Comcast Considering Spinning Off Cable Networks

[EVVTV12 204]

30 minutes ago, MorningNews said:

Awful name. 

So too is the logo. MS NOW sounds like the name of a small news organization in Mississippi.

1 hour ago, MD TV said:

Also, CNBC is keeping it's name, but they're obviously getting a new logo.

If there is any good news CNBC does have three past logos pre-peacock days they could fall back to. 

 

1 hour ago, MD TV said:

[Rusty Muck 4688]

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.

[Hometown News 127]

3 hours ago, MD TV said:

As mentioned in another thread, MSNBC will be known as MS NOW. Also, CNBC is keeping it's name, but they're obviously getting a new logo. And the sports division will be known as USA Sports:

 

https://deadline.com/2025/08/msnbc-name-change-ms-now-1236490616/

 

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.

Edited August 18, 2025 by Hometown News

[SDHIll1980 150]

While I agree that "MS Now" isn't a great name by any means, Versant should have gone with "USA News Network", since USA Network is going to be the flagship brand of this new company.

[TheRolyPoly 3510]

22 minutes ago, SDHIll1980 said:

While I agree that "MS Now" isn't a great name by any means, Versant should have gone with "USA News Network", since USA Network is going to be the flagship brand of this new company.

 

I like that idea. Should've gone with USA News.

 

USA Network, maybe USA Golf, maybe USA Entertainment, idk.

[carolinanews4 455]

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.

Edited August 18, 2025 by carolinanews4

[DJonNews 104]

If they absolutely wanted to, they would've called it "mySRC."

 

"SRC" is an abbreviation of "Source," so the name would've sounded like "My Source." And the "News, Opinion, World" part would've been used only if necessary to assure viewers that it's still MSNBC, but with a new name that finally, finally, does away with the "MS" part that was made irrelevant for years. Something like "my News, my Opinion, my World, mySRC" would've done for an extended logo animation.

 

It would've made more sense to call it that, given the context, than what they ended up choosing. And as for the full name for "MS NOW," it's "My Source for News, Opinion, and the World." Like those minute details are going to make the name choice make any more sense.

Edited August 18, 2025 by DJonNews

[ABC 7 Denver 1889]

42 minutes ago, carolinanews4 said:

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.

 

Any goodwill that MSNBC had by virtue of being associated with NBC will be completely gone. I think the viewership will completely fall out from this. It's worse than NewsMax or One American News Network. I think NewsNation has better brand positioning than this and we know how that's going.

[T.L. Hughes 958]

17 minutes ago, DJonNews said:

If they absolutely wanted to, they would've called it "mySRC."

 

"SRC" is an abbreviation of "Source," so the name would've sounded like "My Source." And the "News, Opinion, World" part would've been used only if necessary to assure viewers that it's still MSNBC, but with a new name that finally, finally, does away with the "MS" part that was made irrelevant for years. Something like "my News, my Opinion, my World, mySRC" would've done for an extended logo animation.

 

It would've made more sense to call it that, given the context, than what they ended up choosing. And as for the full name for "MS NOW," it's "My Source for News, Opinion, and the World." Like those minute details are going to make the name choice make any more sense.

The only issue with that is that MSNBC has been available in Canada on cable and satellite since the domestic MSNBC Canada spinoff shut down in 2004. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is alternatively known as Société Radio-Canada, and Canadian media publications and media forums like this one sometimes use the SRC abbreviation to refer to the French-language Radio-Canada radio and TV networks.

 

So, that might not have worked due to potential confusion, even though they’re completely unrelated entities.

Edited August 18, 2025 by T.L. Hughes

[Jase 1164]

1 hour ago, carolinanews4 said:

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.

 

Excellent points. MS NOW is just lazy and lacks any sense of creativity. Too bad MSN is taken. That would have been perfect (if they didn't want a completely different name).

[Hometown News 127]

52 minutes ago, ABC 7 Denver said:

Any goodwill that MSNBC had by virtue of being associated with NBC will be completely gone.

 

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.

Edited August 18, 2025 by Hometown News

[TennTV1983 870]

6 hours ago, MD TV said:

As mentioned in another thread, MSNBC will be known as MS NOW. Also, CNBC is keeping it's name, but they're obviously getting a new logo. And the sports division will be known as USA Sports:

 

https://deadline.com/2025/08/msnbc-name-change-ms-now-1236490616/

 

In terms of CNBC (aka the "Consumer News & Business Channel), this will mark the first time since 1996 the channel wasn't co-branded with the NBC peacock.

[mre29 1967]

Well, I'm definitely not crazy about the new name. It feels they were handed "MSNOW" and had to come up with a good backronym that didn't reference Microsoft or NBC, and this was what they came up with. They're going to find themselves explaining over and over again that they have nothing to do with MS (MIcrosoft), MS (MIssissippi), or MS (Multiple sclerosis). That should get old fast.

 

Also, you have to wonder how many people at Microsoft facepalmed when they realized they (specifically,  MSN) weren't going to finally be free of any perceived connection to the channel.

 

 

1 hour ago, SDHIll1980 said:

While I agree that "MS Now" isn't a great name by any means, Versant should have gone with "USA News Network", since USA Network is going to be the flagship brand of this new company.

 

I like it, though U.S. News & World Report may have something to say about it. That said, what about "Source News"? As far as I can tell, the only news org that used that name in the recent past was a now-defunct "online journalism platform" in Scotland, so getting the trademark here in the states shouldn't be hard. "My Source News" could also work. I mean, it's all right there in the logo....

 

 

Or they could just call it "The Source".  

 

 

[DJonNews 104]

One of the editors of the Hollywood Reporter imagined a meeting with a whiteboard reading the following:

 

"M__
S__
N__
___
___"

 

Crickets came up next for those who had to work with what they were given. "No one leaves this room until we have a new five-letter brand name that starts with MSN and stands for … something."

 

So never mind that "MS NOW" sounds too confusing as a channel name and "My Source | News | Opinion | World" sounds too clunky when used in full (which Versant is hoping people won't have to do when referring to the channel from now on); in trying to come up with the acronym first before the full phrase, they've done the whole process in the wrong order. In branding, the phrases come before the acronyms, which are an "accepted societal shorthand" for what the people have latched on to.

Edited August 18, 2025 by DJonNews

[nickp 394]

This feels like a 1997 operating system name MS DOS

[Rusty Muck 4688]

4 hours ago, SDHIll1980 said:

While I agree that "MS Now" isn't a great name by any means, Versant should have gone with "USA News Network", since USA Network is going to be the flagship brand of this new company.

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.

2 hours ago, nickp said:

This feels like a 1997 operating system name MS DOS

Start me up!

 

Edited August 18, 2025 by Rusty Muck

[MicFlag 33]

I’ve always considered 5 letters in a network name like MSNBC to be clunky and unsayable, but this makes my brain hurt. The PR people at this country’s largest Multiple Sclerosis nonprofit need to be on the phone with the network 5 minutes ago to secure as many IP rights to this brand as they can before it gets pushed to the university lecture hall “what not to do in marketing” pile.

[24994J 5888]

8 minutes ago, MicFlag said:

I’ve always considered 5 letters in a network name like MSNBC to be clunky and unsayable, but this makes my brain hurt. The PR people at this country’s largest Multiple Sclerosis nonprofit need to be on the phone with the network 5 minutes ago to secure as many IP rights to this brand as they can before it gets pushed to the university lecture hall “what not to do in marketing” pile.

 

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. 

Edited August 18, 2025 by 24994J

[NowBergen 925]

2 minutes ago, 24994J said:

 

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. 

Exactly.  There is no chance there is any confusion, as MS has been in the name since the network debuted.  I have an MS and a certification, so I hope the 5 letters after my name doesn't hurt people's brains.

[T.L. Hughes 958]

3 hours ago, Hometown News said:

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 doesn’t work either. The international feed of Sky News UK is already available to livestream here in the States on Peacock, the NBC News website, YouTube and selected AVOD streaming platforms (like Pluto and Samsung TV Plus), plus Sky Group isn’t one of the properties Comcast is spinning off to Versant. (Duly noted, Comcast did create a US version of Sky’s NOW vMVPD service a couple years ago for Xfinity customers.)

 

MSNBC and NBC News Now currently take the Sky News feed for international breaking news coverage, though unless there’s a licensing agreement for MSNBC to continue partnering with Sky News post-split (the only way such a brand licensing deal could arise, though this might require geoblocking the Sky News International streaming feed to limit confusion), NBC News Now picks up the slack there.

Edited August 18, 2025 by T.L. Hughes

[T.L. Hughes 958]

3 hours ago, DJonNews said:

So never mind that "MS NOW" sounds too confusing as a channel name and "My Source | News | Opinion | World" sounds too clunky when used in full (which Versant is hoping people won't have to do when referring to the channel from now on); in trying to come up with the acronym first before the full phrase, they've done the whole process in the wrong order. In branding, the phrases come before the acronyms, which are an "accepted societal shorthand" for what the people have latched on to.

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.

Edited August 18, 2025 by T.L. Hughes

[SDHIll1980 150]

1 hour ago, Rusty Muck said:

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!

 

 

Figures you would say something stupid...so tell me, genius, what's a better name than "USA News" or "MS Now"?

 

And yes, USA Network is the flagship brand of Versant.

Edited August 18, 2025 by SDHIll1980

[Weeters 2173]

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!

[SDHIll1980 150]

16 minutes ago, Weeters said:

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!

 

That's cute /sarcasm

 

Nice little snide-ass comment you made 

[nathannah 2792]

36 minutes ago, Weeters said:

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".

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.

Edited August 19, 2025 by nathannah