Posted by
Duane Bolick on Monday, September 08, 2008 12:39:58 AM
So, the story goes, MSNBC took a big chance on putting two of the most
far-out leftist pundits in charge of their election coverage this
year. Now, they're shocked (shocked!) that both the public and their
parent company, NBC, have indicated that
their decision was stupid.
I could've told you that. Surprisingly, the New York Times' spin on this is actually spot on. They reason:
"The success of the Fox News Channel in the past decade along with the
growth of political blogs have convinced many media companies that
provocative commentary attracts viewers"
This was why MSNBC put the utterly unapologetic Obama supporters (and part-time "objective journalists") Kieth Olbermann and Chris Matthews in charge of their election coverage.
Unfortunately for MSNBC, "provocative commentary" apparently only works to attract viewers
and listeners if it's conservative "provocative commentary." For
example, witness the recent, dismal failure of liberal talk radio, and this hot-off-the-press example
of the downfall of liberal television commentary.
Fox News is considered "provocative" in the eyes of the press
solely because it doesn't toe the Democrat Party line, like most all
other cable and broadcast networks. The liberal media are like
children imitating adults - if they do the same magical incantations
(e.g., being "provocative"), they should get the same results, right?
Nope, they're still stupid. Conservative commentary is on the rise
because of its conservative nature. It's apparently what the American
people want to watch, read, and listen to. So don't be surprised when
CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC start offering more face-time to conservatives,
and maybe even start featuring conservative-hosted editorial shows.
It's, after all, what we want.