Cause and Effect?
From FishbowlDC…
The die-hard conspiracy theorists might posit that it’s because of the Politico’s new debate partnership with CNN, after having first teamed up with MSNBC (and they might latch onto the fact that no Politico employee — save Roger Simon on yesterday’s MTP, which we addressed above — has appeared on such NBC/MSNBC shows as “The Chris Matthews Show,” “Tucker,” “Countdown with Keith Olbermann,” or “Scarborough Country” since the June 11 announcement of the CNN/Politico partnership).
I hadn’t realized this but it’s true. Jim VandeHei was a regular fixture on MSNBC Live during the weekday hours. I haven’t seen him in weeks. Is it really a case of NBC not wanting to give the Politico any free advertisement with the CNN debates forthcoming? Or is there another explanation?
UPDATE: FishbowlDC finds some information explaining some of this…
The reason “Meet the Press” had to identify the Politico’s Roger Simon as a “syndicated columnist” instead of “Politico’s chief political columnist” on yesterday’s show is because of Politico’s relationship with CBS’ “Face the Nation.” Because of that partnership (whereby Politico staffers appear every other week), no Politico employees are allowed on either “Meet the Press” or “This Week with George Stephanopolous” (”The Chris Matthews Show” does not apply here).
Ok. That explains MTP. It doesn’t however explain MSNBC. Does CNN have a deal with Politico like what CBS has?
UPDATE 2: There is no deal preventing Politico people from appearing on MSNBC but there are “understandable complications”. Chief among those complications is MSNBC.com’s partnership with The National Journal/The Hotline; competitors of The Politico. So it should not be surprising that NBC wouldn’t want to undermine its own partnership by heavily featuring talent from a competitor.
I’ve seen Jim VandeHei a few times on FNC.
Comment by Lurker — June 25, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
“Or is there another explanation?”
There IS another explanation.
MSNBC has a contractual relationship with Washington Post/Newsweek. WP/Newsweek journalists and pundits regularly appear on MSNBC. Jim VandeHei used to work for the Washignton Post. He is no longer with WP which is why he is also no longer on MSNBC.
Comment by MikeD — June 25, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
That explanation doesn’t work. VandeHei was appearing on MSNBC long after he departed The Post for The Politico.
Comment by Spud — June 25, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
where did my comment go ?
Just before the Update 2 edit
postedbyhmmm-june25,2007@6:54pm
Comment by Hmmm — June 25, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
It went away because it used jargon which I found objectionable. I’ve seen your comments. You’re perfectly capable of making a comment without that type of language. If you want to go in the gutter there are other sites better suited for it.
Comment by Spud — June 25, 2007 @ 9:28 pm
So,
Peoplenpunk can call someone a BIGGOT on your page?
Peoplepunk can call someone’s family a BIGGOT on Your page?
Peoplepunk can call someone (rhymes w/ fret) a BIGGOT on your page?
Peoplepunk can accuse someone of attending KKK meetings on your page ?
Peoplepunk can say and accuse just about anything or anyone he wants and NOTHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
I make a very valid point in two sentences, about “journo’s selling themselves OUT. Not the highest bidder, but rather the one who will help drive their agenda.
And you find that “OBJECTIONABLE” ?
And I get EDITED AND CENSORED for using an I-guy term, that was not directed towards any one individual, rather to the group as a whole.
And I get EDITED AND CENSORED for using words of a song, that happened to be the main words “It’s hard out here…” in an Academy Award winning song.
Calling someone a BIGGOT is not “objectionable” in your book ?
Are you for real ?
Posted by Hmmm - June 26, 2007 @ 9:52 am
Comment by Hmmm — June 26, 2007 @ 9:52 am
Biggot is not objectionable to me. Neither is pimp. You could even use “prostitute”. But “Hoe” crosses the line.
And I get EDITED AND CENSORED for using words of a song, that happened to be the main words “It’s hard out here…” in an Academy Award winning song.
So what’s your point? The Academy has no taste in music? I could have told you that. But seriously, not everyone will recognize that you were quoting a tune. I sure as heck didn’t. That’s the problem when using borederline language which can be interpreted in different ways if you don’t have the same frame of reference.
Comment by Spud — June 26, 2007 @ 10:53 am
Clever of you to dodge the RACIST KKK comment from peoplepunk.
Was that not “borderline language” ? I really don’t see any OTHER way to “interpret” that !
Don’t seem to recall you taking this “Hoe” stand when I-guy said “Hoe” Sure it was a news story, so permission was granted to use “offensive” language, but you were silent on the word “crossing the line” back then. The fact is, The I-guy would never have been fired if the girls were white.
But because they were black, the 2 Rev’s charged racism and that is exactly what peoplepunk did here on multiple occasions. You gave him a pass, even when others complained openly on the thread.
I wasn’t “quoting a tune” I used it to illustrate the sanctimony and hypocrisy of the left., which is also on display here.
It is OK for certain people to use “offensive” language, but it is not OK for others…..
On many occasion I have asked you for consistency when you LOCK ME OUT. The fact is you keep changing the ground rules (something I have also noted) to protect someone. You keep asking for civility and yet some peoplepunks get a pass.
Posted by Hmmm - June 26, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
Comment by Hmmm — June 26, 2007 @ 3:43 pm