Ed Schultz Leaving MSNBC Weeknights, Moving To Weekends
Source: huffingtonpost.com
MSNBC's Ed Schultz announced on his Wednesday show that he would be leaving his 8 p.m. weeknight time slot. Schultz will move "The Ed Show" to the weekends, where it will air from 5 to 7 PM on Saturdays and Sundays. Thursday night's show will be his last. His weekend show will begin in April.
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/13/ed-schultz-time-slot-leaving-weeknight_n_2871383.html?utm_hp_ref=media
***VIDEO AT LINK***
SCVDem
(5,103 posts)5 PDT. Now what?
Current is good but will go away.
I don't suppose they are bringing Keith back, I wish, I wish, I wish!
amuse bouche
(3,657 posts)that Keith would be doing a sports show on MSNBC. I asked for a link and will check to see if he sent one
Cal33
(7,018 posts)I found the program very depressing. I, for one, will be glad to have Ed
Schultz on Saturdays and Sundays for a change. MSNBC finally decided
to make this change about having a news program on weekends, too. I
hope Ed will stay there for a long time to come, and may he have many
more viewers, too.
SCVDem
(5,103 posts)we only lose one hour of Ed a week.
I never watch prisons but found it amusing when Rachel sent us there for so long!
mzmolly
(50,957 posts)subject matter on the weekends? I hope so.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)he should decide to spend a little more time on non-political issues.
mzmolly
(50,957 posts)Yavin4
(35,357 posts)drm604
(16,230 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)gateley
(62,683 posts)AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Last I read he was hinting about coming back to ESPN, where the bridges are pretty well torched, too.
LiberalFighter
(50,504 posts)He burned too many bridges. I read that he had approached ESPN and they didn't bite.
morningglory
(2,336 posts)1983law
(213 posts)Close the thread down.
Warpy
(110,910 posts)it seems likely he'll be back only to his first love, sports.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)NOVA_Dem
(620 posts)They did the same thing to Cenk Uygur. They offered Cenk a demotion to regular commentator once he began questioning the Obama administration.
Ed wasn't as critical as Cenk but regularly talked about Obama potentially cutting "The Big 3" and Obama's execution of US citizens by drones overseas without charges or a trial. My guess is that people in admin didn't like that kind of talk.
He'll probably get replaced by another yes man like Sharpton.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)at MSNBC. Actual "Democrats" watch MSNBC.
Champion Jack
(5,378 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)centrist. He's apparently moved too far to the left for the suits' taste. Lately he's been taking no prisoners. This was bound to happen.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)whathehell
(28,969 posts)I've got news for you...He's the ONLY one on the MSNBC
lineup who speaks up consistently for unions and workers rights
Is he not "Ivy league" enough for you?
wisteria
(19,581 posts)I think it is a good idea though I will miss his show during the week.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)"Several MSNBC employees, who spoke about programming plans on the condition of anonymity, said the most likely candidate for a new show was the Washington Post columnist Ezra Klein, a frequent substitute for Ms. Maddow. Mr. Klein may start with a weekend time slot, but these people said the 8 p.m. weekday time slot held by Mr. Schultz was also a possibility."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/business/media/msnbc-its-ratings-rising-gains-ground-on-fox-news.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0%22
This article connects a lot of the dots. It mentions MSNBC's wanting to get away from the prison shows because they muddy its identify.
It also addresses the rumor we heard some time ago about Ed's leaving the 8:00 time slot.
But must of all, it addresses what we should have guessed all along: IT IS ALL ABOUT THE RATINGS! Building better ratings means more money and right now they get less cable money than Fox or CNN.
Sam
bucolic_frolic
(42,676 posts)I get bored watching him. It's probably just me
Samantha
(9,314 posts)Just a little dry in the delivery. He is different. I just can't second-guess who they think will drive up their ratings so they get more money. Who do you think?
Sam
PADemD
(4,482 posts)Samantha
(9,314 posts)Maybe they will give her some time on Saturday or Sunday.
Sam
Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)Sharpton can get away with it. The new guy might not be able to get past his bad delivery. Number one reason. He's not Al Sharpton. He's just the new guy.
SunSeeker
(51,371 posts)I guess it's because he reminds me of my annoying lab partner in high school. That little know-it-all had the same weird cotton-mouth lisp, but he was not progressive.
vlyons
(10,252 posts)I like his wonkiness. Very sharp and he follows the money and sniffs out the GOP budget lies.
JohnnyRingo
(18,581 posts)Ezra Klein is smart tv.
On edit:
I too believe he's slated for the next spot on MSNBC. All you have to do is see who fills in for the hot time slots. He's Rachel's #1 sub.
SunSeeker
(51,371 posts)malibea
(179 posts)I love the wonkiness of Ezra as well. And I think he is so cute- but I'm almost 70 years old so I am allowed! I also love Ezra because he is so sharp and witty especially when it comes to discussing economics.
I would also love to see Joy Reid with her own show. I did some research and discovered that Joy is not a newcomer to the political scene and has background and well planted roots in the Florida "political" soil where she has been a "political" person for a long time. She is also well educated which is a privilege and pleasure to see among more females nowadays. She is also a good speaker and can discuss any political element that is covered.
It would be nice if both Ezra and Joy could each have a show. That's not asking for too much and not too much out of the realm of possibilities.
IcyPeas
(21,747 posts)russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)30% of the time repubs are on air reading their talking points.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)It is always about the money, right?
Sam
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)New York Times reporter and Harvard grad Annie Lowrey has been on Rachel Maddow's show and is very well spoken.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)While I often became frustrated with Ed, not because of his stances, but because he is sometimes misinformed, we needed his firebrand-type commentary. We need more of than on the political left. Our commentators are too nice. Too milquetoast. I like Rachel, but her giggly demeanor is off-putting at times. We need to get more angry on the left. We're too nice!
Samantha
(9,314 posts)Once again, Liberal_Stalwart71, he did not attract the targeted age group. MSNBC is getting less money from cable, behind FOX and even CNN (which is disgusting). As business-people, they want those ratings higher and cable advertising money will flow in. They actually want to catch up with Fox's numbers, and they do not see Ed as someone who can do that. (Just for the record, I never miss him. He is different, but that different flare makes him a standout on MSNBC.) So if Ed has to be moved into another time slot in order for them to catch FOX's numbers, so be it, nothing personal, just business.
As I said in another post, thinking like this will drive cable subscribers to other sources which have better content and cost less. They better start looking at the bigger picture. Sure, advertisers' preferences are important, but it is meaningless if cable subscribers drop out of the equation.
I am paying for information and entertainment that I like, but I am not going to pay for content targeted to an age group which is impervious to the quality of the content. That is my prerogative as a consumer.
So I am in agreement with you, we need Ed to be seen in prime time, but who cares what we think?
Sam
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)truthisfreedom
(23,113 posts)I miss my political shows on MSNBC weekends. The weekend shows they have on are unbecoming of MSNBC.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Nancy Waterman
(6,407 posts)She is terrific. Ezra is smart but very hard to listen to, especially for a whole show. When he covers for Rachel, I last 10 minutes.
Or what about Elliot Spitzer.
gateley
(62,683 posts)John Fugelsang, but not sure how good of a fit he'd be. LOVE him, though!
Myrina
(12,296 posts)His show on Current was EXCELLENT. Skewered both parties and the 1% appropriately, didn't rehash snips and clips that had already been covered by other talking heads (seems like Rachel, Ed and Lawrence re-chew what Matthews, Rev Al, etc already said that day) ... and he's wicked brilliant.
kjackson227
(2,166 posts)Giving Eliot Spitzer a show on MSNBC has been my dream for A VERY LONG TIME! I also hope he'll make a run back to politics.
paria_wave
(6 posts)I like to catch Ed on Sirius XM. And I hate prison - like RM - so Sats ain't bad.
gateley
(62,683 posts)WCGreen
(45,558 posts)I believe he can do his radio show from home.
Perhaps he just wants to spend more time with his family.
whathehell
(28,969 posts)sounds punishing to me.
I'm glad that he's keeping his radio show AND that he's
staying with MSNBC on the weekends.
secondwind
(16,903 posts)Hulk
(6,699 posts)I really don't care much for Ed's show or his radio. He's too much like Rush Limpballs of the right. Now, don't jump me on that, but his voice, stature, and he can get pretty rude with dim-witted reich wing callers - which leaves me cold.
WHERE is THOM HARTMANN? Damn, I miss that guy. We used to have progressive radio in Portland, Oregon - but no more. The bastards quit progressive radio and went to ANOTHER sports program format - just what we needed. I'm sure somebody listens to that crap, but we already have at LEAST one major sports channel; and we have waaaay too many reich wing stations. We get it all.
Back to Ed. I wish him well. I'm glad he's going to give us a break from "Lock-Up" on the weekends. How lame is that? What they hell are they thinking at MSNBC?? Do they really believe anyone cares to watch that crap??
Back to Ed. He probably means well, but he comes off just too aggressive and rude at times for my taste.
With the lack of progressive radio in our metro area, I'm listening more and more, and enjoying more and more, NPR. You can actually learn something about life and also get a rather "unbiased" review of politics. I sure miss Randi Rhodes though..and Thom Hartmann, and Mike The-Cuss-Word-Guy. His name escapes me as I'm typing. ...oh, Malloy.
Good luck to you Ed. I'll see you on the weekends, and maybe I'll enjoy you even more than I do now.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)but I still switch over to Randi at 3.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)become too playful.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)try to work in a joke every other second, it could be quite a meaningful show. Sadly, so much of progressive media depends on rightwing media to sustain their shows. It's like they all have the same producer. It's almost like if you watch one show on MSNBC, you can guess what the rest of the lineup will be doing that day. I don't watch Rachel very often, but when I do, she seems to be the only one who puts work & research into her hour. She doesn't rely on endless video & soundbites from rightwing talk radio and Faux News, and the same goes for Melissa.
I also wish MSNBC would do more international news stories, along the lines of Fareed Zakaria. Fareed does the politics thing from time to time, but he often goes outside the DC media bubble, which makes for must see teevee on Sunday morning. I guess the networks are giving the people what they want, but dammit there's a whole big world out there that doesn't revolve around which party scored this week.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)cohorts spend most of the time responding to wingnut attacks. There's really no analysis or information that we don't already know. Now, granted, I totally understand that the primary purpose of her show is to entertain. I get that. I'm just losing interest in the format.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Steph has a daily segment dedicated to highlighting rightwingers, I think it's called "Rightwing World" or some such nonsense. I understand it's a cheap way to produce a 3 hour show, but Gawd it's boring. And most shows on MSNBC are just talk radio on the teevee. Even Lawrence, whom I agree with most of the time, has a nightly Rush Limbaugh and/or Bill O'Reilly segment. I've been wondering lately if they actually have a side deal to promote these idiot blowhards? This is not just about seeing what the "other side" is doing, it's more than that. I honestly believe that progressive media sees their fate as tied to that of the Limbaughs/Hannitys and O'Reillys, and that's just sad.
Larkspur
(12,804 posts)He nailed Joe Lieberman's voice.
I listen to Bill Press, Stephanine Miller, Sam Seder on The Majority Report, Ed Schultz, Thom Hartmann, Cenk on The Young Turks and on Saturdays The Ring of Fire. I podcast them all.
Stephanie's show helps me laugh at the Reich wing nuts because laughter really unnerves them.
I'm not a fan of Ezra Klein as a TV Show host. His delivery is stiff. I like him as a policy wonk, but find it hard to listen to him for an hour show.
I think Chris Hayes is moving to the 8PM slot. I love Chris Hayes. He comes across as a warm human being who is also very smart. I can listen to him with ease. I always tuned in to his weekend show.
Hulk
(6,699 posts)I can hear that sweet voice again....thank you so much!! I miss that young lady so much.
Funny, cause when I first started listening to her, I couldn't stand her voice. She has that "New York Jewish female voice" that is just normally a completely annoying turn-off to me. And yes, she is Jewish, and maybe she is from New York - but I absolutely LOVE the wisdom and patience that come out of her mouth. The woman is a gift!
I will be listening again. I just can't believe we dumped KPOJ in Portland for a fookin' sports channel. How sad is that!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)progressive radio is a threat, and they're shutting 'em down nationwide, like anybody needs another sports radio station. Enjoy Randi.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)He's on between noon and 3:00 pm PT. I do it every day because our only progressive station got changed to an all right wing
news station format like yours did for sports.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)I find his huntin' & fishin' schtick to be be annoying, and I can't stand to listen to a show that talks about "the Righties" and "the Lefties."
I do listen to Mike Malloy all the time, though. He's as bitter and cynical as I am, and listening to his show gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling (although that may be alcohol-related.)
However, if I want news I watch/listen to DemocracyNow! over and over again.
TomCADem
(17,378 posts)I do wish there were more liberal cable news on Sunday mornings, rather than the corporate media giving lap dances to the GOP on other networks.
brightertomorrow
(122 posts)I am still in shock at his announcement and not at all happy about it either. I wonder if maybe tomorrow night during his last show he will announce who is taking over his hour?? Sure wish it would be Keith but if we can't have Keith back then I wish they would move Martin Bashir up to that hour and maybe put Ezra Klein on late afternoon. I think Ezra would be a better fit for an afternoon time slot.. Happy Ed is at least still going to have a weekend show but boy am sure going to miss him during the week. Sigh!
Rhiannon12866
(202,988 posts)He's a voice like no other. You'd think his stock would have just risen sky high after Scott Prouty (the 47% recording guy) chose Ed's show to finally go public.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)He annoys me. I wish they would stop playing hardball twice too.
whathehell
(28,969 posts)That changes everything.
Hate to be blunt about it, but, who cares?..That's what channel changers
are for. The importance of Ed is that a LOT of people like and relate
to him and he's the ONLY one on the MSNBC lineup who speaks
out consistently for unions and workers rights.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)I appreciate that he speaks out for unions and workers rights, I just don't think we need a left Limbaugh.
And I do change the channel when the Ed show is on.
Maybe that's another reason why his show is moving.
whathehell
(28,969 posts)Yes, indeed -- His show is moving because YOU change the channel.
I do hope you meant that to be funny.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Obviously his ratings are sucking or he'd have a better time slot.
whathehell
(28,969 posts)Re-read your post and learn to communicate better.
By the way, there's no "obviously" here...His wife was stricken by cancer last year
and, as another poster mentioned, he may well want to stay closer to home
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)But that would be ungentlemanly like.
The fact that you think I believe that Ed moved his show for the sole purpose that I quit watching it is comical.
whathehell
(28,969 posts)but that would be impolite.
The fact that you can't see how your own clumsy, ungrammatical
writing gives that impression is what's truly funny.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)I'm glad you got a laugh.
Now you go troll someone else (Since you are so much above me).
Wasn't this originally about how bad the ed show sucks balls..
It still does.
Now I will leave you to your witty response.
And I will ignore it.
Have a nice bitter life..
whathehell
(28,969 posts)with other's trying to hurt you, you might avoid trying
to hurt or insult them. It's that "do unto others" thing.
I'm answering both of your questions: 1. "Is that supposed to hurt me in some way"?
No, it was my second attempt to show you that it was your unclear
writing, not my "weird" interpretation of your words, that was at fault.
Since my first attempt was answered by you with total snark, you'll have to excuse
me if I wasn't overly sensitive to your feelings on the second go round. It's the "do unto others" thing again.
B. "Wasn't this originally about how the ed show sucks balls"?
No, that was your opinion and that of some others, but if you read all or most of the thread,
you'd see that at least half the posters LIKED the Ed show and were sorry to see it go to weekends only.
Truthfully, you sound kind of young and immature, so I'm honestly not interested in fighting with you.
In saying that, I must also tell you that I'm about the least bitter person you're likely to meet right now.
Maybe you're projecting your own bitterness onto me. Sometimes that comes from depression
and I certainly don't wish that on you, as I was once young and depressed and know how hard that can be.
I think it might be best if we ignore each other for now, but I do hope that you
work out whatever is bothering you, and I do mean that sincerely.
olddots
(10,237 posts)I don't 80% of the time and I get ignored for it.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)SCVDem
(5,103 posts)I channel change when I hear S.E. Cupp.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)but then Ed was always a hard right conservative, til he flipped anyhow.
But since that night I haven't watched him nor Rachel nor ever will.(their own shows).
(goes without saying I never watch Matthews own show either.
One is either for or against. No middle, no back and forth.
If I wanted to hear Fox's views after the first debate, I might as well watched them.
Only Al Sharpton, and he called it correct debate night.
Ed lost me forever.
Ed's timeslot was the most powerful on MSNBC. That anyone would voluntarily move from it to the weekend when no one watches cable is beyond me. Whatever floats his boat.
But remember, he used to be a hard right conservative. So, what he really is is just an entertainer like Rush. Rush could have been Ed in different times, Ed could have been Rush.
earthside
(6,960 posts)... left version: Obama and Democrats can do no wrong -- ever.
But Pres. Obama lost the first debate and Chris and Ed and Rachel reported the facts.
The best thing about MSNBC is that while it is liberal, it is not sycophantic to the left like Fox is to the right.
Matthews, Schultze and Maddow will call out Pres. Obama and the Democrats when that is warranted -- like proposing cuts to Social Security or bashing Harry Reid over his filibuster reform sell-out.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)on the facts. They didn't get all emotional and deranged like Ed and Chris did.
I do agree with you on this fact: Liberals will hold Obama/Democrats accountable for poor decisions. I love that about Ed. I love that about the rest of them.
However, that first debate fiasco was too much. They basically pushed the *false* meme that Obama was going to lose the election. Debates don't have that much of an impact on the outcome of elections. Were that the case, both Gore and Kerry would've been elected. Their behavior was over the top that night.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)and Mitt was the big loser.
Personally, I would cancel the mock debates, they are not debates at all, but a waste of campaign time.
I like early voting, have it start the month before the first debate so no one is again influenced by a gotcha like 1980 and others.
Harry Reid is a boxer, and a master technician. He knows things others don't.
And becuase of 2010, one has to worry about losing the senate temporarily for 2 years
(2016 is better because of all who are running then, and in 14 will have coattails.
Republicans didn't win 2010, stupid protest votes gave us Walker and Scott and Christie and everyone else.
SpartanDem
(4,533 posts)Obama was passive in that first debate and let Mitt lie as of there was no tomorrow. The idea that the his loss was part scheme is just too freaking stupid no politician intentionally loses debates. I had no issues with Ed and Rachel that night, and they had nothing but praise when he wiped floor with Romney in that second debate.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)BTW, the only other person besides Rev. Al Sharpton who had it right was Dennis Haysbert who played the President on 24. He was promoting something the morning after the debate, and he told the local morning show exactly what i said that night.
[img][/img]
earthside
(6,960 posts)... these so-called 'debates' should become a thing of the past.
They have become media events with little regard for substance. A person can underperform (like Obama in the first debate), but essentially they are so scripted and formulaic that they are meaningless.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)He made the rest of that panel look like amateurs. I have never been as impressed at his ability to translate the scope of an election in the way he did that night. I have to hand it to him.
Sam
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Larkspur
(12,804 posts)Obama was awful in that first debate and Ed and Chris were right to opine about it.
I refuse to watch Sharpton's show on MSNBC because he said that he would never criticize Obama. So if you are an Obama-bot, that show is for you.
underpants
(182,279 posts)Ghost of Tom Joad
(1,352 posts)they put little Luke Russert on.
On the other hand if they could steal away Soledad O'Brien
bucolic_frolic
(42,676 posts)Ed was allowed to move the needle to the middle a wee bit
with some gutsy stands on unions, Social Security, Medicare, etc.
But that's all for now. I think the network is somewhat wise, in that
they will blow whichever way the political winds blow for ratings sake.
Ed had no upside to that right now.
AndyA
(16,993 posts)A radio show and an hour long television show five times a week doesn't leave much time. I heard that Ed requested this change, partly because he wanted to be able to spend time with his wife, who was treated for cancer last year, and he wanted to be able to travel some to do location reporting.
Last I checked, Ed's ratings were holding their own, and there's no doubt MSNBC needs to seriously overhaul their weekends.
I have a difficult time understanding Ezra Klein at times, and his delivery lacks personality. I would probably not watch him on a regular basis, although I think he does a decent job as a stand in on other shows.
I would love to see Olbermann back, but don't see that happening, unless the powers that be at MSNBC are prepared to tolerate him in return for increased revenues. Joy Reid would be an excellent choice as well.
mtasselin
(666 posts)Ed, thank you for everything you have done. My wife will not be happy about your move because I will be watching you on the weekends now. Keep up the fight, start talking about the Trans Pacific Partnership, the American people need to know.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)TV show, but I can still listen to him and tape the weekend show.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)his radio show is a lot better than his tv show. he has control over his radio show and hopefully he`ll have control over his new tv show.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)podcast subscription. Been listening to Ed now since he first aired. He is much better and freer.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)go but also like Chris.
agentS
(1,325 posts)I live overseas so I can't watch him live most of the time. I always catch up on MSNBC on the website anyhow.
At least with this move, I can watch him on Sunday morning my time on the bootleg feed (while heating up some oatmeal) and catch a Hornets game feed at 9am.
Catching his radio show live is a pain in the ass- on those days when he's in studio (usually Mike P. fills in for him. You can see his work in the Video & Multimedia section of DU from time to time. He's awesome).