Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Archaic

(273 posts)
7. They know Rachel's the most important person there. But they've done nothing to differentiate beyon
Fri May 31, 2013, 01:12 AM
May 2013

Hours and hours of different people talking about the same subjects the last host did, before they hand off to the next host.

If they want to be the anti-Fox, fine.

But if they wanted to actually be a news channel, we'd get a news show, not an opinion show. Some actual, expensive, journalism. History, context, explanations and sources. Not 3 minute segments with guests that were already prepped and timed to say the right things to get the host's point across in the allotted time.

Imagine an Amy Goodman quality show available in prime time. One hour, one topic. Current issue, history and backstory provided, inconsistencies and misrepresentations destroyed.

I love Bill Moyers, but don't need the folksy setups. I want Amy, pissed off that nobody knows the history of the situation that everybody's surprised about now when she's been talking about it for years.

That's the only thing that would make MSNBC watchable in my opinion.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Media»Did MSNBC’s President Phi...»Reply #7