Tom,
Here's a website about TV that seems to have a few good articles on it:
*********
MSNBC Yanking Of "Savage Nation" Says As Much About The Network As Michael Savage
allyourtv.com
Written By Rick Ellis, Tuesday, July 8th, 2003
I've written about MSNBC a lot over the past year, and at this point, I know some of the people working at the network think I have an axe to grind. I've criticized programming decisions, personnel changes, and my pieces on the cancellation of Phil Donahue still infuriate a couple of executives at the network.
The thing is.....I actually like MSNBC. I'm friends with some of the people working there, I admire a lot of talent, and I've watched the network on and off since the early days of Soledad O'Brien and her computer-generated sidekick.
But I think even most partisans at MSNBC would agree that the network has suffered through some truly thick-headed management decisions. Thanks to tension between the cable and NBC News sides of GE, and a current management team seemingly obsessed with which way the wind is blowing at corporate headquarters, MSNBC continues to be the Chicago Cubs of cable news. A likeable, sometimes talented group of people adrift in mediocrity.
A prime example of the shaky management at MSNBC is the way in which the network handled the hiring (and eventual firing) of conservative talk show host Michael Savage. His comments on last Saturday's show (which led to his dismissal from the network) came as no surprise to anyone....except apparently MSNBC management.
Savage was hired soon after the network canceled Phil Donahue's daily program, and that decision was used by critics as an indication the network was turning increasingly conservative. But let's leave that discussion for another time. His hiring seemed to be an odd choice, not just because of his public profile, but because of his already demonstrated inability to control his anger on the air.
Listeners to his radio show are familiar with the way in which Savage can rail at callers and critics who dare to disagree with him. Or just manage to tick him off for whatever ill-defined reason. As one executive from a rival cable network recently told me, "Hiring Savage is like playing Russion Roulette with a grenade."
The person most likely to be hit by shrapnel following Saturday's comments is MSNBC chief Erik Sorenson, whose public support of Savage's hiring may come back to haunt him. He gave a series of interviews to reporters in March and April of this year, in which he spoke positively about Savage, and promised that that the kind of incendiary comments Savage spews on his radio show would not be heard on his cable television program and "if they do happen, they won't happen more than once."
Those comments may seem pretty damn ironic to reporter Ashleigh Banfield, who has been just one the targets of Savage's curious approach to broadcasting. After Savage attacked her during one of his shows--at one point calling her a "mind slut"--she reportedly complained bitterly to management at the network. It's a reflection of the mindset at MSNBC that the comments only became a public issue when Banfield complained about them during an April speech at Kansas State University.
During a discussion of some of the challenges faced by cable news reporters, she mentioned her difficulties with Savage:
"We hired someone recently on MSNBC named Michael Savage. Some of you may know his name already from his radio program. He was so taken aback by my dare to speak with someone from the Martyr's brigade about why they do what they do. About why they are prepared to sacrifice themselves over what they call a freedom fight and we call terrorism. He was so taken aback that he chose to label me as a slut on the air. And that's not all. As a porn star. And that's not all. As an accomplice-to-be of Jewish children. So these are the ramifications for simply being a messenger in the Arab world."
There are some conflicting reports as to whether or not Savage was even warned about the comments by network execs, but Banfield's comments got her a public spanking in the press by Sorenson and others at MSNBC.
All of this turmoil has not helped morale at MSNBC, or the overall ratings. Viewership has slipped back to at (and sometimes below) pre-Iraq-War levels, and many employees I've spoken with over the past weeks describe a feeling that the network is "adrift."
Sorenson has been "unavailable" since news of the firing was released on Monday, not an unusual stance for the executive. His lack of public comment has already sparked some criticism from the press, most notably in a column by Lisa De Moraes, which ran in yesterday's Washington Post:
"Immediately after deciding to whack Savage, MSNBC chief Erik Sorenson, as he has so often in the past couple of years, became hopelessly lost in the Land of Not Available and could not be found for comment. Our thoughts are with him and his family and we wish him another safe return."
Several NBC News sources I spoke with today suggested that Sorenson's job may ultimately be in jeopardy, although many people thought he was on the way out last fall, and he survived that challenge.
Ultimately, the decision to hire Savage--against the better judgment of many at MSNBC and NBC News--is a reflection of the rigid management style at the network. As one former employee told me several months ago, "When they let me go, I was told that I "didn't fit in.' I realized after the fact that what they really meant was, 'when we ask for opinions in meetings, you should keep in mind what Erik wants.'"
It's clear that what Sorenson and his executive group want is a little bit of the magic exhibited by its rival Fox News Channel. The question for the executives at GE is simple. Will that magic happen because he remains, or because he leaves? |
