Scandal-Ridden Leftist Channel MSNBC Faces Lowest Ratings
The scandal-plagued leftist propaganda channel MSNBC is currently in the news for a crisis of its ratings and reputation. Since the November 5 election, MSNBC has been sinking in ratings and some of its media personalities are reportedly under pressure to leave the channel.
On Monday (December 2), Fox News reported that MSNBC recorded its lowest rating on November 26 in the past 20 years among its primary target audience of 25 to 54-year-old people. Multiple programs aired on the channel hot rock bottom in ratings since the channel’s sharp downfall in popularity began around the presidential election last month. The story wrote:
Multiple MSNBC programs have lost more than half their audience since Election Day when comparing demo viewership to 2024 averages.
The ratings in question show at least 50% drop in the audience of MSNBC’s otherwise most popular shows like those hosted by Jen Psaki, Chris Jansing, Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, and Joy Reid. Fox News added that per an insider’s information, MSNBC may even cease to exist as we know it now since its parent company NBCUniversal has corporate plans involving big changes to the network.
Robby Soave and Steven Olikara of The Hill discussed how the leftist media, particularly CNN and MSNBC have taken a hit by Trump’s victory.
A major scandal haunting MSNBC since the final weeks before the presidential election of November 5 involves leftist social justice activist Al Sharpton, who hosts the weekend show PoliticsNation on MSNBC. On October 20, Sharpton had Kamala Harris over for an interview of softball questions, not unusual for leftist media. However, soon after the election, which Harris lost by a big margin in the electrical votes, it surfaced that the Harris campaign had paid half a million dollars to Sharpton’s nonprofit organization. The donation was split over two payments, each of $250,000, in September and October.
The pay-for-play scandal drew sharp rebuke of Sharpton as well as of MSNBC and the Harris campaign over what seems an intentionally hidden conflict of interest. The New York Post cited an insider calling Sharpton a “wide berth” who doesn’t have journalistic standards. The channel admitted that it was unaware of the donations but has not taken any action against Sharpton to date. Amid the many calls for firing Al Sharpton, the National Black Church Initiative recently urged the MSNBC to suspend Sharpton and investigate the scandal.
On Thursday (December 5), The New York Post reported that Rashida Jones, MSNBC President, is reportedly planning to leave the channel after Donald Trump is sworn in as the 47th President of the United States in January. The story noted that a spokesperson for Jones denied the report. However, it added that CNN’s Brian Stelter confirmed the report citing his own sources.
Other leftist media sources have also suffered in the wake of last month’s presidential election. Even before the election, the leftist daily The Washington Post lost nearly quarter of a million subscribers soon after the paper announced it wouldn’t endorse any of the two presidential candidates. Thousands of Los Angeles Times subscribers were reported to have canceled their subscriptions for the same reason.
Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, announced that his paper would not endorse any candidate to stay neutral and bias-free. However, the paper’s history has leftist activism written all over it for a very long time.
This is definitely a black-eye if not worse for Sharpton, Harris, and MSNBC.
MSNBC says it did not know which probably leaves them off the hook, but the question will be: so what are you gonna do about it? Given it’s almost 2 weeks, I would be hopeful that they provide an explanation soon.
God knows what the Harris campaign was doing and, even if legal, there should be an investigation and explanation of what the fuck they were trying to do and why. Dempsey doesn’t mention that this is on top of the money Harris gave to Oprah, presumably explained away as production cost.
They may have given to another media outlet as well and I think she’s got some explaining to do at minimum. I’d like to know about the legality too.
I would think Sharpton should be removed from MSNBC, at least for atimeout.. Again, after checking about the legality and intent of the money.
However, in all of this, as usual, and paraphrasing Tom’s most excellent statement: Dempsey has his head way up his ass and apparently he likes the air up there. His headline claims that MSNBC is scandal ridden. He mentions this one occurrence, which is not even a scandal yet. He offers no other scandal to indicate MSNBC is scandal ridden. Just lies. He is a consistent fucking lowlife liar with the only intent to make Americans feel bad about other Americans, which somehow gives this Pakistani joy.
I spell my name: Danger. And I am Frank. Khaaaaaaaan!!!!
Danger – YOU are the same way, only worse!
MSNBC proves you really can Lie to all the people All the time.
Just, there is a price to pay eventually!
Darren offers zero evidence as proof of this.
What is interesting is that all during the Trump trial involving Storm Daniels and election interference and fraud, I watched a legal network of reporting lawyers who were in the trial audience. I then watched FOX and MSNBC and their reporting of the day. FOX lied quite a bit. MSNBC was much more accurate with only a few miss statements. The results spoke for themself. MSNBC was actually more accurate.
This article is really kind of a nothing article. There were only two salient points with no sources cited. Those points were: 1) MSNBC ratings go lower (and implied is that leftist base may be dwindling on cable news) ; 2) Sharpton’s organization accepted a generous donation from the Harris campaign.
1) Most internet articles from many sources agree that MSNBC ratings are down, but it is still the second most watch cable news network behind FOX. This article gives a good summary of the stats at *https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/cable-news-ratings-november-2024/* MSNBC has many of their reports and shows on the internet which is where I watch their segments. These viewers (like me) are not included in their cable statistics, and I do not use cable tv. While I do not dispute the fact that FOX viewership has gone up according to many articles and MSNBC viewership has gone down, the fact is that cable subscriptions are down, more are using the internet to view shows.
The facts on Cable subscriptions are as follows:
Yes, cable subscriptions are down:
Subscriber loss: In 2023, the US pay TV industry lost around five million subscribers. In Q2 2024, cable lost 1.03 million subscribers, the tenth consecutive quarter of double-digit losses.
Viewership decline: Average cable viewership has dropped from 38% of US households to 28%.
Subscription projections: By the end of 2024, cable subscribers are expected to drop to 70 million, down from 105 million in 2010.
The decline in cable subscriptions is due to a number of factors, including:
Cord-cutting: The rise of streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video has allowed viewers to cut the cord and choose more affordable and customizable options. Rising costs: Cable has become more expensive. Poor content quality: Some say the quality of cable content has declined. Some pay TV providers, like Charter and Comcast, have tried to offset subscriber losses by entering the streaming space. However, it’s unclear if this will be enough to stop the decline.
Sep 4, 2024 — U.S. Pay TV Loses 1.62 Million Subscribers in Q2, 10th Consecutive Quarter of Double-Digit Percentage Losses for Linear…
NextTV
So the theme of what Ernestine Dumpster is pushing, “MSNBC viewership down thus leftists ranks are dwindling” may not be true at all if his statistics had included internet views of MSNBC show segments on Youtube.
2) I have personally watched Sharpton’s show on two occasions. It was boring. Sharpton needs to stick to his core competency which is religious grifting and racially motivated reporting to build his donation coffers. Sharpton has been strategically absent on such issues of “black on black shootings where both cop and suspect were same race. For some reason and I cannot fathom why, there was a case where a young 26 year old black woman moved from Massachusetts to Austin Texas for her dream job in her home state. Along the way in Texas she was stopped for a minor traffic issue like a non-functioning rear turn signal and light. I viewed the dash cam tape and she was clearly abused by cops, they were white. She was put in jail, and yup, she died there a few days later. Sharpton did nothing. He is very selective with which cases he will invest his time. MSNBC would benefit by dropping his show and maybe coming up with a point-counterpoint show like Bill O’Reilly used to have on FOX at 8 p.m. MSNBC may not cancel Sharpton due to the optics of ditching a black hosted show.
As far as Harris campaign donating or paying money to Sharpton’s coffers, they are free to do so, and Sharpton is free to accept the payment. I do believe it would be more ethical to at least state in a visible banner that the interview is a paid interview and who did the paying and who received the payment. I do not see this financial transaction as a Dumpster described “scandal”. And if anyone wants to find many paid for scandals or “pay to play” operations, you only need to look at Trump campaign where he paid folks at the NY Bodega to act like protesters, and paid one of his campaign related employees to act as some sort of on-site news reporter. He did the same thing that very same day with a NYFD station where he posed taking pizzas into the station for the firemen when it was revealed later that the pizzas were already there. There are many more “pay to play” with Trump, just search the internet. Trump also does something worse than “pay to play”; he openly threatens senators and congressmen and woman with retribution if they do not vote inline with his ideas! Just ask Senator Joni Ernst, or watch this report that FOX did not report and MSNBC did at *https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/watch/maga-pressure-campaign-in-full-force-against-gop-senators-who-might-oppose-trump-s-picks-226731589955*
Tom, I think harrison needs to come clean as if an investigation was under your way. I understand that the donations to Oprah were supposedly for production purposes. The donations to Sharpton were supposedly for “get out the vote“ activities. There may be one more media outlet involved as well.
Rather than let this thing stew on the Internet, I think Harris just needs to come clean as to the legality, the intent, the amount, and all of the people that these types of donations were given to.
I do not think this was a pay for place situation, but the optics are very bad.
She ran a very good campaign, except for the losing part. And I contend that given 100 or 200 more days, she would’ve won. She does not need this cloud hanging potentially over her next campaign. She should deal with it.
Frank, I understand your position and I agree that the optics need cleaning up. But come clean about what? There was no scam per se’. The payments seem to be legitimate business deals. Both people, Winfrey and Sharpton already were strong supporters for Harris so she was not trying to buy their influence. She simply used their legitimate businesses because they have large audiences. All she did was pay for a production whereas the optics appear tainted because she did not announce the business deal ahead of the production – but there is no law to do that. This is why I say in the case of Sharpton’s organization, she should have ran a banner at the bottom saying that the interview was paid for by the Harris campaign or an associated PAC.
As an Independent, I just do not see this one as a big deal. I think it is easily defended if there is a need to defend four years from now.
Well, it may be legal Tom, and I’m not 100% sure that it is, since I am not 100% sure what it was for, I still believe she wants to get out in front of this, explain what it exactly was, because if she ever plans to run again, this will be top dead center.
I agree with you on the Oprah 100%. However, on the Sharpton, I do not think it was pay for play as you are indicating, but supposedly it was pay for “get out the vote“ efforts thatSharpton’sc organization leads. Even though that may be a legitimate, even though that may be a great thing to do, let’s face it, doing it before an interview.is just bad optics. Remember, both Al and Oprah profit from either charitable operations like get out the vote, or production efforts from their company. Lastly, I think Sharpton should be at minimum, given a time out at MSNBC for these actions. I am pretty sure the rats will not take a hit.
FYI, Tom, they also gave money to Nuvvu media outlet, about 350,000, for another interview.
They also paid $10 million out for their star studied rallies. While the main stars were not paid, all the support staff was. Again, not only was this legitimate, But it seems to be the right thing to do, but I still think she needs to get out in front of all of this.
I am sure Don has similar payments although being Don, he just gets giant donations from people like Mush and the payback will come after January 2025. I mean, it’s not like Dan to put money upfront, versus taking a giant loan, for a later payback. Especially if it’s illegal.
That’s a freaky typo
If ya’ll say so, E.D., then it must be so. MSNBC vs PBP challenge and compare. Scandals, they pop up right under our noses. The most adept at covering up wins all the apples (most rotten). Pundits and journalists on other info feeds than the one which pays them, get their kicks by slamming the opponent pundits and journalists, but for all but a few, they are blacken pots calling the pan dirty. Worse than pundits and journalists are the pollster class from whom pundits and journalists receive the so called raw data percentages. It’s those cotton pickin’ numbers the polls generate that makes mouths water and keyboards go clickity-clack.
The right hungers after finding dirt under their competitors fingernails and egg on their faces. While the left has Fox Entertainment as an example of what can go wrong in media programming and then take the high road. The easy low road has become congested and slow.
Propaganda, says E.D., is the work of the disinformation and misinformation spreading left and progressive wing. Not so fast with the projecting of guilt you conservative right wing inventors of political projection.
Historically, since human beings brought politics into the public square during ancient times BC, the original conservative right wing began conspiratorial propagandist rumors from falsehoods passed on person to person via gossiping stories convincingly spread by traveling merchants.
On the other hand, there were among these early BC era folks families and clans whose thinking was, in present day terms liberal. They became targets against whom conservatives of the time began to conspire and perpetrate early forms of propaganda.
It was down and dirty misinformation then as the same negative intent publication of false information is in America at present.
Who brought a different term for propaganda into common usage here in the USA. It is D.J. Trump who most prominently talked about Fake News. The truth which he did not want published about him he accused of being Fake News. Trump projected his own guilt on whomever he discovered reporting factual truths about him that are a bad reflection on him personally. These, then, are the facts he wants the world to see are Fake News. When in actuality his calling the truth explained Fake News is itself Fake News.
Trump, from his perspective is saying Fake News is propaganda against him and his MAGA folks. However, publishing facts that are true is trustworthy news and correct information.
Propaganda is conspiracy theory organized into sentences and paragraphs containing those lies and false teachings that conspire to lead folks into thinking and acting in a certain mindset.
It’s the mindset an autocratic dictator inspires in people who will do for the dictator what he wants. His wants are self serving and greedy. And, his followers receive empty promises for their troubles and their sacred privilege of the vote made for him
It’s a long way to Tipperary. Few have both brains and patience it takes to gut it out for the long term reward. Believing Trump when he calls the truth Fake News is setting the country back years. This country has worked long and hard for the gains already made and more in the future. We can not afford or should we allow the next administration to enact policy which cause loss of ground anytime. Loss of ground is unprecedented for America.
Watch in the days after Trump is inaugurated for presidential directives that are morally and ethically correct and reflect what this nation has been in history.
Understand America in historical context and think less about personal and individual gains