NBC's Smart Choice on Meet the Press

Like many other news jukies, I have been curious about the future of Meet the Press. The show had become one of the most respected in the news industry thanks to the leadership of Tim Russert and finding a replacement was quickly becoming a sacred task. However, instead of thoughtful deliberation, it appeared the network had quickly narrowed it down to Chris Matthews as the heir appearent.

Many bloggers, including myself, advocated Tom Brokaw as a transitional candidate to replace Russert. Virtually all the major news stories seemed to dismiss this as a possibility early on in the discussions, but I guess the message finally got through and Brokaw took that spot.

It is clear, however, that Brokaw is an interim host and the future seems unclear. One candidate for the host spot was Ted Koppel, who just recently got taking off of the short list according to Mediabistro. Regarding Meet the Press, Koppel said "That's the kind of thing that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. They need to find somebody younger than Tim, not older than Tim. He was 58. I'm 68. I just don't think it's realistic."

"If I were to do something like that, it could only be for a relatively short period. I don't think that would suit either NBC or me." It isn't like Koppel needs the work, he is now working with Discovery, National Public Radio, and (most recently) BBC America.

So what about the future of Meet the Press? It is hard to say. Many had no idea Koppel was on the list, so the announcement that individuals were on it seems to be stated after they are elininated. Very rude, but it creates a great deal of interest. NBC has stated that it isn't interested in one of the "cable guys," while saying Chris Matthews was a major candidate (who is primarily known for his work with MSNBC). However, I am going to stick my neck out there and say that I think one of the stronger candidates is Anderson Cooper at CNN. Although he is young (which means he can serve in that chair for many years), he is taken seriously by most in the media. We will have to wait and see.

According to recent surveys on marketing, most advertising attracts sellers (others who want you to buy more ads) and not buyers. Do you want to know why? Email info@HoustonBusinessShow.com and put "marketing audio" in the subject line and we will get it to you.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

The Race at "Meet the Press"

The memorial service for the great broadcast journalist was held today, but people are already beginning to speculate who will replace Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press. This process isn't driven by a lack of respect for Russert, but because of the fact that this is one of the highest rated news programs in the country and filling that seat is very important.

Reflections from MediaBistro:

The New York Times' Bill Carter and Jacques Steinberg raise a few of the expected names for potential Meet the Press anchor. "From inside NBC, the potential candidates include the evening news anchor, Brian Williams, who would be doing double duty (as [Bob] Schieffer did for a time at CBS), correspondents David Gregory and Andrea Mitchell and MSNBC hosts like Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough and Keith Olbermann," they write. "Several of those names are already lightning rods for critics, however" (emphasis added).

Allow this critic to be among the first to say "amen." Here is my assessment of these candidates:

* Brian Williams. Williams is sharp, smart, and articulate, but many blame him for the leftward reputation that has come to NBC. Furthermore, his current job is full time plus and so is the position at Meet the Press (especially if it continues to include the Washington Bureau Chief post).

* David Gregory. Gregory always seems to have an agenda. His style reminds me of Sam Donaldson. Tough? Yes, but quite selectively and he seems to be more vindictive towards some than others. That was what made Russert so great, he was an equal opportunity attacker.

* Andrea Mitchell. Generally speaking, I like Mitchell. However, the Meet the Press demographic is almost identical to those who view the evening news. The experiment of placing a female in the anchor chair at CBS with Katie Couric will have everyone moving with extreme caution at NBC.

* Chris Matthews. Matthews is very smart, but clearly very liberal. He wears his convictions on his sleeve. He loves certain guests and shows disdain towards others. He is very well versed on political and national affairs, but he doesn't seem to be the kind of personality that should be in the Meet the Press chair.

* Joe Scarborough. Scarborough's roots are Conservative, but in recent years he has worked very hard to simply be fair with everyone. Furthermore, like Russert, he has roots in politics that have led him to the media. As a Conservative, I would certainly favor Scarborough over the others being mentioned, but his ideological roots are too far too Conservative to make MSNBC comfortable, in my opinion.

* Keith Olbermann. I think Jon Stewart of the Daily Show would be better, in my opinion. He's funny without being angry. I am actually shocked that his name was even dropped in consideration. I hope is is pure speculation and not serious discussion.

Rumor has it, the race seems to have already narrowed to Gregory, Scarborough, and Matthews. I believe Scarborough was put in that group to avoid the characterization that MSNBC was only interested in Liberals. Furthermore, the rumor mill has seemed to eliminate Gregory and the buzz is surrounding Matthews, who is certainly the most political animal on the MSNBC scene.

The one name that was not mentioned in the process, and the one that I think would have been the strongest, was Tom Brokaw in an interim position. Brokaw is serious and knows his trade, regardless of how uncomfortable I might be with his ideology, he was cautious in how it demonstrated it. Furthermore, he enjoyed the highest ratings of any of the big three anchors. His emphasis on "the Greatest Generation" (those who sacrificed during WW II) has placated the concerns of many and he will appeal to the dominant, older viewer, audience.

The great thing about Brokaw, oddly, is that he seems past the desire to do such long term, which will lead to the opportunity to have many others sit in the chair and audition for the post while everyone knows it is in good hands. It will be interesting to see what NBC finally does to fill this massive void.

According to recent surveys on marketing, most advertising attracts sellers (others who want you to buy more ads) and not buyers. Do you want to know why? Email info@HoustonBusinessShow.com and put "marketing audio" in the subject line and we will get it to you.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

How Liberal is MSNBC?

MSNBC is largely considered "liberal", even "flaming liberal" in the eyes of those who describe themselves as conservative. I've noticed this for a long time and it has even showed up in its sister network's (NBC) approach to the news. However, I didn't think it reached the point that other media that is often described as liberal in their own right, would start to take notice. But MediaBistro.com has noted just such a phenomenon.

"Add the Washington Post and Time Magazine to the list of organizations recently questioning the leftward shift by MSNBC. That list also includes the New York Times, the Associated Press...oh, and the White House."

We all know the White House has been unhappy, since President Bush is the network's primary target each day. But the New York Times? The Washington Post? Time Magazine? Who would have guessed. The article continues:

Time magazine's James Poniewozik takes on Keith Olbermann following the anchor's Special Comment on Friday. "Olbermann is edging ever-closer to self-parody, or, worse, predictability," he writes. "He sounds like just another of the cable gasbags he used to be a corrective to."

Continuing: An MSNBC insider gave TVNewser another take. "MSNBC has doubled down on Keith Olbermann, but they give up a lot in doing that," our insider said. "They didn't set out to be left wing, they didn't want to be left wing. But Keith Olbermann let the freak flag fly and did huge numbers as a result. I believe there's a revolt coming."

Than there is the Washington Post: Howard Kurtz writes about what "top NBC journalists," are saying about the network.

"NBC and its cable outlet have become more integrated since MSNBC moved to the 30 Rockefeller Plaza headquarters in New York last fall, a trend accelerated by the sharing of journalistic talent during the campaign," writes Kurtz. "Some top NBC journalists say privately they are troubled by the overlapping identities."

He writes of their primary night coverage, "anchored by (Chris) Matthews, a one time Democratic operative, and Olbermann, the 'Countdown' host who recently finished one anti-Bush commentary by instructing the president to 'shut the hell up.'"

Kurtz quotes people from Ed Gillespie of the GOP to Democrat Terry McAuliffe who charge MSNBC with pro-Obama bias. NBC SVP Phil Griffin disagrees. "To call us an arm of the DNC is a joke," he says. "We have people with multiple points of view. Everyone is getting a little thin-skinned. We argue and debate every topic."

This writer contends that those arguments are being done by journalists who are defending positions against the Matthews and Olbermanns out there with views that they don't actually maintain. That is a tough task to say the least. MSNBC is quickly becoming one of the most liberal networks on television and it is over flowing into the editorial views of NBC. That is costing that network's anchor (Brian Williams) in ratings. I agree with Time Magazine, if Olbermann keeps this up, we will be turning to the Daily Show for serious content.

According to recent surveys on marketing, most advertising attracts sellers (others who want you to buy more ads) and not buyers. Do you want to know why? Email info@HoustonBusinessShow.com and put "marketing audio" in the subject line and we will get it to you.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Today Show's Lack of Environmental Concern?

I like the Today Show because it is a brilliant combination of engaging personalities, excellent interviews, even attractive video, and good old commercialism. No TV show leverages every minute of its air time to make money better than Today.

However, Today is ultimately positioned as a news program and rarely does a week go by where they don't take someone to task for "failing to go green," for being "environmentally insensitive," or telling people clever ways to be successful conservationists. With that, I am surprised that the program has gotten a pass from the blogosphere and others for its recent "Where in the World is Matt Lauer" segments.

Obviously the feature is extremely popular, taking Matt to exotic locations around the world in a week. This year his destinations were (in this order and from the site):

* Day One, Buenos Aires. "On the first leg of his global adventure, Matt visits a city known for steaks, wine, the tango and more..."

* Day Two, Amsterdam. "Matt jumps the pond to the city of bikes, red lights ... and tulips."

* Day Three, Laos. "Matt's third stop on his adventure takes him to Southeast Asia, to the the landlocked Communist country of Laos."

* Day Four, Istanbul. "For the best of both the East and West, Matt heads to Istanbul on the fourth leg of his journey."

* Day Five, Seychelles. "Matt finishes his adventure in an island paradise known for eco-tourism"

It has been an exciting five day journey with great sights and sounds (see video above). But look at the above destinations and a map and you will find that the show criss-crossed around the world adding thousands of miles to the journey as it practically flew over future locations. It boasted being the longest journey for Matt in the history of the feature, but with significant additional energy cost. Then again, the show enjoyed a boost in ratings this week, so I guess life is full of trade offs.

For a copy of the free audio program and free report, "Why Your Marketing Isn't Working," email Info@HoustonBusinessShow.com and put "marketing" in the subject line.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

CBS Should Hire Stone Phillips...Fast

Stone Phillips was "let go" today from NBC following a fifteen year as co-anchor of the very popular "Dateline" program. I believe that CBS should hire him fast.

The 53 year old veteran broadcast journalist is smart (Yale graduate), very articulate, handsome, and projects himself very well. He has won numerous Emmys and Peabody Awards over the years and has a reputation of being extremely professional. I believe he would be an excellent replacement for Katie Couric, who will be likely to leave CBS in the near future, in my opinion.

He has the right look and style to attract the younger set that Katie was suppose to get, but he is a mature enough male not to chase off the primary audience of nightly news (males who are 60 years old or older).

He wasn't let go because of lack of talent, but because of Draconian efforts by the peacock network to keep costs down. He isn't being replaced by anyone. Instead his co-host, Ann Curry will do the whole show on her own. Ann is extremely popular on the highly rated "Today Show" so choosing someone who had to go was quite simple in this scenario.

I believe CBS should jump on this. They can acquire him at a very competitive rate because of the circumstances he is under. I believe they should get him pinch hitting for Katie and put him in right away as the permanent anchor of the weekend news broadcasts. Don't be surprised if this happens quickly. Don't be surprised if this happens sooner rather than later.

I believe if we don't find him at CBS we will see him at the new Fox Business Channel in a very prominent role. This will not be the last we see of Stone Phillips.

The Incredible Shrinking Katie Couric

Katie Couric (photo, in much happier days) continues to struggle in the ratings game and the future looks grim, to say the least. There have been several firings all around her and reorganization in the news department is inevitable.

I've said on this site before that "I hate to say I told you so," but I must be lying, because I again want to point out that she was destined to fail. I pointed this out the day she joined CBS News. The reasons are simple:

* Nightly news is made up primarily of mature males and seem to like someone who can sit down and visit with them. An attractive, relatively younger woman may not fit that description when it comes to the weighty news issues of the day.

* Cheap ploys, like attempting to use an attractive woman to reach a more profitable and younger demographic won't work. The younger people want their news immediately. The best source for that is online.

* I think that older viewers (the average age of a nightly news watcher is 60) tends to be more conservative. Katie Couric built a reputation at NBC as a liberal and carries it with her to CBS.

Couric was "dead on arrival" when she arrived at Nightly News. I cannot say for sure what the future holds for her, but I feel comfortable saying that it doesn't include staying at CBS.

Today Show Sends Warning to Men

I have been a big fan of the Today Show and have mentioned it often in this blog. The wildly successful infomercial (how I refer to it and it is a compliment) that was already on an hour longer than similar shows, has decided to expand to 11 AM. In anticipation of this big move, they have brought on several correspondents. With the exception of former New York Giant great, Tiki Barber (photo), all of the new people are women and their focus has been on topics that clearly leans towards women -- female fashion, cooking, make up, etc. I can't name any of these other women because none of them played in the NFL, but all of them are going to bring largely female oriented topics to the program in light of the way they were introduced (yes, cooking is a female topic, in my opinion).

In addition, the Today Show is investing a small fortune in a new set devoted to cooking segments. With four ovens and several stoves, this kitchen is serious! This kind of investment indicates to me that they will be spending a great deal of time cooking. It seems to me the future of Today is with women and that they plan on making it a competitor to the other lifestyle programs that are so common in the morning. The future of Today has a strong feminine bent.

The Network News Mystique

It shouldn't surprise anyone that I'm a devoted viewer of news in general during the day and Fox News in particular. My posts at this blog reflect that fact. However, on those very rare days that I'm at home at 5:30 PM (Central), I begin looking for a network news channel like clockwork. In the past it was always NBC because I like the way Brian Williams presents. His liberal agenda, however, has me moving away from the network. Then, with the move of Katie Couric to CBS, I became very intrigued to watch that train wreck unfold. Now, more often than not, I'm tuning into Charlie Gibson (photo) of ABC News because it is slightly less biased than the other two.

The question is, with the several hours of news I see daily, why would I want to see the broadcast networks? It has come down to a few reasons:

* Creature of habit. Before there were so many cable news channels, people got their news from the networks at the end of the day. The younger a person is, the less likely this will be a factor.

* Entertainment quality. The networks spend significantly more on the 30 minutes of nightly news than the cable companies do on hours of their news programming. They use their best talent, with the best sets, and the finest graphics. If "good looking" broadcasts is important to you, than you probably still find yourself watching the network evening news.

* The "catch all" factor. When you cover the news 24/7 like they do on the cable channels and you find yourself watching them often, you often wonder if you are missing something because there is so much out there. That 30 minutes tells you all the major stories of the day (at least we hope).

* The major network "legitimacy." I think everyone wants to know what "the big networks" are saying. The stories they cover and the way they cover them often tells us the direction the news is going and the stories we can expect in the future.

In light of the fact that I'm typically disgusted by the liberal ideology pervasive in the "mainstream media" today, I'm surprised that I can still stomach it, let alone take extra steps to watch it. But through it all the major networks still have their own mystique.

The "Today Show" Prepares to Become the "All Day Show"

We were recently informed that NBC's popular Today Show was about to add a fourth hour and, if it keeps it up, make take the rest of the day time programming (that is wild speculation on my part). The show consistently (as in years) remains the most popular each and every quarter, and since its parent company (GE see photo) has interests in virtually every type of business, the show is actually a very elaborate infomercial (an idea I discussed in the past), why wouldn't it move to all day? Millions sitting there being sold the latest product or service from the mind of GE, how can they not love such?

But they are getting prepared for the next hour by doing something I have never noticed as a regular Today watcher -- they are replaying stories later in the program from earlier in the show. They are recycling content. They may have done such before, but it flew past me. I guess they figure that, if we are willing to watch hours of infomercial, we might want to see the same things repeatedly on the same program. Those people are brilliant!

In the 1990s Today tried an idea called "Later Today" and it was a complete wash. In fact, I think it only survived a couple of months. The program was an hour or so after Today ended and had completely different personalities. Obviously, if the extended Today is going to work, it is going to have to be seamless. It is already the longest daily morning show of the networks, the bet is that it can be longer still and successful. This is something we will have to wait until September to see.

NBC News and the Extended Broadcast

Tonight, NBC Nightly News made history when, in the first time in its history, one advertiser (Philips electronics) was the sole sponsor of the show and gave us one minute, 15 seconds in ads instead of 7 minutes. NBC then asked us to comment and let them know our thoughts. This is what I wrote:

Clearly NBC is countering the problems facing TV news more forcefully than its counterparts at CBS and ABC with the move towards extended newscasts and the more strategic use of podcasts. The networks are trying to reach the "Accumulators"; those between the ages of the mid 30s to the mid 50s who find time to be their greatest asset and who make every effort to protect such.

I wrote about the problems facing the networks in detail in my blog at http://houstonbusinessdaily.blogspot.com/2006/11/meet-accumulators-and-how-to-reach.html. With the extended newscast and the podcasts, NBC is clearly showing its intention to be around in the 21st century. I will be discussing this in more detail at www.bizplusblog.com. Congratulations on the move, I think it will be win for Philips, NBC, and us viewers.

What else do I wish to add?

First, NBC intentions are not altruistic, but a desperate attempt to recoup the huge number of viewers in the 30s, 40s, and 50s who want their news when and how they want it, and are going else where to get it. I wrote about such in the Accumulator entry mentioned above. The average age of the typical evening news viewer is still 60 (not the prime group advertisers desire), this action by NBC will not change that fact, in my opinion.

Second, it costs a lot of money to produce national nightly news broadcasts. MSNBC laid off over 700 people a few months ago, due greatly to this problem. If people continue to go to the web, rather than TV, they will eventually abandon the latter as a news source and fill that time with some reality show that costs virtually nothing to produce. We will then get virtually all our news online where it can be updated quickly and produced cheaply. TV news will likely be dead entirely except for niche stations (e.g., Fox News, CNBC, etc.) and for the occasional local news broadcast.

You can see why I relegated these comments to my blog, I'm afraid NBC may not have liked what I had to say and they could have failed to include my comments. (Yes, I'm guilty of a little blatant self promotion, the occupational hazard of bloggers).

Hey, Katie Couric, I Hate to Say I told You So

Hey Katie, I actually miss you on NBC's Today and wish we had you back. I'm also sorry to be right about my prediction shortly after you took the helm of CBS Nightly News that it wouldn't work out for you. But right I was, it appears. And although you may not be leaving your anchor spot any time soon, it appears you won't be raising your ratings much either.

The reasons why I said it wouldn't work back on Sept. 5 of 2006:

1) It isn't a real news program, but a mini version of a news magazine.

2) She isn't the right approach to reach the typical nightly news viewer who is 60 years old. She is too young and possibly too female, for the hard news crowd who tends to watch that type of programming (I believe viewers of such programs prefer an older son or the wise next door neighbor over a younger female).

3) Finally, that demographic (60 year olds) isn't even the group advertisers are trying to reach. Rather they are looking for the affluent and time crunched "Accumulators", who get the news when they want and it isn't at 6:30 Eastern.

She went from number 1 her first week as anchor when people tuned in out of curiosity and she is already down to number 3. CBS's $15 million lady may already be in trouble. But I think that was the case before she even did her first broadcast.

Katie Couric's Big Day

Today was Katie's big day as host of CBS Evening News. She made history by being the first female anchor of the most prestigious and important 30 minutes of news. Yes, I know, that is a lot of hyperbole, but that is the media's position on it, not mine. In reality, evening news is in desperate shape and Katie Couric wearing little to no clothes would not be able to likely save its staggering decline in viewership (by the way she was fully and appropriately dressed). Furthermore, the approach they took with Katie will likely contribute to this media's further decline.

First of all, the new approach is no longer the evening news. It is, instead, a mini version of a news magazine such as 20/20, Primetime Live, or 60 Minutes. Instead of making sure the major news stories were covered in less than 30 minutes, Katie gave Morgan Spurlock of "Supersize Me" fame an opportunity to trash our "divided nation" and to express his opinion that we need to stop operating in extremes in her new "Free Speech" segment. Furthermore she had Thomas Friedman of the New York Times on who discussed how we need to restore the friendly US that much of the world loved and appreciated (and often used as a doormat, but we won't go there). The new format was mildly entertaining, but it wasn't the "Evening News."

Second, it isn't the right approach to reach the typical Evening News viewer. That viewer is 60 years old and likes to hear from older sons (such as Brian Williams and Charlie Gibson) and not necessarily from that "chatty" Couric girl. I'm just talking the typical senior, in my opinion, not necessarily my view. I don't see her surviving long trying to reach the senior crowd. Further, the networks are actually trying to distance themselves from seniors and are trying to pursue the all important Accumulators -- 35 to 55 year olds who largely drive the economy today. Which is exactly why they pursued Katie, who falls in the age group and other parts of that key demographic.

Third, she won't likely reach the Accumulators either. Most of them are doing a lot of things at 5:30, but watching the evening news isn't one of them. They are picking up kids, making meals, taking care of parents, or several other things that have nothing to do with the smiling Katie. This audience is reached now, largely, through the Internet, which allows them to watch the footage they want to watch and see it when they care to see it. In no time the podcast version of the news will have a much larger audience then the TV broadcast, but with the rate evening news is going, that won't be saying much.

I hate to be negative. I actually like Katie and miss her on the Today Show, but I believe this experiment will fail and she will have an audience significantly smaller than she did early each morning on NBC. By the way, the morning shows like Today are about the only viable way to reach the all important Accumulators because they are busy multi tasking and find the background noise of information and the relaxed environment of the program a great way to launch a day. It is sad she left this viable place to reach an audience to go to the largely dead network news. But don't worry, we will likely see her on some other day time show in the not too distant future. Watch out The View!