Actually, no, you misread and wrongly get that I don’t understand what MSNBC, or what CNN or any…
Andrew Jerell Jones
1

Actually, no, you misread and wrongly get that I don’t understand what MSNBC, or what CNN or any cable news outlet are all about. In fact, it’s really stated in there.
Whether you like it or not, MSNBC does still break stories, and that is a part of journalism. Journalism also nowadays for the cable networks, as it has always been, is about ratings and profits first.

I’m pretty sure I didn’t get you wrong when I said you didn’t correctly perceive MSNBC as entertainment and propaganda, not journalism, when you are still trying to say they’re journalists. They’re not journalists. Truth and objective reality are not what they are there to report.

Alex Jones breaks stories. He’s also not a journalist. Breaking stories may be part of journalism, but not everyone who breaks stories is a journalist. Sometimes, conspiracy theorists or propagandists break stories. Alex Jones is the former, and MSNBC is the latter. If A is a subset of B, it doesn’t mean that everyone in A is also in B. Journalists are a subset of story-breakers.

The problem with your perspective is that the programs that Lack prefers don’t actually bring in ratings and profit success for them. Instead, it’s just about preserving conservative and just powerful entities status. But MSNBC, as has proven in the past, can’t emulate being a “new Fox.” Fox was driven by, whether you like it or not, the likes of O’Lielly and Hannity, not by someone like Greta van Susteran. MSNBC does not have those personalities, and the ratings haven’t been good for their non-primetime shows.

You could be right about Lack’s motives. But, overall, corporate motives are transparent, and they’re always about the money. MSNBC is surely aware they are going to slip into utter irrelevance if they make no adjustments as the left turns away from propaganda and to legitimate independent media. They can’t serve the corporate agenda and the left, so they have chosen the former, and that means gambling on conservative personalities.

Drawing your conclusion about whether this will work from a few months’ worth of ratings is obviously unscientific, in that it is a paltry sample size with no longterm statistical significance. MSNBC is playing the long game. They know they cannot succeed by trying to go left while still being corporate shills. If, over the years, they can peel off what’s left of Fox’s audience as it continues to crater, then they at least have a chance to remain profitable by going right.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.