See the video at Johnny Dollar’s Place.

Name a news story from this past week. Already having trouble? Yeah… me too.

The week-to-come won’t be boring: The tenth anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing and the Papal Conclave will share the 24-hour news cycle.

The Associated Press’ Bill Kaczor focuses in on MSNBC 10pm host Joe Scarborough in
this Saturday-edition piece. Joe gives a bit of insight in to, if nothing else, the genesis of his program during the “major combat operations” era two years ago:

“They [MSNBC] kept telling me they wanted me to be O’Reilly,” Scarborough said in Pensacola, where he lives and tapes most of the TV shows. “They wanted me to be a mouthpiece for the right and I kept telling them `It’s just not that simple.’ “

And remember all that flack Joe took over the Bush campaign event he hosted last year? The one MSNBC said was OK. MSNBC took the line that Scarborough is a “host” of an opinion program — not a news anchor. He said it almost didn’t happen. But he got encouragement from (on the surface) unlikely source:

“I got cold feet,” Scarborough said. “I asked my wife whether I should do it or not, and she said `Sure, it’s a great honor.’ I said `Yeah, what would you say if Chris Matthews was hosting an event for John Kerry?’ She said `Oh, I see what you mean.’ ”

Scarborough tried to back out, but the White House said it was too late and MSNBC president Rick Kaplan urged him to stick with it.

“I was very uncomfortable doing it and told everybody involved that it’s the last time I would ever be involved in a campaign that I would be reporting on,” Scarborough said.

Bill O’Reilly’s Friday version of the “Most Rediculous Item of the Day” is quite funny.

A political editor at Sky News in London, England, Adam Boulton, has a new nightly news program called, are you ready, “The Boulton Factor”

Now I’m sure the check’s is in the mail for your humble correspondent. But more importantly, “The Boulton Factor” better be good. If not it would be ridiculous.

Of course, Sky News is owned by News Corp. — as is Fox News Channel.

Fox News Channel will produce a series of tax tips and advice to air on the in-house “Wal-Mart TV” network — and will air in both Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club. Learn more.

Mike Barnicle will soon end his Boston Herald column. The sometimes-contributor to MSNBC offered to help out the struggling Herald by dropping his services. “I didn’t want to be sitting around collecting a check from the Herald while someone who has been over there for 25 years or 25 minutes was getting laid off,” he told competing Boston paper The Boston Globe.

Barnicle appeared on MSNBC’s Countdown (with guest host Allison Stewart) Friday, and the second line on his name super was The Boston Herald.

A few months ago, there was some speculation that he would be joining MSNBC full time. The Globe says Barnicle “has another time-consuming writing project to work on.”

Celebrity Justice reports that CNN’s Larry King was served with a subpeona to testify in the Micahel Jackson Circus. Trial. The Michael Jackson Trial.

CJ says King got hit with the subpeona while leaving a Beverly Hills newsstand Friday morning.

Why? Well that’s a bit complicated:

We’re told King will testify about a conversation he allegedly had with Larry Feldman and book publisher Michael Viner at Nate and Al’s, a landmark Beverly Hills deli.

Feldman’s the attorney who represented Jackson’s 1993 accuser, and who has also had many meetings with the current accuser and his mother. Last year, Feldman told “Good Morning America” that he believes the latest boy’s story.

While Feldman has denied he told King anything damaging about the accuser and his family, sources tell “CJ” that the book publisher, Viner, contends Feldman made unflattering comments about the accuser’s mother. And it was Viner’s impression from the conversation that the mother wanted money.

Earlier today, I wondered if NBC’s new crime show was out faster than you can say Michael Jackson. An MSNBC insider who asked not to be identified reports that they are going to make some minor adjustments — and return next week.

Quoting here:

“Same time, same anchors, minor tweaks to story concepts and set and blocking. The show got good in-house response from the higher ups, but there were a few things that staffers felt needed improvement, so it was given two weeks to retool and relaunch. “

AllThingsCooper has audio and stills from Anderson Cooper’s appearance on Late Night with Conan O’Brien earlier this week.

On CNN: Larry King sits down with family & friends of Prince Rainier and Aaron Brown previews the upcoming conclave..

On FNC, Mark Lunsford enters Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin Zone — Lunsford is the father of the 9-year-old Florida girl kidnapped and killed. Plus: Hannity & Colmes show you how to stop paying taxes.

Countdown shows you a new company that allows you to join the Mile High Club without sneaking around in a cramped lavatory. Plus, Jane Fonda sits down with Chris Matthews on Hardball.

MSNBC’s new Friday crime series Dietl and Daniels didn’t show up today (despite references to “next week’s show” on last week’s show).

What’s the deal?

In the previous part of this series I illustrated some of the unique challenges that face MSNBC as a result of its relationship with NBC. The framework that MSNBC is required to function in is a result of the direction and priorities given to it by NBC and is not a burden shared by the other cable news channels. NBC’s strategy to date vis a vis MSNBC has been to place the onus of news coverage on the shoulders of NBC News and NBC News’ programs because that’s where the viewers and advertising dollars are and changing focus could dilute NBC’s windfall. An argument can be made that this position is not entirely justified. There is evidence that, though broadcast news (and broadcast television in general) has been hemorrhaging viewers for decades as the cable channels started growing at a near exponential rate, even on a big news day the three cable news networks combined almost never equal the viewership of the broadcast networks when they choose to simulcast a story. FOX did it last year on one night but that has been the exception and not the rule. Thus it could be suggested that the turf war mentality that arises from this paranoia at NBC Corporate, its affiliates, and NBC News over the possibility of being undercut by MSNBC may be unwarranted. But for now that seems to be the conventional wisdom at NBC. In a nutshell, NBC News and its programming (and all that is necessary to make that a reality) receive an overwhelmingly disproportionate priority over anything MSNBC does. In this section I will more closely examine how this relationship as it currently exists can play out to the detriment of MSNBC’s coverage in cases when MSNBC should not be getting shortchanged.

For the sake of discussion, let us accept as fact that MSNBC’s charter is to deliver the news as it unfolds and to cover the stories in depth through live reports, interviews, and analysis the way CNN and FOX do. It is true that recently NBC/MSNBC have been conducting an advertising campaign where MSNBC is positioned as a better alternative to CNN Headline News; a strategy which suggests that NBC views HLN as the competition. But it is also true to even the most casual observer of both networks that HLN’s and MSNBC’s charters and the way the two networks approach news coverage are fundamentally different to the point of making a direct comparison counterproductive. In other words, while MSNBC may be being advertised as a better alternative to HLN, it is covering the news the way FOX and CNN do and not the way HLN does.

By being a “24 hour” news channel (though in reality no channel is live 24 hours a day anymore…not even HLN…it’s just too expensive to do that) MSNBC is positioned to do things that NBC News cannot for the simple reason that NBC is not all about news. In fact NBC is mostly about entertainment. Breaking news as it happens is the appeal of a 24 hour news channel because broadcast networks are loathe to cut into their lucrative schedules. It has a tendency to annoy viewers who have their programs pre-empted. People actually complained during the later Apollo missions because re-runs of “I Love Lucy” had been pre-empted. Broadcast networks see reactions like that and plan accordingly. Which is why when breaking news of national import happens, networks tend to keep “news interrupts” to a minimum. But the all news cable channels have no such restrictions because that’s what they’re in business for. One would think that this would play to MSNBC’s benefit but that is not always the case.

For a near perfect example of this one only has to go back two weeks ago to when the Pope’s health took a sudden turn for the worse. MSNBC had a bit of luck that night because both CNN and FOX were caught napping with reruns of coverage of Terry Schiavo’s death that they chose not to interrupt. MSNBC was already live with Dan Abrams, also covering Schiavo, when news started leaking out of Rome that the Pope had suffered a cardio collapse and was in dire straits. Incredibly, MSNBC owned the late night coverage as CNN and FOX continued on with their taped programs. For the next hour and twenty minutes it was the only network devoting coverage to the Pope with analysis of his medical condition and live reports from Rome. CNN eventually switched over to the CNN International feed. But MSNBC had gotten the drop on the competition.

MSNBC was in a unique position. It had owned the early coverage. Plus it had MSNBC anchor Chris Jansing already in Rome as part of an extended Papal assignment. What’s more, NBC the next day decided to gamble and pull the trigger to get their people out to Rome, even flying Matt Lauer out to Rome on Friday night to anchor Weekend Today on Saturday. NBC and MSNBC would have their people in place, in force, 24 hours before any other network could mount a similar campaign.

But somewhere along the way the decision was made that NBC News would carry the water and MSNBC would follow behind, even though there were no plans to interrupt large portions of NBC’s regular programming unless and/or until the Pope died. This decision would translate on the TV screen into heavy emphasis of the Pope on Today, Weekend Today, and NBC Nightly News featuring interviews and analysis from Rome. Katie Couric would cut her vacation in China short and fly to Rome. But there would be no wholesale adjustments made on MSNBC save flying Chris Mathews to anchor Hardball from Rome. The daytime coverage would continue to originate out of Secaucus and not Rome. Jansing would be confined to mostly hourly update reporting with little interviewing or analysis while the bulk of the interviews would be conducted from the studios at Secaucus. In effect, NBC/MSNBC took its best available asset that was already in place in Rome and marginalized it even though NBC would not be doing coverage from Rome during non-traditional NBC News periods. By not going beyond the confines of NBC News regular programming, NBC News would leave a void for NBC viewers seeking information on the Pope and an opportunity for MSNBC to shine in coverage from Rome 24 hours before any other cable network. But this opportunity was not taken advantage of. This was no accident. For whatever reason it was planned this way by NBC and MSNBC executives.

There are some possible explanations why this approach was taken. For one thing, satellite time is expensive. It wouldn’t be just MSNBC using satellite time but NBC News as well. Given the NBC/MSNBC relationship, NBC News would be using it more to emphasize their programming. Whereas with CNN and FOX there’s just one satellite that doesn’t have to be shared with a “competing” network. However this started to fall apart as a likely explanation when the interviews being conducted out of Secaucus during the morning and daytime hours included interviewing people live in Rome with Secaucus based talent. This begs the question; what is the point of having a skilled journalist and adept interviewer like Jansing in Rome if you are going to use the people in your American studio to interview people in Rome?

Another explanation is that this could be seen as an opportunity to feature more MSNBC talent covering a story that had a high viewer interest. There is no doubt that more viewers would become familiar with the faces of MSNBC as this story unfolded and I could see how this would sound very attractive to those in charge who are looking for a way to emphasize MSNBC’s ability to cover a story from all angles. However there is a drawback to this approach that may not have been anticipated. The drawback is that the viewer will see people in the studio in Secaucus interviewing people in the studio in Secaucus or via satellite while the other cable networks’ people who are in Rome are interviewing people in Rome. On location coverage tends to be more compelling to the viewer than static coverage originating from a studio. NBC seemed to know this is the case because they ensured that their NBC News programs had heavy Rome coverage of Rome from Rome. Yet for reasons that are still inexplicable to me, they chose not to extend this approach to MSNBC. When news broke that the Pope was dead, Jansing had a couple of quickie interviews in Rome and then coverage was turned over to Lester Holt who was on standby apparently at 30 Rock. Holt then proceeded to interview people in studios and in Rome. Meanwhile CNN and FOX coverage stayed mostly in Rome. Given the choice which would you rather watch? Live coverage from Rome or static coverage from a studio?

Another possible explanation is that MSNBC wanted Chris Mathews to head up the bulk of the coverage from Rome. For a while now MSNBC (and by extrapolation NBC) has been positioning Mathews as the face of MSNBC. Saturday’s quickie MSNBC TV ads of the coverage originally said, “Join Chris Jansing and Chris Mathews in Rome”. Those were hastily replaced 24 hours later with ads that said, “Join Chris Mathews anchoring from Rome and Chris Jansing reporting from Rome”. So it was apparent that NBC/MSNBC wanted Mathews to be the face of this coverage. But Mathews would not arrive in Rome for yet another day and wouldn’t go live until that night. Meanwhile Jansing, who was already in Rome, would contribute relatively little to the overall coverage beyond giving minor updates once an hour.

The result was, having established the lead in the coverage, MSNBC relinquished it. By taking Jansing out of the equation and not utilizing her to the fullest extent while Mathews was in transit and by basing it’s coverage out of the Secaucus studios, NBC/MSNBC gave FOX and CNN back the 24 hours they had originally stolen from them. CNN had the time to flood the zone in Rome with its front line talent and did the bulk of its coverage originating out of Rome. Even FOX, which was sluggishly slow to react and sent a relatively meager contingent to Rome compared to CNN or NBC, managed to outpace MSNBC for live coverage from Rome; going so far as to interview people live in the middle of St. Peter’s Square (and would continue to do so throughout the following days). MSNBC, with the exception of Mathews and Hardball, stayed mostly in Secaucus. When it came time for the Papal funeral, the viewing patterns had been firmly established based on the coverage of the three networks up to that point and MSNBC got creamed by both CNN and FOX in the ratings.

NBC/MSNBC had a golden opportunity and they muffed it. This was one of those seminal news events that can frame a viewer’s perceptions of the network the viewer is watching. Through a series of procedural decisions involving turf wars and doling out whom gets what resources, MSNBC came out looking a lot weaker and worse off than it is. Anybody who watched the Democratic and Republican conventions and the various debates last year saw MSNBC in fine form with substantial on location coverage and analysis during daytime hours. However the principles followed during those events were not applied to this case, to MSNBC’s detriment.

In the final part of this analysis, I will discuss how MSNBC could maximize it’s strengths to help mitigate the negative aspects of the NBC/MSNBC relationship.

That is a line that is repeated everyday in high schools across America, as students are taught and exercised by a coach, in both the educational and physical enviroment. Everyone has been to a sports practice or PE, had a coach tell them to do something, and they would do it. “I can do it coach”. While it’s a good thing in high school, its generally not a good thing in the world of cable news, especially when the host of a show is coaching his guests on how to answer his liberal counterpart’s questions. Especially not, when you host, what you claim to be the “most complete and informative program on your radio dial”, and have a show on the “fair and balanced network”.

Have you guessed who we are talking about yet? Here’s a hint, the first name is Sean. The last name is Hannity. He is one a mission to “Hannitize” America and also apparently journalism(if you call what he does journalism) in the process. According to Lloyd Grove in today’s NYDailyNews that is exactly what Mr.Hannity did with several of his guests while he was down in Florida “covering” the Terri Shiavo case. Keep it Sean, your doing a great job, don’t let ethics get in the way of spewing your talking points.

See it?

It’s overthere, in the top right hand corner of the site. I am just drawing attention to it, simply because it is a cool kind of news jar that will allow you to drop us tips, anonymously or not. So, if you have a news item you would like us to know about, just send it to us via the link.

MSNBC’s Special, which replayed portions of the Royal Wedding, and provided some extra commentary did extremely well. It aired during the 8e hour on MSNBC and pulled in more than 750,000 viewers, nearly doubling CNN’s audience at the time. Link to TVNewser who has “insider” reaction.
———————————————-
From April 13, 2005

TVNewser reported these ratings last night…

Who was #1 in royal wedding coverage? It depends on your clock. But it’s clear that CNN had a very strong showing. Between 7 and 11am, CNN was first: They averaged 1,597,000 viewers, compared to 1,499,000 for FNC and MSNBC’s 593,000, according to the network. CNN beat FNC in the 25-54 demo, as well (538k vs 485k). CNN’s coverage officially began at 6am, though. If you’re measuring each network’s technical time period of live wedding coverage, FNC comes in #1. For the Nielsen records, each network commenced live coverage at a different time. So here are the raw numbers for each network’s coverage, based on the time period they covered the funeral: FNC: 6:55 to 11am: 1.5 HH / 1,484,000 viewers / 481,000 demo CNN: 6 to 11am: 1.4 HH / 1,352,000 viewers / 462,000 demo MSNBC: 7 to 11am: 0.6 HH / 593,000 viewers / 133,000 demo…

Since there has already been comment about how polling and ratings are one in the same, no preamle will preceed the ratings tonight. They are much more incomplete than usual. Whomever leaked them to TVNewser only gave the total primetime averages for each of the networks not the hourly breakdowns.

“Nancy Grace has now entrenched herself as a solid 0.3 show — averaging just 308,000 viewers last night,” an insider says. On Wednesday night:

FNC: 1.8 / 2,123,000 viewers / 563,000 demo

CNN: 0.5 / 494,000 viewers / 212,000 demo

MSNBC: 0.2 / 194,000 viewers / 57,000 demo

HLN: 0.3 / 308,000 viewers / 100,000 demo

But 0.3 is still an improvement over the number HLN used to pull in primetime…

Everthing in italics comes from TVNewser.

The answer according to this column from the Boston Pheonix (hat tip CNNWatcher), not cable news. The author of the column states his opinion that cable news simply doesn’t have the seriousness and dedication to stories that don’t involve a double murder. He suggests that NPR (yes, radio) may be the way of the future. Overall a very interesting read.

2005 marks the 10th year of MSNBC’s existence. With that landmark in mind, an examination of MSNBC is in order. The purpose of the first of what will be a three part blog analysis of MSNBC will be to look at the NBC/MSNBC relationship.

One could start off such an analysis by asking the question “What is MSNBC?”. There seems to be a lot of misconception and confusion on this topic. In the cable news wars, the fight has always been framed as CNN vs. FOX vs. MSNBC. But this assumption is based on a somewhat flawed premise; namely that MSNBC is anindependent entity like FOX and CNN.

If one takes the view that MSNBC is its own organization ala FOX and CNN, then one would naturally want to hold MSNBC to the same level of scrutiny that would be used on either of its two competitors. And when utilizing such a worldview, MSNBC appears to suffer by comparison in some areas.The problem with such a comparison is MSNBC is not an independent entity to the degree that CNN and FOX are and I don’t think a lot of people realize this and take it into account when looking at MSNBC. Therefore another purpose of this first entry is to try to explain why MSNBC is different from FOX and CNN in several critical areas.

The MSNBC/NBC/GE relationship is a complex one but it directly impacts what MSNBC can and cannot do and how it can and cannot go about doing it. This must not be understated as it is the single most important factor why MSNBC is the way it is. Both CNN and FOX do not have anyone to compete with or answer to except other cable news channels. That is not the
case for MSNBC. MSNBC’s existence depends greatly on what NBC, NBC’s affiliates, and NBC News say it shall be. The buck does not stop at the desk of Rick Kaplan, MSNBC President. In many ways it’s only buffered there and filters on up through the likes of NBC News President Neal Shapiro and even up to the desk of NBC President Jeff Zucker.

Often Shapiro and Zucker are the ones who say what MSNBC can and cannot do. Though to be fair it would be a more accurate representation to say that they provide a framework for Rick Kaplan and MSNBC to operate out of. But make no mistake, while CNN and FOX don’t have to clear a lot above the heads of Jon Klein and Roger Ailes, Rick Kaplan has to run a lot on
up to Shapiro and Zucker.

This is not to say that Rick Kaplan isn’t his own man and I am not at all arguing as such. I don’t think for one second that he would have taken the job just to wind up being a network toadie. Rick Kaplan has a vision and ideas, and while I may not agree with everything he has done, it is clear he is putting his own imprint on MSNBC. But at the same time he does not have the carte blanche that Klein or Ailes have and he never will because of the outside pressures and competing interests that bear down on MSNBC both from NBC corporate and NBC News.

MSNBC is something of a paradox. On the one hand it is supposed to compete with CNN and FOX in terms of news coverage and viewers. And yet on the other hand it is not supposed to undercut NBC News or NBC programming. This would appear to be an untenable position for MSNBC, in its current form, to be in because the case can be made that MSNBC can’t do both and do them effectively because the two directly conflict with one another. You can’t be expected to match CNN and FOX if your approach is being governed by the principle
that you must not undercut your bigger, more well connected sibling.

And yet this seems to be the lot that MSNBC has drawn. Or rather, to put it in more appropriate terms, this is the hand that MSNBC has been dealt by NBC Corporate and NBC News; compete with the other two cable nets but not at the expense of us.

Take the Imus program for example. When everyone else is broadcasting news, MSNBC is in effect simulcasting radio. While it should not be ignored or discounted that Imus lands bigger numbers on MSNBC than their daytime programming and he does get some A list guests and politicians, it is still basically a radio show being shown on TV. Few in studio guests are ever present, most are just detached voices coming over a phone line. Compelling TV it is not. FOX has “Fox and Friends” and CNN has “American Morning” while MSNBC in essence broadcasts radio. Why does MSNBC wait until 9 am EST to start its news day?

To get one possible reason, all one has to do is take a look at the 800 lb. gorilla that also airs at that time; NBC’s Today Show. I read somewhere that this monster of a program generates hundreds of millions of dollars annually for NBC. If you are Jeff Zucker or Neal Shapiro do you want to mess with that success? Do you want to have your affiliates call you up and complain about lower numbers (along with the corresponding lower ad dollars) because viewers are jumping over to MSNBC for news? Of course not. You would want Today to be the only NBC show doing news during that time period. And that’s what they have now. And you know what? From a business standpoint, it’s the right call to make because NBC is the bigger profit generator. But there should be no illusions about why Imus is on MSNBC. It isn’t because someone had a great idea back in 1995 to put radio on TV.

When was the last time you saw MSNBC get a big name interview before The Today Show? Or before NBC Nightly News? Or before Meet The Press? Or before Dateline? The word “synergy” is bounced around a lot by NBC and MSNBC execs and it has become standard to hear “MSNBC…backed by the power of NBC News”. And yet a lot of that synergy and power seems uni-directional; going from MSNBC to NBC and not so much the other way around. NBC News has siphoned off some of MSNBC’s better talent over the years. John Siegenthaler, Soledad O’Brien, Lester Holt, and Natalie Morales all started off as MSNBC anchors. NBC will always pre-empt regular programming for NBC News coverage of special events but rarely will simulcast an MSNBC live broadcast unless it is an extreme emergency and NBC News for whatever reason can’t do it. MSNBC talent are rarely seen on NBC News shows (some of you out there will undoubtedly say, “What about Lester Holt?” but he is no longer exclusively an MSNBC employee…he’s more of an NBC employee who hangs out on MSNBC when he’s not doing anything for NBC). There is little cross promotion of MSNBC on NBC.

Of course this is the way it is because NBC News’ financial stake is much much larger than MSNBC’s and therefore much more valuable to NBC. This is the crux of the issue and MSNBC’s conundrum as it moves into its second decade of existence; how to function well as a news organization given that your parents do not necessarily have your best interests at heart.

It is important to keep this in mind when talking about the cable news wars. To compare MSNBC to CNN and FOX is a mistake because though their goals are the same, the structure and operation of MSNBC is significantly different from that of FOX and CNN. A more apt comparison would be to compare NBC and MSNBC to CNN and CNN Headline News as the structures and organizations between the companies are more similar (though at the same time one could write a whole essay on why MSNBC’s functions and its mission are very dissimilar from Headline News’). Ironically, the ratings success of Nancy Grace on HLN may have forced upon CNN the very dilemma that NBC has successfully managed to avoid for the last 10 years on MSNBC…having a show on the offshoot network capable of undermining the parent company’s programming.

In the next part of this series I will examine in more concrete terms how this NBC/MSNBC dynamic plays out in what you see on the air.

Anderson Cooper appeared with Conan O’Brien last night — catch the repeat this evening on CNBC. (Thanks: What’s Happening@CNN)

MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews is set to cablecast live from RFK Stadium in DC for the Washington Nationals 2005 season.

Also tonight: The O’Reilly factor asks if American newspapers are feeding the culture war. Larry King sits down with a group of clergymen to answer the question: “What happens after we die.” And Anderson Cooper answers another age old question: “Does Size Really Matter?“

News for CNBC World fans: After little more than a year at CNNI, Martin Soong will be returning home to CNBC Asia on April 25 as anchor of Asia Squawk Box [6:00 - 9:00 pm Eastern Sunday-Thursday]. [via]

Meanwhile, former Asia Squawk Box cult fave Bernard Lo continues to languish away in obscurity on Bloomberg Asia Pacific … we think.

Kristi Turnquist of the [Portland] Oregonian gives CNN a much-deserved raspberry for its embarrassing attempt at integrating blog content into its daily news coverage:

CNN Discovers the Blogosphere: As if CNN doesn’t have enough problems trying to catch the Fox News Channel in the ratings, some genius has decided to include a segment called “Inside the Blogs” on the afternoon news show, “Inside Politics.” This bit consists of two “blog reporters” sitting at a table facing each other — you can tell they’re blog reporters because they’re dressed in computer-geek-casual instead of TV reporter suits. These two sit at snazzy computers and quote a couple lines from a blog or two about whatever’s in the news that day. Camera operators clumsily try to get in close to the computer screens to show highlighted words. After Monday’s installment — a brief, abrupt, awkward check-in on controversies surrounding Rep. Tom DeLay — host Judy Woodruff seemed on the verge of laughing. Or crying.

There’s a word for this sort of thing. That word is “clueless.” If CNN is that dumbfounded as to how to use the blogosphere to its advantage, perhaps they should drop us an email. Come on Bohrman, you know better than this.

And no, MSNBC, you haven’t escaped our notice. Here’s a hint: Doing an exact copy of CNN’s blogtastrophe may not be the best way to stand out from the crowd.

Michael Starr of the New York Post reports that ABCNEWS employees are showing their support for Peter Jennings by sporting the ubiquitous yellow wristbands of the Lance Armstrong Foundation. Jennings, of course, was diagnosed with lung cancer last week.

MSNBC’s Scaborough Country had a nice little button on it tonight.

Joe did a segment on the “sexually satisfied female.” At the end of the show — he said “And stay tuned next for Hardball — Chris has the secrets to the sexually satisfied male. Or Politics. One of the two.”

It’s interesting that Chris’ guest is former Viagra pitchman Sen. Bob Dole

TVNewser reported these ratings last night…

Who was #1 in royal wedding coverage? It depends on your clock. But it’s clear that CNN had a very strong showing. Between 7 and 11am, CNN was first: They averaged 1,597,000 viewers, compared to 1,499,000 for FNC and MSNBC’s 593,000, according to the network. CNN beat FNC in the 25-54 demo, as well (538k vs 485k). CNN’s coverage officially began at 6am, though. If you’re measuring each network’s technical time period of live wedding coverage, FNC comes in #1. For the Nielsen records, each network commenced live coverage at a different time. So here are the raw numbers for each network’s coverage, based on the time period they covered the funeral: FNC: 6:55 to 11am: 1.5 HH / 1,484,000 viewers / 481,000 demo CNN: 6 to 11am: 1.4 HH / 1,352,000 viewers / 462,000 demo MSNBC: 7 to 11am: 0.6 HH / 593,000 viewers / 133,000 demo…

Now the analysis of those ratings. CNN beat FNC in their coverage if you look at the same time. This has re-established a trend that was broken by the Iraq War, that CNN usually beats FNC in breaking news and special coverage. But for MSNBC to draw nearly 600,000 on the weekends is quite unusual. If you go back and look at the hour to hour (7-10AM for both days) numbers for the Pope’s coverage, MSNBC’s ratings for their wedding coverage are about the same as the Saturday morning numbers for just before the Pope’s death. This is curious as it may show that MSNBC has over the past few weeks reached an audience that will tune into it for special coverage of “major” events. Just some thoughts. Post your thougts in the comments section below.

A person who identified him/herself as an insider and passed along some details of the renovation.

The set renovations are located in the old Nachman, Homepage Nook of the main studio. The area is being turned into a weather center for NBC WeatherPlus(which according to our source will be produced in Secaucas), as well as expanded weather segments on MSNBC. This source said that the new “Weather Center” will include two chromakeys, a stand up area, a possible monitor wall, and multiple workstations for weather producers and meteorologists.

–Just a reminder, the specifics of the renovations have not been independently confirmed! However, all are aware that there is construction underway on that part of the MSNBC set. The construction looks to be more intensive than just thowing up a couple of green screens. So, this blog has decided to pass this tidbit along since it fits with a portrait of current events on the MSNBC Newsroom set.

We will bring you more as we get it.

Count Cal Thomas among those who didn’t like the cablers coverage of the Prince Chuck wedding (v 2.0). He specifically blasted CNN & MSNBC, but the Fox News contributor did not mention FNC.

Here’s a little more on the latest report from Nielsen/NetRatings on top news websites.

LostRemote points us to the latest rankings — which put MSNBC.com on top with 25-million unique viewers in March. That puts it just ahead of Yahoo’s 23.5-million and CNN.com’s 21.9 million. What’s interesting is the amount of time the average user spends — 23 minutes on MSNBC.com, versus 34 minutes for Yahoo and an astounding 47 minutes for CNN.com.

As we were the first to tell you earlier this week, MSNBC is revamping part of its set — to make way for a new weather center.

Currently, the network does not have a weather center — but is adding one near the current interview area. The studio is still in use for all its regular programs, except MSNBC Live.

TVN hears they are “just” remodeling the area used for weather reports — but it’s clear that this is more than just a slight change.

These just in from TVNewser…

Who was #1 in royal wedding coverage? It depends on your clock. But it’s clear that CNN had a very strong showing. Between 7 and 11am, CNN was first: They averaged 1,597,000 viewers, compared to 1,499,000 for FNC and MSNBC’s 593,000, according to the network. CNN beat FNC in the 25-54 demo, as well (538k vs 485k). CNN’s coverage officially began at 6am, though. If you’re measuring each network’s technical time period of live wedding coverage, FNC comes in #1. For the Nielsen records, each network commenced live coverage at a different time. So here are the raw numbers for each network’s coverage, based on the time period they covered the funeral: FNC: 6:55 to 11am: 1.5 HH / 1,484,000 viewers / 481,000 demo CNN: 6 to 11am: 1.4 HH / 1,352,000 viewers / 462,000 demo MSNBC: 7 to 11am: 0.6 HH / 593,000 viewers / 133,000 demo

As usual what’s in italic is from TVNewser… Independent analysis in the morning

For all of you who don’t know, Vox Populi was a segment in the Network Newshour w/Howard Beale. The newscast wasn’t real. It was part of a movie that predicted a very grim future for Network News. The movie, Network, was supposed serve as a warning, to keep it from happening. It was a warning and a very accurate one at that. It was a warning that no one heeded. Today newscasts resemble the Network Newshour (what the movie portrayed as a newscast was thought of as scandalous back in the 1970’s) in more ways than one would like to admit. So here at ICN, we pay tribute to the visionary movie by naming the semi-regular ratings(which are just a poll after all) segment after the opinion poll segment from that newscast from that movie…

And now the ratings, from TVNewser

CNN has seen several rating boosts during big news stories, but the #s settled down on Monday. Larry King had a 1.1, but NewsNight averaged just a 0.6. “Good thing Jon Klein has that screenplay to write,” an e-mailer remarked. In primetime, FNC averaged 1,823,000 viewers, while CNN had 780,000 and MSNBC had 281,000. Here’s the individual show breakdown:

FNC: Shep: 1,164,000 / O’Reilly: 2,390,000 / H&C: 1,553,000 / Greta: 1,524,000

CNN: Cooper: 485,000 / Zahn: 530,000 / King: 1,172,000 / Brown: 637,000

MSNBC: Hardball: 338,000 / Olbermann: 338,000 / Abrams: 254,000 / Scarborough: 285,000

CNBC: Miller: 126,000 / Deutsch: 63,000 (scratch)

Nancy Grace averaged 360,000 viewers, but only 74,000 in the 25-54 demo — CNBC’s 8pm rerun of The Contender had 80,000. “Nancy back to last,” one insider said…

Everything that is in italics, is, quite naturally, his.

It has been a slow couple of days in the cable news world. Here at ICN, we pride ourselves in having our eyes on the screen and our ears to the floor. No matter what we do there just seems to be a dearth of cable news related events and stories right now. One must wonder that instead of covering cable news, critiquing and commentating the coverage, if this blog and other’s like it are just a mere reflection of medium which they are supposed to cover.
(more…)

The Denver Post’s Jeanne Ostrow loves CNBC’S Keith Olbermann, and the New York Times’ Alessandra Stanely can’t stand MSNBC’S Tina Brown.

The Daily Illini reports that MSNBC president Rick Kaplan told a group of about 50 students at alma mater University of Illinois that the blogging trend is helping get people get more involved with the world.

Kaplan warns that the accuracy of blogs can sometimes be a hangup:

“The bloggers’ accuracy rates are good for baseball, not for journalists,” Kaplan said. “A baseball player can make seven out of 10 at bat and be highly respected. If journalists are only right seven out of 10 times, this would be terrible.”

MSNBC-TV makes extensive use of blogs in its programming. Most of MSNBC’s evening hosts write blogs (Abrams, Olbermann and Scarborough — and a blog for Hardball, writen primarly by reporter David Schuster and other contributors). The new show Connected: Coast to Coast is tightly intergrated with it’s MSNBC.com site, and Countdown now features a live blog of the newscast online.

Know something that you want us to know, and want others to know, but don’t want other to know who you are?

Drop Inside CableNews a line at insidecable(at)gmail(dot)com. There will be a link up in the right column with some of the other links in a couple of days.

If you want to remain anonymous to the public, please indicate so in your e-mail. You don’t have to tell us who you are, but being able to verify your information will be much easier if you leave us a name and a return address. If you choose not to tell the blogsters(those who blog on this site) your name, you can contribute tips to the jar of anonymous tips. However, discretion will be used in publishing these tips by author’s unknown. We will attempt to independently confirm all tips dropped in the jar. If independent confirmation cannot be provided, and the tips are deemed noteworthy enough to be published, they will be published with a “RUMOR” banner preceeding them.

This policy may be changed at the discretion of those in charge at a later date. However all will be informed of the changes. This blog will strive for transparency.

UPDATE- Edited for clarity, and a new e-mail address…
UPDATE2- To fix incorrect mailbox- Link should now work. Thanks for understanding.