MSNBC to drop Sunday afternoon news…
MSNBC will be dropping its 12-4 pm ET Sunday newscast starting tomorrow. In my opinion this move leaves MSNBC at a disadvantage because CNN and FNC will still be live through significant portions of the day. The Saturday 12-4 live news broadcast will remain.
MSNBC originally added the four live hours hours to Saturdays and Sundays at the start of this year after former MSNBC chief Rick Kaplan cancelled Connected: Coast To Coast, At The Movies, and Entertainment Hotlist. Now MSNBC will be canned after Noon once again. If this isn’t a budgetary consideration I’d love to hear the thinking on why this is a good move because I don’t see how it possibly can be.
Ironically, this move will occur on the heels of MSNBC’s Appreciation Week. Talk about sending mixed messages…
UPDATE: I’ve revised the original entry as a result of more information coming my way.
Im fine with them dropping some of it. Maybe get rid of the 12-2pm hours, then have live news 2-4 or even just have one hour of wrap-up coverage.
Comment by jman — December 9, 2006 @ 3:44 pm
p.s. what does this mean for Contessa Brewer?? Will she be on Sundays doing news breaks during the afternoon or evening or will she be featured more during the week?
Maybe MSNBC will go back to having Witt anchor 8am-12pm, then the newsbreaks till 3:30, then have Brewer on from 3:30-11:30.
also, witt said to wake-up with alison stewart tomorrow morning, i assume that means alex has sunday morning off.
Comment by jman — December 9, 2006 @ 3:46 pm
Fine, but they are supposed to be a NEWS organization. We all whined for years about them not having news on weekends, then they finally did so just recently. Now it’s gone again?
Maybe they will garner a slight increase in ratings, but if they want to be known as a news orgn., they’re going to have to be more consistent. If Fox and CNN can do so, so why MSNBC?
Comment by Missy — December 9, 2006 @ 4:48 pm
I hope they succeed. They have made great strides so far. Personally, I like all news but I understand it is the bottom line for them.
Comment by ladyone — December 9, 2006 @ 5:57 pm
I am very disappointed to hear this, Spud. I tune in every weekend for MSNBC news and this stinks. I guess this is a hint of what’s to come. Thanks for nothing, MSNBC. I don’t appreciate it.
Comment by Goldfish — December 9, 2006 @ 6:31 pm
That’s fine with me, as long as Alex Witt isn’t affected. It’s not like I watch MSNBC on the weekends anyways (CNN’s news is far better on the weekends, especially CNN Saturday/Sunday with the fantastic Betty Nugyen).
Comment by Anonymous — December 9, 2006 @ 7:24 pm
I think this is a mistake. I hate it when I can’t get any news on the weekends and all the cable networks are running their “information” shows but not live news.
Comment by Alison — December 9, 2006 @ 8:26 pm
This is one of the reasons I stopped watching MSNBC. They are not consistent. Don’t get attached to any program because it probably won’t be there tomorrow. They don’t leave any program on long enough for the viewers to trust that it will be there in the future.
I do watch Alex Witt on Sat and Sun ( and only Sat & Sun) as I feel safe that it will be there as it is early AM. Once Noon arrives I’m not too sure they will be live, so I watch CNN and FOX. On Sat, FOX has the business block on from 10am to 12noon, and I’m not interested in that.
In my opinion, it is ridiculous for a NEWS organization to be running repeats of Headliners and Legends and whatever other programs that are so old the film must be almost worn out.
If you can not compete with CNN and FOX, than stop claiming you are a NEWS orginzation, change your format and become a re-run channel.
Sorry to be so long, off my soap box.
Comment by Barb — December 9, 2006 @ 8:42 pm
Excuse me Barb, but how does this not make them a news organization? Documentaries are perfectly news-ful and relevant to current day topics, more than the same person reading the same teleprompter script, the same graphics popping up ever hour with the same news, and the constant rolling of the same stories on and on and on……
Comment by Chris — December 9, 2006 @ 9:55 pm
I would rather watch news than a decade-old Headliners and Legends.
Comment by Goldfish — December 9, 2006 @ 9:58 pm
Goldfish, I’ll agree with you there!
Comment by Chris — December 9, 2006 @ 10:07 pm
If they are going to cut live news again, they could at least air NEW documentaries instead of the old crap they run.
Comment by Goldfish — December 9, 2006 @ 10:10 pm
These documentaries are anywhere from 2-4 yrs old, and some are 5-6 yrs old. As far as reading from a tele-prompter the same news over and over again, at least it is still within the same year (2006) and all the cable channels do the same thing.
I have no objections to any cable channel running documentaries on the weekend, but run ones a little more current.
I do not think documentaries that are 2-6 yrs old are presently news worthy. It is old news, over and over again.
If you like it, watch it, I’m not.
Comment by Barb — December 9, 2006 @ 11:46 pm
Crime didn’t work. Politics became boring. So having tried out two personalities, MSNBC decided it was safer to go back to tape than to sit down at another board meeting and figure out a mission statement.
It’s really a disgrace that the cable outlet for NBC News, the most-watched American news org on TV, is so disjointed and lacking a clear personality. And, live news on Sunday. (As if news doesn’t break on Sunday!)
Comment by Charles — December 10, 2006 @ 12:53 am
They have started to air some new docs this month; some of you haven’t been paying attention! How about splitting the difference: if they can only afford 12 hours of news on the weekend, do one hour of news, three hours of docs, one hour news, three hours of docs, and so on 24/7. Then break in every half hour ending with, “Our next news break is in 30 minutes. We’ll have another full hour of news at x o’clock. Now back to Headliners and Legends.” Just a thought.
Comment by erljr — December 10, 2006 @ 12:58 am
I think it’s a shame they got rid of “Coast to Coast.” Aside from Monica being my favorite news honey, it was the only real back and forth debate show that network had… and featured MSNBC’s ONLY conservative host! Personally, I like the debate format… I thought the show could have moved to prime time, but other than that, I found the show very enjoyable.
Comment by ImNotBlue — December 10, 2006 @ 2:27 am
Monica Crowley sucked and so did that show, hopefully when her contract is up MSNBC just let’s her quietly go back to plagiarizing other peoples work.
And please, you don’t mean conservative you mean republican in lockstep with the whitehouse. Because I doubt Carlson and Scarborough have changed their beliefs all that much.
Comment by Steve — December 10, 2006 @ 3:15 am
What about the fresh new episodes of LOCKUP? They might as well turn into the PRISON CHANNEL on weekends! I’ll bet the numbers won’t get any worse.
Comment by Terance — December 10, 2006 @ 7:42 am
#18 - the numbers would probably improved. I am eternally amazed at the American public’s appetite for all things ‘prison’.
Comment by Arthur — December 10, 2006 @ 8:02 am
dan abrams = idiot. so how does this make msnbc “The News Channel”? anyone who don’t know what iam talking about watch his “goodbye video” on “http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036652/”
documentys aint news their boring! repackaged garbage sucks.
Comment by Jason — December 10, 2006 @ 9:47 pm
Jason - I watched the clip, and I remember it; but I also remember Abrams saying he didn’t want to be CNN or FNC. And I remember the ratings when he took over. The demo has doubled! It may just be the elections or luck, but the numbers ARE a lot better overall. MSNBC is nowhere near being “THE” news channel, but they are redefining themselves, and the ratings, whatever the cause, give Abrams exactly what he needs: time.
Comment by erljr — December 11, 2006 @ 1:22 am
Wow Steve… apparently I was able to push your buttons with my liking of “Coast to Coast.” Perhaps you should consider upping your medication.
Anyway, “Coast to Coast” was on at a terrible time… 1am is not a great time for a debate program. As for Monica plagiarizing, I have no idea what you’re talking about… perhaps some evidence, or news story, or something.
If you think that Tucker is a republican, you should perhaps try listening to him… he’s a libertarian. And Scarborough has actually said that he works harder to criticize republicans (http://newsbusters.org/node/8930). Neither of them are what one would call a conservative.
But I’m sure when Monica’s contract is up, they will let her go. MSNBC is trying to become the “Abercrombie & Fitch” of cable news… Diversity? We don’t need no stinkin’ diversity.
Comment by ImNotBlue — December 11, 2006 @ 1:48 am
ImNotBlue - I like the name. Did you know that “Abercrombie & Fitch” is the upscale “Gap,” and “Old Navy” is the cheapie “Gap.” All the same company, all the same stuff, marketing to three distinct income groups. Does that still fit into your diversity/non-diversity analogy?
Thanks for setting Steve straight on Carlson and Scarborough. If they were real conservatives, they wouldn’t be on MSNBC. And the only reason they have Pat Buchanan is because he’s an anti-war protectionist.
Monica Crowley: I miss her filling in for Sean Hannity. Can’t wait til she’s free to do that again.
Comment by erljr — December 11, 2006 @ 2:06 am
Anyway, “Coast to Coast” was on at a terrible time… 1am is not a great time for a debate program.
Wasn’t it on at noon and 5pm est? It failed at both time periods, it got consistently low ratings (lower than plain ole msnbc live), and it had no real critical acclaim to speak of. You can like it all it wants, the the fact remains the quality of MSNBC went up when it was cancelled.
As for the plagiarizing charge. She got caught doing it in the Wall Street Journal and they had to apologize for it and she got caught lifting passages for her Nixon book.
Neither of them are what one would call a conservative.
I love this new fact that if one does not run in lockstep with the republican party that they’re not a conservative. It’s bs of course, the republican party has strayed so incredibly far from their small government platform that it would seem that their biggest critics should be conservatives, but it’s a nice way to try and discredit someone.
And as for erljr
And the only reason they have Pat Buchanan is because he’s an anti-war protectionist.
That’s why they only have him on to talk about war and trade. Oh wait that’s not true, there goes your theory.
Comment by Steve — December 11, 2006 @ 2:59 am
MSNBC is it’s own worst enemy! They were doing a little better in the ratings, and now have cut off their nose to spite their face!
I am so sick of DOCs and Headliners and Legends I could scream!
Comment by jan — December 11, 2006 @ 12:04 pm
Maybe they should bring back The Savage Nation?
Comment by John Stackman IV — December 11, 2006 @ 12:12 pm
Not a theory Steve. Many of us have been saying this since Tucker came over. It’s not a new thing and I haven’t changed my view; and where did you see this “lockstep” comment? MSNBC has three anti-war Republicans/conservatives. Buchanan is a religious conservative who’s been an anti-war protectionist since Nixon. Tucker’s always been a Libertarian. Nothing wrong with either of them. They haven’t changed their strips or flip/flopped. Scarborough can’t decide what he wants to be. I post here almost every day; if you’re going to drop in every now and then and accuse people of being this and saying that, you may want to pick on people who do the same and aren’t going to respond.
Comment by erljr — December 11, 2006 @ 1:41 pm
erljr - “Banana Republic” is the ‘upscale’ version of the same Gap and Old Navy clothes. “A&F” stands alone… and all the clothes are for rich white yuppies… they are far from diverse.
Steve - One question… when did the quality of MSNBC go up?
Comment by ImNotBlue — December 11, 2006 @ 3:28 pm
An unfortunate programming decision by someone who no doubt is paid a hefty salary to make smart decisions. And so it goes.
Comment by ceci — December 11, 2006 @ 4:17 pm
I don’t get it! MSNBC delivers such a better product that the other’s; but they never seem to want to deliver it! CNN does canned stuff for three hours each afternoon- if I want live news, who should I watch now? FNC? No way. They’re not really even biased, they just have a crappy news operation that dumbs down the programming for idiots. God forbid there would be decent live news on the weekends.
Comment by sam — December 11, 2006 @ 4:44 pm
I also wonder if this was a strategic move by Abrams or one purely based on cost cutting. I agree with Terance that the weekend numbers can’t get any worse so maybe people would rather watch documentaries about a grown man eating fast food for a month straight than MSNBC’s coverage. It seems with this move that MSNBC is conceding the weekends perhaps in order to free up some money to pay Olbermann and his ego.
Comment by Buck — December 11, 2006 @ 5:11 pm
Tucker Carlson may be a libertarian, but he’s also dumb as a post. Anybody know his background, i.e., why his opinions should warrant his own show?
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — December 11, 2006 @ 5:32 pm
Tucker’s daddy was a bigwig at VOA and CPB. Don’t forget ‘To Catch a Predator” cuz I really really wanna see a 40 yr old guy try to hook up with a 13 yr old. I am sick and tired of the repeats. Hardball is played 3 times. Olbermann 3 times. Tucker and Scarborough,twice. The news at 3 am is the exact same as the one at 4 am. The same pieces, the exact same language used by the anchor for the lead stories. They have a real opportunity to beat CNN’s old farts but does MSNBC step up to the plate? Hell, no.
Comment by ANON — December 11, 2006 @ 9:27 pm
MSNBC, are you listening? Folks are wathcing, your numbers are climbing, you deliver the better product- WHEN you deliver it!!! Enough of those outdated documentaries and H&L’s for heavens sakes!!!
Anyway, I think they should bring back ‘Connected: Coast To Coast’ (it was the best debate show on cable TV)and put it on Sunday afternoons!! It’s the perfect slot for the perfect wrap up to all the other Sunday talk shows! Let Monica and Ron do the news and spar over all the previous weeks topics. Bring in the MSNBC analysts for weekend wrap up commentary, and/or maybe even Tucker, Scarborough, Matthews, and Olberman for an allstar roundtable.
C’mon MSNBC, don’t blow it!!!
Comment by Anthony Nichols — December 12, 2006 @ 3:33 am
Steve - One question… when did the quality of MSNBC go up?
When connected got cancelled.
Comment by Steve — December 12, 2006 @ 9:45 am
Not a theory Steve. Many of us have been saying this since Tucker came over. It’s not a new thing and I haven’t changed my view;
How the hell am I supposed to know what you were saying a few years ago? This blog wasn’t even around.
MSNBC has three anti-war Republicans/conservatives. Buchanan is a religious conservative who’s been an anti-war protectionist since Nixon. Tucker’s always been a Libertarian. Nothing wrong with either of them. They haven’t changed their strips or flip/flopped.
I’m not the one trying to kick them out of my club by saying they’re not conservative. And btw Scarborough and Carlson were both staunch supporters of the war and their opinion, like most of this country, has evolved as time went on. And in case you haven’t noticed MSNBC hasn’t been doing a lot of hiring lately so I doubt they’re going to go out and hire another conservative commentator just for one issue.
Scarborough can’t decide what he wants to be.
While I don’t know the man he seems like a lot of conservatives. He’s seen the party he grew up in, the party he believed in, be corrupted by power. He seems to want it back and good for him I hope he succeeds, I’d like to see the smaller government republicans back.
I post here almost every day;
Good for you, I on the other hand am not filled with time, and sometimes just don’t have anything to add to the conversation.
if you’re going to drop in every now and then and accuse people of being this and saying that, you may want to pick on people who do the same and aren’t going to respond.
Oh boo friken hoo, I’m picking on you by disagreeing with you? I didn’t insult anyone, I didn’t swear at anyone, and to the best of my recollection I haven’t broken any of Spuds rules. Life’s tough wear a cup.
And just for the record stop pretending you’re someone, like you have some resume that means your word is more important that anyone else. No one here is important, we’re all just jackass’s posting in the comments section of a cable news blog nothing more nothing less.
Comment by Steve — December 12, 2006 @ 10:18 am
Hiya Steve. Sorry I hurt your feelings. I post here, like you, because I think I have something to add to the conversation. I respect disagreement. I do not respect personal attacks. If you want to accuse Republicans or conservatives or Democrats or liberals of feeling a certain way, that’s fine; but if you name names and attach views to them, expect a response; especially if you are making things up.
For the record: Tucker has never been for the war.
And who or what do you think I’m pretending to be? For the record, I am “someone.”
Comment by erljr — December 12, 2006 @ 11:06 am