Leaderboard

If USA Network truly had the brand equity to justify changing the name of MSNBC to "USA News", then I suspect they wouldn't have picked "Versant" as the spinoff name. We'd have seen a return of "USA Networks". I hear there's a motivated seller with the brand "NewsNet" available!

It's weird that they're still keeping "MS" in the name even though Microsoft sold its share of the network 20 years ago. I know they're trying to make it a backronym for "My Source," but it's just very clunky. I'm not sure why they weren't willing to make an 100% clean break from the MSNBC brand. They've always been the third-place also-ran in cable news, there's nothing there worth clinging on to. The logo is also bad. It looks like the logo of a third-rate presidential candidate who gets 3% of the vote in the Iowa caucus and drops out before New Hampshire.

I like that idea. Should've gone with USA News. USA Network, maybe USA Golf, maybe USA Entertainment, idk.

I don't usually comment on names and logos because it is so subjective. For everyone who loves something, there's a group of people who hate it. But this is downright bizarre. First of all, the name sounds like a non-profit dedicated to helping people who are living with MS. Then there's the logo, which I hope was rushed and doesn't represent the final product. But it looks very low rent. They made the announcement this morning during Morning Joe, complete with an animated logo (linked below). In watching the clip online, they talked about how this new name proudly declares their newfound independence. Many articles quote a recent podcast interview with Rachel Maddow about how this corporate divorce will make them stronger. If that's true, then why not truly rebrand?? Why take your current name (plus logo font!) and change BC to OW. It's as if they are half-heartedly holding onto their old brand. "We want a new brand...as long as it is not that new." From a business perspective, the most interesting piece was in published memos from Mark Lazarus and Rebecca Kutler. They both mentioned this was an NBC decision. Lazarus writes, "... and it [the NBC peacock] is a symbol they have decided to keep within the NBCU family." Kutler went further, "During this time of transition, NBCUniversal decided that our brand requires a new, separate identity." Several media outlets have reported that the decision was made recently. Usually, this type of detail would either not make the cut in the announcement or it would be spun to say something like, "Together, we agreed that our best path forward is with a new brand that we entirely own." The fact that both said it was an NBC decision stood out to me. It doesn't take a lot of guessing as to why NBCU might want MSNBC to have a separate identity, but that's a topic for a different day.

Awful name.

It does take away a certain authoritarian's nickname of the channel.

Gee, the changeover from Jennings couldn’t possibly have been a longer-term factor.

The first-ever weather update on CBS Atlanta:

I like the local touch in the upcoming logo. The new branding is similar to the brand they used when they became an ABC affiliate and launched their news department back in 1994.

People afflicted with and/or organizations that bring awareness to Multiple Sclerosis don't own the letters 'MS,' nor does Microsoft, Mississippi, or individuals with Masters of Science degrees.

The new name is incredibly clunky. What's the point of keeping the MS? How will it be pronounced? Will there also be a Mr. Now? The logo looks like a 1990s search engine. "News, opinion, world"... World what? World news? Redudant? It's a poor attempt at a backronym. Can't imagine the employees there are impressed.

So the channel's full name is Microsoft NOW.

Local news equals more political ad revenue (at least until the political parties and SuperPACs realize spending endless amounts of advertising time on linear television is not an effective strategy). It's why WUPA is doing news so soon and why Gray's bar for success at WANF will be set impossibly low.

and ratings fell once that experiment started

Given the channel's left-leaning lineup and viewership and the obvious current political climate, "USA News" feels like a rather awful, tone-deaf choice. And no, USA Network is not the "flagship brand". It's a cable channel whose only regularly scheduled attraction is WWE Smackdown. Nothing else. Start me up!

Oh look, another news branding with "NOW" in it. How original.

So too is the logo. MS NOW sounds like the name of a small news organization in Mississippi. If there is any good news CNBC does have three past logos pre-peacock days they could fall back to.

If it's anything like the "Mr. Delicious" character cooked up by the Rax Roast Beef chain, they'll be doomed for sure.

This name gives off 'bad screaming Indian news channel vibes', especially with the world part, which we all know this organization is going to cover with just Reuters video; you won't be seeing an "MSNOW London Bureau". As I said about the Tampa station naming situation, branding people are really bad at this lately.

I've been watching her since her days at KTNV Las Vegas. She is fantastic and very beautiful, I do agree.

Yuck. It looks like another one of those "fake news" channels. Of course, take that what you will, being that the other channels are not part of the "lame-stream" media. Since CNN was driven into the ground by themselves (and Jeff Zucker), there's not really a true news channel out there anymore, and any one that claims itself as one is woefully blind. Losing the link to NBC News is not going to help their cause.

The deal likely sets in stone any branding standards that the Fox affiliates have to abide by. Aside from stations like WBRC, many will have a tough time trying to rebrand like many of Gray's other stations.

Goodbye MSNBC…hello MS NOW.

Listings for some newscasts on their website starting tomorrow show a microscopic version of the new logo. The Sunshine Skyway cables being the focal point of the logo is a nice local touch. The ABC sticking out is weird.

This is essentially what ABC was planning to do with Woodruff & Vargas 20 years ago. Rarely were they supposed to be in-studio together, but instead have one on assignment much of the time.

As long as the average viewer knows what is the network and/or channel number, they don't care about what the brand name is. And I put the emphasis on and/or, because on OTT guides...you don’t even get the channel number. It's only network, unless the station has the courtesy to put their logo with the channel number and network on it.

So if a station goes from "CBS 2 News" to "CBS News Chicago" it's "confusing" to the viewers because there's no channel number, but when a station goes from "ABC Action News" to "Tampa Bay 28" it's "confusing" to the viewers because it's too similar to everyone else? Given the situation at WANF and WPLG right now, I don't think it's too hard to see why some of the creativity in channel branding has disappeared. The ol' affiliation as part of the brand can't be relied on anymore. I suspect "Scripps News Tampa Bay" wouldn't have gone over well here, either. "Today's" was getting long in the tooth, and I know station management was pretty attached to that brand, so to see it go meant they must have really felt it wasn't "working" anymore. I would have loved to have seen a return to "News 4 Milwaukee", but "TMJ4 News" takes up less characters on Twitter, so...

I prefer 28 Tampa Bay News but hey, whatever floats its boat.

Today in TWC history... Today marks 20 years since the longest-used logo in the history of The Weather Channel was starting to be used. It has been used ever since and is now one of the most recognizable logos in American broadcasting history.

The other consideration is that the USA Radio Network (which is still around) likely still has rights to the name and probably locked down the same rights for TV at the same time despite the many iterations it's gone through. NBC is not about to pick a fight/pay out the nose for the rights to that just for the channel to be gone before the end of the decade. I'm more interested in how CNBC rebrands, considering they burned money on a complete rebrand just last year and now will lose a lot of NBC News's and the O&O's gruntwork for a lot of New York, Los Angeles, and the Valley's companies and have to strike out on their own. I assume a lot of stuff is out of KNTV for instance and they may have to move their bureau there and in SFO.

Bicoastal Media has a cluster right next door to Marquee’s newly acquired Eureka stations (KIEM/KVIQ). They share a driveway.

MeTV and Get are examples of this broadcasting-wise, standing for “Memorable Entertainment Television” and “Great Entertainment Television” (though Get’s backronym is more recent, having been around since 2023, while MeTV dates back to 2003, when it began as a programming block on present-day flagship WWME). Weigel’s upcoming WEST network tries to replicate the idea behind the MeTV name by having it stand for “Western Entertainment Series Television”, but is kinda clunky in its own right. Nowhere near the level of MS NOW’s backronym, but clunky nonetheless.

I'm not sure that this goodwill (if it was ever really a thing in the first place) still existed anyway. Since this change is coming from NBC's side, it likely means that being associated with MSNBC had become a liability for their brand, not an asset. The more I think about this, I'm not sure how Comcast missed the obvious solution of just adopting the Sky News brand. Unlike MSNBC or this frankensteined "MS NOW" experiment, it's been a proven success in both the UK and Australia/New Zealand. Certainly the network has other issues besides branding, but this was an easy layup and they managed to airball it.

This screams "rushed." They want it to be known as "My Source for News, Opinion, and the World," but those minute details alone don't make that name choice make any sense. Besides, most people won't even know that it's still the news channel they've come to expect at first until the channel beats them over the head with it in promos for several months, if not a whole year. If that's the end result and the viewers still don't come, then that suggests that they're failing at brand awareness. And after I typed this, I read an article detailing what Hollywood Reporter editors thought about the name change. Not even they knew what Versant was going for with this half-hearted attempt at a rebrand post-spinoff.

It's nice enough a name. It'll take getting used to. It could be worse(/better). I like what it stands for. (things I'll tell myself for a while).

Of all the replacement names MSNBC could have picked, this is one of them. Versant (just like Discovery 2.0) is being set up as a viking funeral company and the way they're trying to spin it otherwise is super cringe.

According to the DirecTV guide…. Starting September 3, ‘Chicago Now’ will air from 10a-12p. Sherri will move to 1P. Jennifer Hudson will air at 2P followed by TMZ Live at 3P (no change). Not sure if this is a just a limited trial run or permanent.

Chicago Sports Tonight expands to six nights a week this fall.

Already established elsewhere that Elex is staying in LA.

I read he is likely destined for a role with the 'California Post', the sister publication of the 'New York Post.'

80 or so years in is anybody really confused on where to find what channel or what’s gonna be there when they turn it on? Honestly I think the network names and logos in the local branding is way worse. Most of the people watching are 902 and their dials are rusted on whatever channel they prefer.

What I don't get is why they didn't change the branding when they debuted the new graphics pacakge??

My pleasure! No creativity, you're right. You now got... WTSP: 10 Tampa Bay WTVT: FOX 13 Tampa Bay WFTS: Tampa Bay 28 WTOG: Tampa Bay 44 WVEA: Univision Tampa Bay WXPX: The Spot - Tampa Bay 66 Its not confusing at all. /s

Comparing WPLG to KTVK c. 1994 is deeply flawed. KTVK at least tried to do unique things besides shovelware news when they lost ABC. They actually tried to do things. WPLG isn't trying by adding unsustainable levels of local news and doing a cheap xerox of WNT, and that's because of lazy programming and being owned (for now) by a faceless holding company. WANF isn't even giving the illusion of trying, they're just dumping hours and hours of low-rated news in hopes that a dozen people watch at 2pm or 3am. It won't work. Again, lazy programming is what is causing this, not because of viewer demand.

No, they are not. The streaming windows are day-after-air. Sony acknowledged they are separate arrangements from the syndication pacts.

MyNetworkTV basically. A branding package and a programming block that can be aired as is, bounced around, or split in half. WATL tried the primetime news and it failed. How bad were the ratings?

When WBNX lost the CW under the Ernest Angley management, that was tied to a default the ministry had with one of their investors. They were originally under contract through 2021 and WB/CBS cut the deal with WUAB that's up in September. Then Nexstar bought the CW, and then WBNX.

They assuredly want to be a buyer, but probably don't have many options available. Apollo-Cox is the easiest one of larger scale and gives them some needed capital if it is structured in a way where Apollo can finance. Sinclair knows its window of opportunity is closing, and fast. They need to buy something now or will wind up being ripe for a takeover.

If you read above, that may not even matter... Gray is getting away with it in multiple markets with the Allen purchase... They'll either merge or sell... But may not be forced to.. I posted and hid the same thing a few days ago and was heckled to death about it

If we are all patient, we will learn the plan once SpinCo is about to be spun off. People being paid big bucks and in negotiations are doing their jobs. Wait and we will find out. The one known: NBC sports will continue to use SpinCo networks. That's all we know and no need to figure out how right now.