX also has its own line up of political butt-kissers as well, which to me at least, dilutes what journalism is suppose to be.

 

[landtuna]

When I mentioned journalism, I was referring to what MSNBC and (in all fairness) the other so-called cable news networks are attempting to portray themselves as. But in reality many hosts of these so-called news shows have their own political agendas.
Case in point: Chris Matthews of Hardball and Rachael Maddow.

CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and others began their businesses as bonifide news organizations (albeit with a right or left-leaning slant in some cases). Then they added commentators and other programs which "discussed" the news but didn't report it. That's when the confusion began.

Today it seems the three mentioned above (as well as others) are programming more of the latter and less of the former and, hence, cannot be considered real news outlets. Newspapers had this issue at one time - that's why there is a big banner 'OPINION' on their opinion page(s).

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

When I mentioned journalism, I was referring to what MSNBC and (in all fairness) the other so-called cable news networks are attempting to portray themselves as. But in reality many hosts of these so-called news shows have their own political agendas.
Case in point: Chris Matthews of Hardball and Rachael Maddow.

We can come here and wring out hands and cry "Woe is Me" over the bastardizing and/or mis-labeling these networks and these programs as journalism and then clucking our tongues.

If the public wanted actual journalism, radio would not be running these wimpy little top of the hour kiss-and-tell things they call "the news". If the public wanted actual journalism C-SPAN might be the top rated network in the evening hours when they fill time not being used up by the House and the Senate.

On the other hand, have you noticed how much energy NPR puts into news these days. Apparently they know something other broadcasters can't come to grips with.

If you haven't already, get a copy of Rachel Maddow's book "Drift". It will make you wonder whose side she would be on in a true political showdown.

The lady is a Rhodes Scholar with a Doctorate from Oxford in Political Science. In some ways it must "grind her gears" to put that much energy into the shabbiness of broadcast journalism today. I am anxious to see where her trajectory takes her in years to come.

 

[recto101]

Keith Olbermann used to do the KCBS2 News in LA back in 1989-1993?
I think Keith Olbermann and Bill O"Reilly used to do the news together in Boston in the early 1980's before Bill went to WCBS2 and Keith went to KTLA in LA in 1985.

 

[LKellerIII]

Poor Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow and especially Chris Matthews were on the verge of tears when voters in Wisconsin rejected a left-wing, labor-backed effort to recall that state's Republican governor.

Even union members voted to keep the governor.

Now that's what I call CHANGE!

Is that even a surprise that MSNBC will act like this. Wait til November If President Obama wins then the Fox News people will play the Harold Camping card on us. If Mitt Romney wins in November MSNBC will play the same card again. Jon Stewart writers will keep this as evidence for after the Election.

Huh? What does Harold Camping have to do with 2012 politics? As far as I know, Camping is non-political.

As far as MSNBC goes, I'm a liberal Obama supporter who couldn't give a flying f**k what Maddow and Schultz think. I get no pleasure out of watching pundits who validate my views. I think for myself.

As for Wisconsin, it was clear to me that Walker would win - I'm not thrilled - I would rather he had lost, but I won't cry any tears.

 

[recto101]

Poor Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow and especially Chris Matthews were on the verge of tears when voters in Wisconsin rejected a left-wing, labor-backed effort to recall that state's Republican governor.

Even union members voted to keep the governor.

Now that's what I call CHANGE!

Is that even a surprise that MSNBC will act like this. Wait til November If President Obama wins then the Fox News people will play the Harold Camping card on us. If Mitt Romney wins in November MSNBC will play the same card again. Jon Stewart writers will keep this as evidence for after the Election.

Huh? What does Harold Camping have to do with 2012 politics? As far as I know, Camping is non-political.

As far as MSNBC goes, I'm a liberal Obama supporter who couldn't give a flying f**k what Maddow and Schultz think. I get no pleasure out of watching pundits who validate my views. I think for myself.

As for Wisconsin, it was clear to me that Walker would win - I'm not thrilled - I would rather he had lost, but I won't cry any tears.

What I mean by that is that Fox News will say End of the World is coming if President Obama keeps his seat in November or MSNBC will say End of the world is coming if Romney becomes president.

 

[dhett]

Sounds like a few talking heads let wishful thinking get in the way of reason. Yeah, the exit polls showed a tight race, but all polls leading up to the election showed that Walker should win by a margin similar to his victory in 2010.

At the same time, conservative commentators falling all over themselves to declare this a mandate are also in danger of letting wishful thinking getting in the way of reason. While most of Walker's votes came from those who supported his policies, there was also a percentage that came from people who supported Barrett, but thought it wrong to recall elected officials for reasons other than corruption or profound incompetence.

 

[Ultimajock]

Damn I had no idea that Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, HLN have less viewers than all-news radio in the largest cities.

...as has been said repeatedly on this site, more people still go to the can during the commercials on the Diane Sawyer, Brian Williams and Scott Pelley newscasts than ever bother tuning into Faux Noise Channel ...

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

In the two messages giving audience size, are we comparing oranges to oranges?

I got the idea the the audience numbers for the cable channels was actual audience size at any given time or cumulative audience for one given night. The audience numbers for the radio news states appear to be weekly cumes or something.

The numbers showing two NYC news station with almost as many listeners combined as there are people in NYC. If that was for a given time period on one night, that would mean all the other stations in the market had a wimpy audience of practically nothing.

 

[recto101]

When I mentioned journalism, I was referring to what MSNBC and (in all fairness) the other so-called cable news networks are attempting to portray themselves as. But in reality many hosts of these so-called news shows have their own political agendas.
Case in point: Chris Matthews of Hardball and Rachael Maddow.

We can come here and wring out hands and cry "Woe is Me" over the bastardizing and/or mis-labeling these networks and these programs as journalism and then clucking our tongues.

If the public wanted actual journalism, radio would not be running these wimpy little top of the hour kiss-and-tell things they call "the news". If the public wanted actual journalism C-SPAN might be the top rated network in the evening hours when they fill time not being used up by the House and the Senate.

On the other hand, have you noticed how much energy NPR puts into news these days. Apparently they know something other broadcasters can't come to grips with.

If you haven't already, get a copy of Rachel Maddow's book "Drift". It will make you wonder whose side she would be on in a true political showdown.

The lady is a Rhodes Scholar with a Doctorate from Oxford in Political Science. In some ways it must "grind her gears" to put that much energy into the shabbiness of broadcast journalism today. I am anxious to see where her trajectory takes her in years to come.

Unfortunately if you want actual journalism you have to live in certain markets like San Francisco or Washington DC where an NPR stations WAMU and KQED are competing against CBS all-news Stations like KCBS and WTOP. Or where a Pacifica station is available.