MSNBC ‘Like Watching Pravda’

Pravda. “Truth” in Russian. A test drive of MSNBC from an unlikely vehicle.

Dartmouth 1993. Now they watch MSNBC.

Michael Calderone Huffington Post:  “If the Democratic National Committee were to own a network and produce news programming designed to promote the party, it would look exactly like what MSNBC has become,” said Glenn Greenwald, who writes on civil liberties and national security for The Guardian.

In an interview, Greenwald acknowledged that Hayes and Maddow have challenged the Democratic establishment position on occasion, but said the latter seemed more willing to do so in the past as a host on Air America, the defunct liberal radio network, and early on in her MSNBC career. “She used to criticize Democrats from the left constantly,” Greenwald said. “Now she does extremely rarely.”

Speaking broadly about MSNBC’s programming, Greenwald said the network has “staffed their shows with not only hosts but regular guests who are the most loyal, reverent admirers of President Obama and who are single-handedly devoted to no real political principle or cause other than glorifying him and defending what he does.” At times, he said, the network can feel “like watching televised Pravda at the height of the Brezhnev era,” a reference to the old Soviet propaganda arm.

MSNBC head trip Phil Griffin.

“This channel has never been the voice of Obama. Ever,” Griffin told The Huffington Post. “People want to talk about Fox. Fox is the voice of the Republican Party.”"We hire smart people with a progressive sensibility,” Griffin said. “I tell them to go think for themselves. We don’t have talking points.”

Griffin suggested that Obama’s unwillingness to appear regularly on MSNBC proves the network is “not the home team.” And going forward into the second term, Griffin said his hosts will hold Obama accountable.

“We’re going to hold Obama to his campaign promises,” Griffin said. “And the fact is, there are many things that some of our hosts support him on. But basically, we have a standard, whether it’s the war on terror or getting out of Afghanistan: Is he going to live up to his campaign promises?”

Psychedelic H2O.

Matt Stoller, a fellow at the progressive Roosevelt Institute who had consulted for Dylan Ratigan’s former MSNBC show, similarly said that the network’s evening line-up is now “just part of the Democratic Party” and serves primarily as a “partisan organizing vehicle.”

If there are issues the Democratic establishment doesn’t want to discuss, Stoller said, it’s unlikely MSNBC’s hosts will either — from the financial system to foreign policy. “It’s a pro-Wall Street, pro-war narrative,” he said. “It just happens to be the blue version of it.”

Recently, professor Cornel West took aim at the network during an appearance on “Democracy Now.” A tough critic on Obama’s left flank, West charged MSNBC hosts Al Sharpton and Melissa Harris-Perry, along with MSNBC guest host Michael Eric Dyson, with becoming “apologists for the Obama administration” in exchange for insider White House access.

Indeed, Sharpton hasn’t been as tough on Obama as the 6 p.m. host he replaced, Cenk Uygur. A former Democratic presidential candidate, Sharpton regularly refers to Democrats on air as “we.” Similarly, Martin Bashir, host of MSNBC’s 4 p.m. hour, hasn’t been anywhere near as critical of the Democrats as his predecessor, Ratigan, was.

Sharpton’s support of the president shouldn’t come as a surprise. In a “60 Minutes” profile airing shortly before he took over the 6 p.m. slot, CBS’s Lesley Stahl described the civil rights activist as a “trusted White House adviser” who has “decided not to criticize the president about anything — even about black unemployment, which is twice the national rate.”

Such public support departs from the precedent set by Uygur, who, while harsher on Republicans, could also run through a list of progressive grievances on air, including Obama’s not closing the Guantanamo Bay prison, pushing “weak” financial reform, helping to “deep-six the public option” in health care reform and going along with Republicans on spending cuts.

During a phone interview, Uygur described Hayes as a “real progressive” and said Maddow also sometimes challenges Obama from the left. “But the overall sense you get at MSNBC is they are pro-Democrat rather than simply progressive,” said Uygur, who slammed MSNBC’s management on the way out and now hosts a 7 p.m show on Current TV.

“Should MSNBC take a more aggressive stance with President Obama after the elections to make sure he follows through on his progressive promises? Of course,” Uygur said in a follow-up email. “Will they? Probably not. They’ve been leaning back on their criticism of Democrats for so long, that I’m not sure they know how to, or care to, hold them accountable.”

So far, MSNBC hasn’t challenged Obama’s ardent backing of Israel’s aerial bombardment of Gaza, which The New York Times described as being as “vigorous” as George W. Bush’s support during his presidency. While Hayes’ guests this past Sunday morning offered a variety of perspectives, including that of the Palestinians, there hasn’t been a similar counterweight in primetime to the unwavering pro-Israel position shared among leaders in the Republican and Democratic establishment.

The Nation’s Greg Mitchell wrote Tuesday that MSNBC’s hosts devoted just 15 minutes to the crisis over five hours the previous night, a sharp contrast to CNN, which has sent high-profile hosts like Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper to Jerusalem and Gaza City, along with several senior correspondents, who appear on air throughout the day. Mitchell wrote that “none of MSNBC’s five prime-time, liberal, hosts last night or their guests would utter a single word critical of Israel in the current conflict with Gaza.”

Not all progressives agree that MSNBC needs to take a stronger line with the Democratic Party.

Robert Creamer, a political organizer, strategist and partner in Democracy Partners, told The Huffington Post that MSNBC took “exactly the right tone” during the 2012 race and described a need to illustrate the sharp contrasts with a Republican Party trying to “return us to the Gilded Age.”

“If we didn’t have MSNBC as a vehicle, I think it would have fundamentally transformed the political environment,” Creamer said. “If it was just Fox out there and kind of the middle-of-the-road journalistic CNN on television, I think we would have had much different circumstances.”

Creamer praised 8 p.m. host Ed Schultz for being “completely committed” in a battle to “save the middle class” and, broadly speaking, said MSNBC’s “positive winning tone” was very helpful to progressives during this election year.

Progressive Strategies CEO Mike Lux said in an email that he hopes “MSNBC will use their platform to push the President in a more progressive direction, and hold him accountable when he doesn’t live up to the hopes progressives have for him.”

But Lux said he also hopes MSNBC hosts don’t “mindlessly criticize” Obama when Republicans, in his view, are the ones blocking legislation.

Crazy like a fox?

Shortly after learning MSNBC beat Fox News on the first night of the Democratic National Convention — a first in the network’s 16-year history — an exuberant Griffin told The Huffington Post that “nobody thought we could do this” and chalked up the ratings victory to having “created something strong and different than the other guys.”

After taking over as president in 2008, Griffin began repositioning MSNBC as a liberal talk network, led by former star Keith Olbermann. While Griffin may balk at comparisons to Fox News when it comes to pushing a political agenda, he’s marveled at his rival’s programming strategy. “Fox figured it out that you have to stand for something in cable,” Griffin told New York Magazine in a 2010 cover story titled “Chasing Fox.”

Still chasing Fox, Griffin last week told The New York Times –- in a piece headlined “The Anti-Fox Gains Ground” –- that “we’re closer to Fox than we’ve ever been.”

MSNBC announced Monday that Maddow’s 9 p.m. show and Lawrence O’Donnell’s 10 p.m. show both ranked number one in the post-election week in cable news’ key age demographic, 25- to 54-year-olds — a major achievement for the network.

Speaking to The Huffington Post, Griffin attributed MSNBC’s recent ratings success to having built a strong brand and community around hosts whom viewers trusted during the 2012 election cycle and will hopefully stick with into Obama’s second term.

“What I really believe is we analyzed this election in a really smart way and we didn’t go over the top,” Griffin said. “We weren’t just shilling for Obama. We were really smart. And people are responding to that now.”

Thursday, November 22, 2012 @ 6:57 AM


  • http://twitter.com/sixtus66 Sixtus66

    Phil Griffin can spin it anyway he wants; even those who are radically left/liberal are saying that the network is a shill for the Democratic Party. Now, he can say that this point is an opinion, but why would these progressives lie?  

    The fact remains that the network hosts do not criticize the president; one network host proudly proclaimed that he never would. Which is ironic because in not criticizing the president, he is throwing under the bus, the race/demographic he swore he would defend with his program. But then again, this is only more proof that said host is only out for the person who stares back at him in the mirror every morning. 

    Anyways, the more Phil Griffin talks, the more he defends MSNBC and calls it nonpartisan, the more he sounds like his counter part at FOX…”We’re Fair and Balanced! Really!”

    • http://chickaboomer.com/ Marty Davis

      Phil’s been pandering that delusion for years.  We’ll see if MSNBC can make a permanent dent in Fox’s ratings.

      Happy Thanksgiving!

  • http://tomnichols.net/blog Tom

    Marty – Thanks for the shout-out in the Dartmouth picture, but you do realize the unintentional irony that it’s a picture of the only Republican in that department 20 years ago, right? I was a young prof teaching at Dartmouth, and occasionally consulting on Soviet politics with the CIA and Defense Department. Reading Izvestia was a way of keeping up with the enemy.

    Of course, comparing Izvestia to MSNBC is kind of an insult to Izvestia, but that’s another issue.

    Cheers,

    Tom Nichols (Dept of Government, Dartmouth, 1989 – 1997)

    • http://chickaboomer.com/ Marty Davis

      That’s you? Well, fucking incredible! See the link where I got it: The War Room. I linked it in the photo caption.

    • http://chickaboomer.com/ Marty Davis

      Yeah, truly an insult. For those clueless, Izvestia is Russian for ”news.”

    • http://chickaboomer.com/ Marty Davis

      Spasiba! I can I’D you next to the photo if you wish!

    • Jimbotalk

      Spasiba?  When did you learn russian?

    • http://chickaboomer.com/ Marty Davis

      Attempted Russian when grad student in SIS AU DC.

  • Jimbotalk

    When Phil Griffin dies, they can bury him in a coffin.
    Or, give him an enema and bury him in a matchbox. 

    • http://chickaboomer.com/ Marty Davis

      Ha ha! Good one!