Reweivvt88

Exactly. I really don't understand what the point was. It must be really annoying to work at CBS News with all the cost cutting and then see them spend money on stuff like moving "CBS Mornings" (what a dumb name) to Time Square with a set that looks like it could be a green screen. Honestly, all the networks have gotten really lazy with set design. The new trend seems to be make a fake digital set and then display it on a huge screen as a background.

She also called out the new MSNBC leadership for the fact that all the non-white hosts are all losing their shows, mentioning Joy Reid, Alex Wagner, and Katie Phang, saying it is "worse than bad, indefensible" and lashed out at how horrible the new MSNBC leadership was treating the staff at these shows. Saying "this has not happened at this level at the network before, because this is not the right way to treat people. it's inefficient and unnecessary", and went on to say and it "kind of drops the bottom on if people feel like this place is a good place to work, so we generally don't do things this way" and went on about how the way to be successful is to treat people with respect and that's something that they could "do a lot better on, a lot better". She has been critical of MSNBC in the past, but I have never seen her go this far against network leadership before. I think Rebecca Kutler just realized she can't behave the same deplorable way she did at CNN at MSNBC. Hosts are going to attack you for your horrible decisions on air, staff are going to record your private meetings and release them to the media. She has clearly lost the support of MSNBC's most high profile host, and that's really not a good position to be in as president of the network. Rebecca Kutler can make all the excuses she wants, but this looks really bad. The Reidout was not bombing in the ratings, it was outperforming all the CNN primetime shows. The viewership of Joy Reid's show was similar to that of Jen Psaki. Yet, Joy's show gets cancelled and Jen gets promoted to take over Alex Wagner (the only other non-white weeknight host) in the 9:00pm slot. Meanwhile, the show that has shed the most viewers (The 11th Hour) remains unchanged. The show that has angered a lot of MSNBC's audience (Morning Joe) remains unchanged. A panel show that airs weekend mornings is now going to air in primetime, that's a huge risk, it will need to gain hundreds of thousands of new viewers, and will need to win over very upset viewers of The Reidout. It's a very reckless decision to try out a new show like this at 7:00pm ET. And the changes she made to the weekend schedule seem idiotic to me. While MSNBC's weeknight primetime ratings were strong, weekend ratings struggled, and she has decided to take the 2 highest rated weekend shows (and the only weekend shows MSNBC bothered to promote) off of the weekend schedule and move them to weeknight primetime, so the new weekend shows will have to launch without the benefit of having a strong lead-in / lead-out. Repeats at 6:00am ET when everyone else has live news, a new 3 hour panel show at 7:00am ET, followed by 3 hours of Ali Velshi, 3 hours of Alex Witt, an hour of repeats, Al Sharpton, and then another panel show starting at 6:00pm (and I assume running until 9:00pm, so 3 hours of the same new untested show) is the new weekend schedule. So if one of these new panel shows bombs in the ratings (which is likely, especially the 6pm ET panel show which will have repeats & Al Sharpton as a lead-in), it's going to bring down 3 hours of programming with it. There's not really much of a reason to watch MSNBC on the weekend if you want some variety. Basically 4 shows each running 3 hours.

MSNBC is crazy if they don't do everything they can to get him on their network. I don't see how anyone can trust or defend CNN after this decision. One of the highest rated anchors, who has higher ratings than some of the primetime shows, gets his show cancelled just because he was critical of Trump. It sends a message that nobody at CNN is safe saying anything critical about the Trump admin. It's funny how this thread was started by someone on the far right criticizing CNN for doing actual journalism because it was critical of Trump and now years later the same network is removing journalists who have been critical of Trump and normalizing the Republican party's unprecedented shift to authoritarianism

There have been quite a few times during non regular hours (weekends/overnight) when MSNBC ignored breaking news and I checked to see if NBC News Now was at least covering it and nope, no coverage on NBC News Now either. This was really bad though, this wasn't an international story other news channels ignored, it's a major event happening in the Los Angeles market everyone else was covering live. It also seems crazy to me that the priority of NBC News Now seems to be producing newscasts air that weekdays at the same time and basically compete against shows like the Today show, NBC Nightly News, and MSNBC Reports but does nothing live for west coast primetime or the weekend even if there is breaking news (unless the story is big enough to justify an NBC News Special Report which is then simulcast on the main NBC network)

I would think, especially for the streaming channels, that moments like these would be when they get the most viewers. How many people are making a habit to regularly tune into a bland streaming newscast at a certain time every weekday? Especially when they are competing directly against so many other newscasts on other channels. Major news happens after hours. Lots of news happens on weekends when the major networks are pre-empting all their newscasts all day for non-stop sports all day/night. There is a major over saturation of news on weekdays during the day and then there is a massive void of live news available on weekends and west coast primetime.

Which makes the banner even more ridiculous. Promote viewers to go to NewsNation so viewers can end up watching a simulcast of KTLA with portions muted for commercials. At least the simulcast got them to take the NewsNation banner off.

Massive fires happening in southern California. In the 9:00pm PT hour, CNN has live coverage, FOX News has live coverage, NewsNation is simulcasting KTLA, ABC News live is simulcasting KABC. CBS News 24/7 is live simulcasting KCAL MSNBC is airing repeats. I don't see how MSNBC can argue this doesn't impact its core audience. A left wing cable news channel has no viewers in California? Nobody who watches MSNBC cares about a major climate disaster in California? NBC News Now is just as bad. They are also airing a repeat of Top Story with Tom Llamas covering the fire from earlier in the day. When MSNBC is spun off it will be hard to argue how bad losing access to NBC News will really be when this is how they are covering major breaking news with access to NBC News. Maybe they can partner with a news org that is more committed to providing breaking news coverage because NBC News clearly isn't very good at providing coverage of breaking news when it happens outside of regular eastern times.

KTLA is always so good at providing extensive breaking news coverage. They were also great covering the 2017 fires with live non-stop coverage all night long right into the morning. They are basically by default an all news channel and spend more time covering actual news than any of the cable news channels. Couldn't agree more about NewsNation. I doubt very few if anyone in LA watches NewsNation to begin with, but this is the worst time for Nexstar to force promote the channel. If NewsNation actually had something of value for LA viewers then I could understand, but this is not the time.

Watching fire coverage right now on KTLA. It appears Nexstar has now forced them to add a large banner at the bottom of the screen stating that "NewsNation is on Spectrum 126, Directv 307, Dish 207" I have no idea why they think anyone watching KTLA would need to know what channel number NewsNation is. It's actually insulting that while KTLA is producing extremely important breaking news coverage they are being forced to have a banner promoting coverage on some garbage low rated cable channel channel run by disgraced and/or former FOX News exces, Why would anyone choose to watch coverage anchored by unpopular fired and/or disgraced cable news hosts instead of live coverage from KTLA itself? NewsNation will never be a success. Doing ridiculous stunts like these on actual good quality news sources people actually watch like KTLA just makes Nexstar look so pathetic

I know they haven't yet announced what will happen to the names, but I don't think it's ideal for Comcast to allow the NBC brand to be used by another company that will basically become a competitor to NBC News programs & NBC News Now. They aren't renewing the Sky News licensing deal in Australia and Comcast doesn't even operate in Australia, so licensing the NBC brand to direct competitors in the same country seems like something they wouldn't be interested in doing.

Long term who knows how successful any cable network will be, but right now the NBCU cable networks part of the spin-off are profitable with billions in revenue, so shutting them down doesn't really make a lot of sense. Not to mention, shutting everything down and moving all the shows to the currently unprofitable peacock just increases expenses for peacock. If a show is successful on E! or Oxygen, it makes sense to keep the show on that network and have that network cover the majority of the costs instead of shifting the cost of the show exclusively to peacock where the show might not even perform as well. Same goes for moving Bravo shows exclusively to peacock. It makes more sense for NBC to keep Bravo and have the profitable network finance shows which can then perform well on peacock, and peacock doesn't have to cover the majority of the costs. I don't see how it makes sense for MSNBC & CNBC to merge into one channel. Both networks are highly profitable on their own and target different audiences. Besides weekend marathons of Lockup, left wing opinion programming is the only thing MSNBC has had success with. While I as a news junkie like them to cover news, I accept that there are so many news channels out there covering news, and MSNBC is the 2nd most watched news channel because it focuses on left wing opinion. Whenever they do focus on non-political news their ratings fall behind CNN, I still think they need to cover non-political news as a news channel and I'm disappointed with their lack of coverage for major international news stories over the past few years, but it's hard to deny how successful they have become focusing on politics with the left leaning view.

While you & me would like a news heavy channel, it seems like every network thinks most Americans wont. CNN & NewsNation are both in a better position to focus more on other news, and they are still spending a lot of time focusing on politics, and when they aren't focusing on politics, the focus seems to be on more sensational stories designed more to entertain than inform. It appears NewsNation likes to focus on true crime & UFO's when they aren't covering politics. In the past CNN focused on things like missing planes & aired reality style programming in primetime. The streaming news channels are not much better. There seems to be a theory that most Americans don't care about news from other parts of the country unless it's something sensational. The only stories from different parts of the country that get wide coverage are things like mass shootings or major storms. International coverage is even worse. Unless it's something like a war or terror attack, most international news is ignored. National newscasts in Australia & Canada do a much better job at covering international news than any of the major network newscasts, and they do so with far fewer resources. I think political news will increase for everyone in 2025, and with NBC News splitting from MSNBC, the channel formally known as MSNBC will have every reason to focus more on politics.

Rupert doesn't own the Sky News branding, they are licensing the brand from Comcast. It's actually been reported that News Corp in Australia will lose access to the Sky News branding when the agreement expires in 2026. Here is an article below: Sky News Australia may be forced to rebrand, Fox News Australia among the names in the mix

There has been quite a few stories over time about tension between NBC News & MSNBC, and it goes both ways. NBC News doesn't just think MSNBC is hurting their reputation, MSNBC has problems with decisions by NBC News. This even sometimes extends on air. One public example I can think of: The NBC Trump town hall in 2020 that aired directly against the ABC Biden town hall. Whenever it was mentioned on MSNBC the point was made to say that the town hall was being produced by NBC News and not MSNBC. At the end of Joy Reid's show before the town hall began, they refused to mention the town hall at all and at the end of the show showed a graph promoting MSNBC's primetime lineup for the night with the town hall not included. After the town hall Rachel Maddow started her show reminding her viewers that the town hall was a production of NBC News and not MSNBC and how MSNBC is run separately. The Ronna McDaniel hiring by NBC is another example, multiple hosts didn't just attack NBC News for hiring her, but made it clear that while she would be appearing on NBC News, she would not be welcome on MSNBC. Ever since NBC News Now launched, most of the synergy between NBC News & MSNBC faded away. Yes they often will share reporters, but they each produce separate political news coverage, and even major non-political news coverage is produced separately. The primetime MSNBC shows utilize reporting from outlets like The New York Times, ABC News, Washington Post, etc. just as much as if not more than reporting from NBC News. The biggest changes for viewers will be the name of the network & studio they broadcast from. The main draw to the network is the primetime hosts. I don't think the network has to worry about losing viewers because they no longer have access to NBC News coverage. They can rely on outlets like Reuters, Associated Press, etc.. and form partnerships with other international broadcasters. They are already saying they could acquire a local station group, and they could at least partner with one. Lots of examples of synergies that will need to be changed, E! News & NBC's Access Hollywood share production staff & studio, Dateline produces episodes for Oxygen True Crime. But in my view nothing about the breakup is insurmountable

I would say over the last few years MSNBC & CNBC have become much less intertwined with NBC News than before. While reporters appear on both NBC & MSNBC, most MSNBC anchors now stay exclusively to MSNBC. NBC's Andrea Mitchell announced she will no longer host an hour on MSNBC a few weeks ago, the only other MSNBC anchor who also anchors on NBC is Jose Diaz-Balart. I guess you could include Willie Geist who does both Morning Joe & NBC's Sunday Today, but even then that's 2 anchors for the entire network that share an anchor role with both MSNBC & NBC News. I would say NBC News Now is already directly competing with MSNBC as opposed to acting as a companion. They don't cross promote each other or collaborate at all. I watch MSNBC quite often and they don't even acknowledge NBC News Now exists. When it's a slow news day MSNBC Reports will check in with someone from CNBC but there is zero synergy between MSNBC & the NBC News streaming channel. It's even rare when anything from NBC News gets mentioned. Before NBC News Now was launched, NBC would use MSNBC for special reports when breaking news happened at unexpected times, but even that rarely happens now. When it comes to splitting staff and covering events, I think it will be much less difficult to separate them now compared to 5 or 10 years ago. It's kind of like NBC & MSNBC already divorced but have continued living in the same house even after NBC has already moved on with NBC News Now. As for why Bravo is staying, they probably feel losing the Bravo escapism dreck would harm Peacock, so they don't want to part with it.