MSNBC: Must Agree TV

[Mac1958]

.

Erik Wemple nails it:

MSNBC: Must-agree TV

Here come the deflections to Fox in 3, 2, 1....

.

 

[blastoff]

Audience-wise they're preaching to a rather small choir. But not disappointing the clowns at all.

 

[kiwiman127]

I would think that somebody,,anybody, would look at their tiny audience and would come to an easy business solution to entice a larger audience and more advertising revenue,,,change the one-sided approach!
Liberals and conservatives are not only different animals when it comes to political positions, they also appear to have approach on getting their news and opinions. Look at the huge difference with the ratings between Fox News and MSNBC and look at the even larger difference of audience size when it comes to Talk Radio! Conservatives love listening to the battle cry, where as with liberals the rah, rah battles cries don't seem to work. I think conservatives are much more emotional about their politics, it's in their genes. I think maybe it's this thing the left has about political correctness and also lefties are more laid back.
Anyway, back to MSNBC. If they really want to get the troops fired up, they'd be better served getting top notch conservatives as part of their programming, either as guest and at least as co-hosts. That way it wouldn't be such redundant programming because that's all MSNBC's programming and line up of hosts offer. Sharpton, Schultz and in the past Olbermann represents one-sided boredom.
My wife is pretty left but only watches one show and that's Maddow's show. My wife tells me that Maddow has an open invitation to anyone from the right. I'd guess that's true because I trust my wife. She has had Rand Paul and Tea Party folks on her show and doesn't try to shout them down according to Mrs Kiwiman.
Anyway, myself, I don't watch either Fox or MSNBC. This preaching to the choir thing doesn't do anything for me. I'd rather make my decisions with none partisan facts.

 

[blastoff]

I would think that somebody,,anybody, would look at their tiny audience and would come to an easy business solution to entice a larger audience and more advertising revenue,,,change the one-sided approach!...

Amen to that. In a boardroom somewhere their meager ad revenue has to be a subject of discussion, frequently I would think considering their ongoing low ratings. And the natural question from someone at the top should be what are you going to do to make it better next quarter and beyond?

But, it's either never asked or they keep swallowing whatever pie-in-the-sky plans the MSNBC idiots feed them. That never work.

Really lousy upper management.

 

[konradv]

I would think that somebody,,anybody, would look at their tiny audience and would come to an easy business solution to entice a larger audience and more advertising revenue,,,change the one-sided approach!...

Amen to that. In a boardroom somewhere their meager ad revenue has to be a subject of discussion, frequently I would think considering their ongoing low ratings. And the natural question from someone at the top should be what are you going to do to make it better next quarter and beyond?

But, it's either never asked or they keep swallowing whatever pie-in-the-sky plans the MSNBC idiots feed them. That never work.

Really lousy upper management.

Pie-in-the-sky? Do even know what it means? Progressives don't go for that. It's about solutions for the here and now, not the hereafter.

pie in the sky - Wiktionary

 

[blastoff]

I would think that somebody,,anybody, would look at their tiny audience and would come to an easy business solution to entice a larger audience and more advertising revenue,,,change the one-sided approach!...

Amen to that. In a boardroom somewhere their meager ad revenue has to be a subject of discussion, frequently I would think considering their ongoing low ratings. And the natural question from someone at the top should be what are you going to do to make it better next quarter and beyond?

But, it's either never asked or they keep swallowing whatever pie-in-the-sky plans the MSNBC idiots feed them. That never work.

Really lousy upper management.

Pie-in-the-sky? Do even know what it means? Progressives don't go for that. It's about solutions for the here and now, not the hereafter.

pie in the sky - Wiktionary

From your link: pie in the sky
A fanciful notion; ludicrous concept; the illusory promise of a desired outcome that is unlikely to happen.

So, go back and reread my post and sub "the illusory promise of a desired outcome that is unlikely to happen" for pie-in-the-sky and maybe it'll make sense. If not, that's life.

 

[konradv]

Amen to that. In a boardroom somewhere their meager ad revenue has to be a subject of discussion, frequently I would think considering their ongoing low ratings. And the natural question from someone at the top should be what are you going to do to make it better next quarter and beyond?

But, it's either never asked or they keep swallowing whatever pie-in-the-sky plans the MSNBC idiots feed them. That never work.

Really lousy upper management.

Pie-in-the-sky? Do even know what it means? Progressives don't go for that. It's about solutions for the here and now, not the hereafter.

pie in the sky - Wiktionary

From your link: pie in the sky
A fanciful notion; ludicrous concept; the illusory promise of a desired outcome that is unlikely to happen.

So, go back and reread my post and sub "the illusory promise of a desired outcome that is unlikely to happen" for pie-in-the-sky and maybe it'll make sense. If not, that's life.

That's only based on the bastardization of the term by the song "High Hopes". You'll find its original and true meaning here.

The Preacher and the Slave - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[daveman]

I would think that somebody,,anybody, would look at their tiny audience and would come to an easy business solution to entice a larger audience and more advertising revenue,,,change the one-sided approach!...

Amen to that. In a boardroom somewhere their meager ad revenue has to be a subject of discussion, frequently I would think considering their ongoing low ratings. And the natural question from someone at the top should be what are you going to do to make it better next quarter and beyond?

But, it's either never asked or they keep swallowing whatever pie-in-the-sky plans the MSNBC idiots feed them. That never work.

Really lousy upper management.

Pie-in-the-sky? Do even know what it means? Progressives don't go for that. It's about solutions for the here and now, not the hereafter.

pie in the sky - Wiktionary

Wind power. Solar. Electric cars.

 

[daveman]

Rachel Maddow Posted Her Worst Ratings Ever This Month

Read more: MSNBC, CNN, Fox News Ratings In August - Business Insider


"The Rachel Maddow Show" posted all-time ratings lows in August, in a month that continued a ratings plunge that has prevailed throughout much of the year.
The show was down 43% in total viewers and 47% in the key 25-54 age demographic, respectively, from August 2012.

And overall, MSNBC posted ratings that were down 28% in total viewers and 32% in the demographic in the daytime, and down 36% and 32%, respectively, in primetime. For the 140th consecutive month in cable news, Fox News won the ratings war, and CNN slipped down to third place in both primetime and total-day viewers.