Okay, what they say is true. That is, what MSNBC says about itself in its new commercials is true: it is indeed the fastest growing cable news channel. To a very large extent, MSNBC’s recent success is carried by younger viewers. This would be a highly unremarkable fact, especially in the cable world, since it is always the younger viewers, characterized by various journalists and media critics as more liberal and educated, that have taken The Daily Show and The Colbert Report to such heights. People even speak of the “Stewart-” or “Colbert”-bump. That is to say, when politicians and other public figures appear on these shows, their favorability ratings get a boost. (Don’t get me started on the ridiculousness of the notion of “favorability rating.”) Appealing to the youth is always a good bet. The culture industry and corporate America have figured this out since at least Elvis. Ain’t nothing new really,nahmean?
So what has changed for MSNBC, which along with its parent org NBC News and the larger umbrella corp NBC/Universal, has been getting pounded by its competitors? What has made MSNBC grow so quickly? What has made the youth, often labeled as apathetic and lazy (I plead guilty to the former), become so involved in what was before a pretty mediocre cable news channel? More personally, why do I always have it on? And personally, again, why do other cool people like George Clooney have it on all the time? (Clooney has nothing to do with this really, except I will take advantage of any opportunity, easy, cheap and shameless as it is (it’s my blog..remember?) of being associated with him.)
Well, so-called experts have generally pointed to one small minor detail–the presidential election, duh. No, but for real. The election has no doubt generated a tremendous level of interest in the election, with no small debt to Obama, who I support for President but not for reasons one would first leap at. (Hint: We share tastes in theology.) Still, I find that there must be something more to MSNBC’s popularity among the Jon Stewart crowd than good timing and a rather talented junior senator from Illinois.
The person who has clearly been at the core of MSNBC’s newfound goldmine is none other than Keith Olbermann, the ESPN SportsCenter alum. With really amazing wit and liberal-left politics (which he definitely wears on his sleeve), Olbermann has catapulted his show “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” to new levels of stardom–even Internet celebrity-dom (Gawker has reported on him) and Page Six coverage. (That’s when you know if you’ve made it.) He is, as the New Yorker profile on him describes, “one angry man.” But, as the article details, Olbermann’s left-leaning counterpoint to Bill O’Reilly’s point, makes for a pretty good example of what folks have been calling “viewer cocooning”–the phenomenon of viewers watching news programs that reinforce their already-formed political and intellectual positions. In other words, it is the drive to identify, the will to confirm, what Dr. Freud (whom Olbermann pages a lot when making fun of various right-wing media pundits and political figures) once described as “the oceanic feeling.” So yes, this bodes not too kindly for me, a self-described “left of the American left” person. Am I a goddamn liberal? Ehh…not too fast folks.
Though Olbermann’s status as a liberal-left alternative to O’Reilly is done with gusto and a good deal of awesome writing, for me, the hook for “Countdown” was MSNBC contributor and Air America radio host Rachel Maddow, who frequently appears on the show and also fills in for Keith when he’s out. There was a recent NY Times piece on her, which claims that Maddow will be the next to get a slot on MSNBC. No, I don’t like her just because she is a PhD, although she copped that player hater’s degree in History from Oxford of all places just for the record, nor is it because she is queer, although it is refreshing as all hell to see a queer person on television that isn’t doling out fashion and hygienic advice for once.
Okay who am I kidding; that is precisely why I like her so damn much. But plus which, Maddow is always smart and articulates the lefty position that she occupies with such clarity that even a cat like Pat Buchanan has to give her due props (Watch Rachel son Buchanan). As the Times piece states, she is well-liked by Phil Griffin, newly appointed Prez of MSNBC. Will she be the first real left voice on a major cable news channel? (You may ask: what about Olbermann? Wasn’t he a left voice? Yes, many people consider him left. He even has a blog on DailyKos; he must be! I’ll leave a discussion about the rather skewed discursive usage of the terms “left” and “right” on TV, print and mainstream Internet (yes, DailyKos is mainstream…if you doubt it, use the Google to find out how many unique visitors they get per day) for another post. But I consider Olbermann to be liberal, or liberal-left at best.) Is the presence of the first out-of-the-closet gay person on cable news imminent? (For the record: cats will bring up CNN’s Anderson Cooper and Suzanne Malveaux, but they are not out. Well, if they are, they are definitely trying to “pass” as straight for the cameras, which I think in 2008 is rather wack. Now, am I naive as to think they and their network won’t get some kind of backlash? No, I know the stakes and I’m never one to knock one’s hustle. It’s their choice to out themselves and I respect that. I’m not saying they have a “responsibility” to be more “gay” on TV. That’d be foolish, especially since I can’t speak as a queer person. I’m simply not counting them as queer TV personalities since they do not make it known in any form that they are gay, whereas Maddow makes it clear on her official website. And really, I’m just really shocked that there aren’t really any queer folks on TV news.)
Since, we got the gay thing covered, are Asian Americans next? Yeah right….
