did CNN cancel Soledads show for attracting too many minorities?

[suestorm]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:01am

wow, CNN didnt like the show as it attracted too many minorities. and they say FOX is racist.

Many staffers were stunned when Feder constantly complained that the viewership of “Early Start” and “Starting Point” was “too ethnic,” based on the high concentration of minority viewers. This common complaint worked itself up through the company, to CNN’s Diversity Committee, and to other staffers, who were mortified that a CNN executive was squabbling over attracting minority viewers

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/cnn-starting-point-staffers-fear-jeff-zucker-soledad-obrien_b95106

Updated On: 1/31/13 at 11:01 AM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:22am

CNN in general has been on a decline these past few years.

[madbrian]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:29am

Recent cable ratings show CNN way behind their competition. Of course, Fox 'News' leads by a wide margin, though their numbers are down. They need to make wholesale changes.

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:39am

I still don't understand Fox's numbers. Are there that many delusional people in this country?! I always liked Soledad so it will be interesting to see where she ends up.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:40am

The only problem any network ever has with any show is that it doesn't make them money. This particular show drew less viewers than its competition and the viewers it did draw were less desirable. If it drew 1.2 million minorities it would be CNN's biggest hit.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:46am

My only understanding of Fox News's numbers is that liberal viewers that want a more liberal angle are split between CNN and MSNBC. Conservative viewers only have Fox News

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:49am

Thats a good point. Republitards won't even watch the 11 o'clock news since it's so damn liberal.

[suestorm]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 11:58am

my Dad says the only thing lower then a politican is the news media.

Say what you want about fox, but they are focused and consistant. CNN and MSNBC are always shifting their programming. they claim to be credible and unbiased, but then they put nutjobs like Al Sharpton and Ellott Spitzer, Keith Olbermann and Piers Morgan on!

Updated On: 1/31/13 at 11:58 AM

[Wynbish]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 12:06pm

I'll take all four of them together over Glenn Beck or Hannity. The only person I like on Fox News is Shepard Smith.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 12:08pm

1) "Always shifting their programs" used be seen as presenting all viewpoints and used to be seen as a virtue. There is no equivalency between MSNBC and Fox- MSNBC is a news network that presents a variety of viewpoints and a full slate of straight-forward news reporting. Fox is a propaganda tool for the Republican party and every minute of its programming is presented with a rightward spin, which they claim is counteracting a pervasive liberal bias in other stations.

2) Keith Olbermann was fired by MSNBC and Spitzer was fired by CNN.

Updated On: 1/31/13 at 12:08 PM

[madbrian]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:01pm

As far as I can tell, MSNBC makes no claim to being unbiased. They're fairly upfront about their liberal viewpoint. That said, they fall far short of Fox's leverl of partisanship. The best example is Fox's fostering of the Tea Party. At its inception, Fox 'News' personalities were hosting Tea Party rallies around the country.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:16pm

No. MSNBC is not "biased." They are a news network that features a block of liberal programming in prime time. They also have hours of "straight news" programing and a very successful morning show hosted by a Republican ex-congressman that features a right-wing viewpoint. While several shows (and hosts) have a "liberal viewpoint" the network itself presents a range of opinions and straight-forward news.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:23pm

In fact, they "lean forward" which symbolizes balance and fairness.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:30pm

I make no secret that I watch/listen to hours of MSNBC every day and while they might seem to lean extraordinarily left-leaning to some people I think that's only because of the ridiculousness of how far right FOX takes it. I hear people on MSNBC being critical of Democrats all the time, even in the Prime Time hours, but I pretty much always find the news and commentary on that station to be "fair & balanced".

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:31pm

I think I'll have tacos for lunch.

[suestorm]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:32pm

I think people think Fox is biased because the rest of the media skews left....

MSNBC is less fair and balanced than Fox News, study says
11/4/2012


http://now.msn.com/msnbc-more-biased-than-fox-news-according-to-pew-research-center-study

You know those snarky comments you hear about Fox News and its “fair and balanced” reporting? It turns out they’re not the outlet you need to be keeping an eye on this fall. Cable channel MSNBC has shown more bias in its political news than Fox’s TV coverage, according to a study by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. Pew studied news stories about Romney and Obama, and the study showed that in MSNBC’s coverage, 71 percent of stories about Romney portrayed him in a negative light, compared to only 46 percent of Fox segments on Obama. For the record, Pew did not address the biggest question concerning the two networks: Who is more annoying, Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity? [Source]

Click to see more on msnNOW.com, updated 24 hours a day.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 1:55pm

Then I wonder why people who only watch Fox News are the least informed? Even less informed than people who watch no news at all.
Fox News viewers least informed

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:03pm

Because they lean backwards.

[suestorm]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:09pm

ERIK, thats a different issue, but maybe this is why? (from your own link)if you saw my link it was actually from MSN itself.

Other networks also did badly in some sections; MSNBC viewers and Fox News viewers both fared worse in answering international questions than people who watched no news.

Fox News hit out at the school responsible for the study on Thursday. A spokesperson for the network told The Hollywood Reporter, "Considering FDU’s undergraduate school is ranked as one of the worst in the country, we suggest the school invest in improving its weak academic program instead of spending money on frivolous polling – their student body does not deserve to be so ill-informed."

[~tiny~]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:14pm

Suestrom. New or old troll, mikey or abby. Sounds so familiar. lol.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:17pm

Indeed. She is certainly Mikey/Abbey. At least she's not just trolling any more.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:19pm

And note the loads of Mikeyness in this OP: First, the title is a flat out wrong- she wasn't fired and the change in her duties had nothing to do with her ethnicity.

[suestorm]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:25pm

you know whats funny? as soon as i wrote this, i knew in this room i was going to get called names for going against the status quo. its really kind of sad. especially as i wasnt advocating fox news, im just commenting on the general state of suckiness for all the news networks.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:25pm

Interestingly, in the MSN article Sue cites, if you click the "source" link you'll find the original study says nothing of the kind.

In fact, it says specifically that "The study of the tone in news coverage is not an examination of media bias."

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/31/13 at 2:32pm

MSNBC is less fair and balanced than Fox News, study says
11/4/2012

That study only covers an 8-week period and only focused on stories concerning Obama and Romney. If you read the actual results of the study, there is a lot of information they leave out. Such as the results of the other networks included, the number of stories reported for each network, and conveniently, the number of positive stories reported on each candidate for each network. this is what the study itself had to say on MSNBC and Fox:

The study also reveals the degree to which the two cable channels that have built themselves around ideological programming, MSNBC and Fox, stand out from other mainstream media outlets. And MSNBC stands out the most. On that channel, 71% of the segments studied about Romney were negative in nature, compared with just 3% that were positive-a ratio of roughly 23-to-1. On Fox, 46% of the segments about Obama were negative, compared with 6% that were positive-a ratio of about 8-to-1 negative. These made them unusual among channels or outlets that identified themselves as news organizations.

Now, it may be true that MSNBC is more biased than Fox (though by a much slimmer margin, I imagine), but it wasn't proven by this study. And the study certainly doesn't address overall network content or accuracy. It is just about the Presidential candidates during an 8-week period of the election race. And yes, I do find it easy to believe that MSNBC, as well as probably most networks other than Fox, had more negative things to say about Romney than Obama. Even Republicans had more negative things to say about Romney than they did McCain.
Analysis Report