More Opinions, More Ratings: Maddow, MSNBC Should Stop Denying What They Truly Are

“Listen, my job is to cover these things, not to tell you how I like them or not.”
–Rachel Maddow describing her MSNBC anchor role to Bill Maher on HBO’s Real Time, June 23, 2012

“The increasing reliance on packaged segments on MSNBC in prime time does not translate into more straight news reporting. For example, host Rachel Maddow often leads her program with a long package filled with her own opinions on a subject.”
-Pew Research study, March 18, 2013

“There may be liberals on TV at MSNBC, but the network is not operating with a political objective.”
-Rachel Maddow, January 2, 2012

“MSNBC’s coverage of [Mitt] Romney during the final week [of the campaign] (68% negative with no positive stories in the sample), was far more negative than the overall press, and even more negative than it had been during October 1 to 28 when 5% was positive and 57% was negative.”
–Pew Research Study, November 19, 2012

Upon comparing Ms. Maddow’s statements to quantifiable facts in two independent studies by Pew Research, it’s safe to say that the MSNBC’s highest-rated anchor is either living with Mr. Roarke and Tattoo on Fantasy Island…or intentionally sharing, shall we say…invalid truths with the public.

The Pew Research study released Monday—one that finds MSNBC has an 85/15 ratio between opinion and news reporting, is hardly surprising for those who watch the network. Fans of MSNBC will simply counter with the usual, “But FOX does it, too!” argument. But the Pew study says otherwise, showing relative balance: 55 percent of FOX’s content is opinion, while 45 percent is dedicated to hard news.

That hard news includes two hours (3:00 PM and 7:00 PM EDT) with Shepard Smith, arguably the most respected and objective news anchor on cable. But don’t take my word for it, just ask Ms. Maddow. Even Smith makes sure the audience knows they’re watching FOX’s hard news aspect, tagging out of his program every evening by stating, “…from the journalists at Fox News,” in a proud and almost defiant fashion.

So does being a network almost completely dominated by opinion a bad strategy by MSNBC?

If ratings are your leading indicator, not at all…

Remember not too long ago, MSNBC used to be a solid third (and even fourth) place cable news network. It’s 2007 prime time lineup, for example, was the following fair and balanced offering:

Tucker Carlson (conservative)
Chris Matthews (liberal)
Keith Olbermann (liberal)
Joe Scarborough (conservative)

It now consists of:
Al Sharpton (liberal)
Chris Matthews (liberal)
Ed Schultz (liberal)
Rachel Maddow (liberal)
Lawrence O’Donnell (you’ll never guess…)

But when comparing MSNBC’s numbers between 2007 and now, there is no comparison.

Six years ago this week (March 2007), MSNBC averaged 120,000 viewers in the demo. Now, it doubles that audience with 240,000 viewers (in the demo) per night. As a result, MSNBC is now a solid second, beating CNN (although the gap has shrunk since the arrival of Jeff Zucker). Once in awhile since the election –at least in the key 25-54 demo—Maddow and O’Donnell have even beaten their FOX competition (Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren) in the demo, once considered impossible. MSNBC’s fourth quarter in 2012, which obviously included election coverage, saw the highest ratings recorded in the history of the network. The good Neilsen news can be seen across every show across the board.

MSNBC may be 85 percent opinion as it has shifted to 85 percent liberal (the other 15 percent consisting of Scarborough, S.E. Cupp and a handful of conservative contributors and guests), but it is now enjoying a 100 percent rise in the ratings from a time it consisted of hard news mixed with conservative and liberal prime time hosts. Apparently that was a recipe for failure…

If people want hard news, they can get it on their phones immediately (or depending on time of day, tune to CNN, HLN or Fox). But what they want more than ever is perspective. It’s why Fox’s The Five is an overwhelming ratings success. It’s why The Cycle followed suit.

Rachel Maddow, of course, will continue to tell you she has no skin in the game, that she’s only there to cover things, not offer an opinion.

Memo to Maddow: Just be honest about who you are and what your network is: An opinion network with a political objective and a growing audience to show for it.

It’s nothing to be ashamed of.

Because as long as unbiased studies like the one Pew just released are out there, it doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to know when you’re insulting the intelligence of anyone paying attention…

Follow Joe Concha on Twitter @ConchSports

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.