Shake-up for Trump era gives liberal MSNBC a whiter, more centrist look
The brutal shake-up at MSNBC, the liberal news channel that has been been at the forefront of scrutinizing Donald Trump and his politics, could lead to the loss of progressive voices and stories affecting people of color, media experts said.
All of this arrives at a time when the Trump administration is actively attacking the media.
MSNBC announced on Monday that the progressive host Joy Reid was being fired from her weeknight show, with Alex Wagner also losing her prime-time nightly broadcast. Katie Phang and Jonathan Capehart also lost their solo weekend shows, along with Ayman Mohyeldin, who has been a fierce critic of Israel's bombing of Gaza. A 'bloodbath of non-white anchors', as the Daily Beast termed it, as the move was widely criticized, including on MSNBC.
'Indefensible,' was the verdict of Rachel Maddow, the channel's highest-profile host, as she lambasted the network live on her show on Monday. 'I think it is a bad mistake to let [Reid] walk out the door. It is also unnerving to see that on a network where we've got two non-white hosts in prime time, both of our non-white hosts in prime time are losing their shows, as is Katie Phang on the weekend.'
Other criticism was even more strident. Elie Mystal, justice correspondent at the Nation, wrote on X: 'I owe the television part of my career to Joy Reid, as do so many other Black voices y'all never would have heard of if not for her. And *that's* why she's gone. They can treat black folks as interchangeable, but everybody Black knows that Joy was indispensable.'
Mehdi Hasan, a progressive journalist and Guardian columnist whose MSNBC show was canceled in 2023, wrote: 'It's a big loss for MSNBC viewers as [Reid] did talk about issues – racism, fascism, Gaza – that other hosts have avoided. And I'm also sad to see my brilliant friend Ayman lose his unique show, too.'
Phang and Wagner will remain with the network, Phang becoming a legal correspondent and Wagner a political analyst, and Capehart and Mohyeldin will become co-hosts on other programs. But with non-white journalists underrepresented in the media, the loss of those voices from prime-time shows and at the helm of their own programs represents a blow for those concerned about diversity.
'Joy Reid represents another loss of amplifying Black and brown voices who will report news on stories that oftentimes go under the radar or underreported by mainstream journalists,' said Emmitt Riley, a professor of politics and African and African American studies at the University of the South and the president of the National Conference of Black Political Scientists.
'When we think about what diversity truly means, it means that we bring a wide variety of perspectives to the table. And certainly a person's life experiences with discrimination, their life experiences in terms of where they occupy certain positions of power or lack thereof, informs what stories they decide to amplify. And so we saw Joy covering a number of different stories that I think will go under the radar now.'
Along with losing the perspectives that journalists from a range of backgrounds and life experiences can bring, there is also concern that MSNBC is losing progressive voices and sidelining some of its most prominent critics of Israel, including Reid and Mohyeldin.
At a time when Trump has made it clear that he will offer little support to Gaza – last week the president shared an AI video showing the US turning it into a cross between Dubai and Las Vegas – the loss of those voices is a concern.
Reid's show will be replaced by Symone Sanders Townsend and Michael Steele, who are Black, and Alicia Menendez, who is of Cuban descent. Although Sanders has progressive bona fides as a former national press secretary for Bernie Sanders, Steele is a former chair of the Republican national committee who describes himself as 'an American, a conservative and a Republican, in that order'.
Menendez also has deep connections to the center of US politics – her father is Bob Menendez, the former Democratic senator who in January was sentenced to 11 years in prison for taking bribes. Her brother, Robert Menendez, is a Democratic congressman.
Wagner, who in 2022 MSNBC described as the only Asian American to host a prime-time cable news program, platformed critics of Joe Biden as he declined in mid-2024. She will be replaced by Jen Psaki, who served as Biden's White House press secretary and previously had roles in communications for centrist Democrats including Barack Obama and John Kerry.
'It is going to change the discourse,' said Heather Hendershot, a professor of communication studies and journalism at Northwestern University.
'It's still going to be in keeping with the MSNBC brand, it will still be liberal. But they're moving a little bit away from the left with these recent changes.'
The moves came two weeks after the Federal Communications Commission, led by the Donald Trump appointee and Project 2025 co-author Brendan Carr, launched an investigation into Comcast, MSNBC's parent company over its diversity, equity and inclusion policies, part of a broader policy which has seen Trump order an end to all DEI programs in federal government and also target the programs in schools and universities.
'At a time when the very value of diversity in American institutions is in question, implementing changes which result in firing and demotions of the channel's highest-profile non-white anchors seems a bizarrely off-brand action for a news channel that is supposedly liberal-oriented,' Eric Deggans, an NPR TV critic and media analyst, wrote on his Switching Codes Substack.
It is a delicate time for Comcast, which is seeking approval to spin out MSNBC and other cable shows into a new company, called SpinCo, later this year. The shake-up also comes as other media organizations have been targeted by the Trump administration.
The FCC is investigating NPR and PBS to assess whether they should be continued to be allowed access to public funding, while Trump is suing CBS, alleging that they selectively edited an interview with Kamala Harris – something CBS denies – and has threatened legal action against the New York Times, among others.
There are signs some news organizations are already acquiescing to Trump. This week Jeff Bezos, who pulled an endorsement of Kamala Harris in the run-up to the 2024 election and later attended Trump's inauguration, announced that the Washington Post editorial pages would in the future only publish pieces 'in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets'.
The Post's former editor, Marty Baron, described the move as a 'betrayal of the very idea of free expression' that had left him 'appalled', and the Post's opinions editor quit in the wake of the move, which could further hit the Post's number of subscribers – 250,000 people previously canceled their subscriptions after Bezos blocked the Harris endorsement.
At MSNBC, Mark Lazarus, who is set to be CEO of SpinCo, told staff at a meeting: 'The only thing I'll say is the worst thing any leader can do is change something that's working just because they can. So, if this is working, then there's no reason to change it.'
However, Oliver Darcy reported for Status that Lazarus had suggested he would like the network to be on better terms with Republicans.
'The SpinCo boss, who now oversees the progressive network, has privately indicated to people that he would like the outlet incorporate more GOP voices on its air,' Darcy reported.
Apart from the need to have media that stand up to the Trump administration, left-leaning organizations were missing an opportunity by not standing their ground, Hendershot said.
'Part of the bigger picture of MSNBC is that now is the time for these stations or newspapers or magazines that lean left, to lean into what they do best. Anything that slants left does the best in terms of ratings when the right is the White House. And likewise, when the other party is in the White House, publications who are on the right do best,' she said.
'If you lean toward objective coverage of the authoritarian situation we find ourselves in right now, your numbers could go up, whether you're MSNBC or the New York Times or whatever entity. So it's hard not to read it as bowing to the authority of the White House. I don't see any other interpretation. That's certainly how Trump sees it.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
13 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Trump explains why Egypt was not included in travel ban
In introducing the partial or complete ban on travel from citizens of 19 nations on June 4, Trump cited the Boulder, Colorado, attack that took place at an event raising awareness about Israeli hostages. The suspect in the case, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, is an Egyptian man who entered the U.S. on a tourist visit that he overstayed after applying for asylum, federal officials say. More: Trump's travel ban is his fourth attempt. See how list compares to 2017 Yet, the travel ban that Trump unveiled days later did not include Egypt, raising questions about the timing and purpose of the ban, which the president's critics say unfairly targets African and Muslim-majority nations. Trump requested that the State Department and other national security officials put together a list of countries for potential visa restrictions in an executive order just after taking office. But nothing came of it for months, until the Boulder attack, which he blamed on the previous administration. "We want to keep bad people out of our country. The Biden administration allowed some horrendous people," Trump said in the Oval Office, as he touted his deportation policies. Egypt has acted as a central mediator alongside the United States and Qatar in the conflict between Israel and Hamas, helping to establish a ceasefire and secure the release of prisoners and hostages. The United States had conducted joint training exercises with Egypt since 1980 and considers the Arab nation that has been ruled by Abdel Fattah El-Sisi since 2014 a regional partner. The Egyptian embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
NBC News
19 hours ago
- NBC News
Those from the countries on Trump's travel ban say they're confused and angry about what comes next
Anger and condemnation broke out as families, attorneys and immigrant advocates absorbed the blast from the latest bombshell delivered by the Trump immigration — a travel ban that stops or restricts people from 19 mostly African, Asian and Caribbean countries from entering the U.S. While the Trump administration said the travel ban is meant to keep Americans safe, critics lobbed accusations of discrimination, cruelty, racism, inhumanity and more in response. Meanwhile, the news also elicited confusion over what will happen once the ban goes into effect on Monday. "This travel ban is a racist, bigoted and xenophobic and deeply un-American attack on human rights — it's like persecution. We have fled dictatorship, violence, hunger,' Adelys Ferro, executive director of the Venezuelan American Caucus, told NBC News from Miami, a city with a large population of immigrants from several of the countries on Trump's list. 'This administration clearly has something against immigrants, and it has something against us in particular,' said José Antonio Colina, a former Venezuelan army lieutenant who fled to Miami in 2003 and heads the exile organization Veppex. 'We are double-persecuted. We are persecuted by the tyranny of Nicolás Maduro and we are persecuted by the administration of Donald Trump.' A 38-year-old Haitian green-card holder in Miami who was too fearful to allow her name to be used said she and many others in the community feel 'confused and scared' over the travel ban on Haiti. She said most of her family lives there, including her sister and father, who is sick. 'They come all the time to visit and now I don't know if they will be able to,' she said, adding she heard there were exceptions to the ban but wasn't sure. There are some exceptions, including for people with lawful permanent residency, spouses and children of U.S. citizens, those who are adopted and others. 'But if you are a spouse of a permanent resident, forget about it,' said Doug Rand, former director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services during the Biden administration. It will also impact other relatives, such as adult children and siblings of lawful permanent residents, people who won the diversity lottery or were sponsored by a U.S. employer and are from the listed countries, 'people who have been waiting for years and done it the right way,' he said. In Havana, a queue of people outside the American Embassy learned the news of the travel ban and suspensions as they waited for their visa interviews. 'I had been waiting nine years for this moment,' said one young woman in line, who declined to be identified by name for fear it might affect her visa chances. She and others said the suspension means not being able to visit family or escape dire circumstances in Cuba. 'If they don't grant visas, Cubans will starve, given the situation, they will starve,' said Ismael Gainza, a retired Cuban. 'I see that measure as bad, I see it as bad because the situation is tough and we have to survive.' Trump's proclamation issued Wednesday night bans people from 12 countries from traveling to the U.S. The countries are: Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. In seven more countries, travel to the U.S. was suspended but not banned. They are Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. Shahzeen Karim, managing attorney at Hafey & Karim law firm, said that although she's in the immigration law space, she holds 'Republican views' on the topic, agreeing there's a need for a stricter immigration policy and more thorough screening. 'I know the White House presented some explanations as to why each of those countries, but I can't help but feel very targeted, being a Muslim immigration attorney,' Karim said. 'The countries are majority Muslim unfortunately.' Challenging the ban could be 'an uphill battle' Immigration advocates said that, unlike Trump's previous travel ban, which caught them off guard, they expected the president would enact a similar policy in his second term. Trump's 2017 ban immediately barred Muslims from entering the country, leaving some stranded at airports or unable to board flights. But like his previous ban, the impact of the current ban taking effect next week will be felt by people trying to bring together families, those who landed a job in the U.S., who had tours or visits planned, who planned to study here or were looking forward to a cultural exchange. It took three tries for Trump, in his previous administration, to come up with a travel ban that the U.S. Supreme Court would accept. Lower courts nixed the first version and the administration kept revising it until the high court accepted its third version in June 2018. Immigration and civil rights groups opposed all three versions. Raha Wala, vice president of strategy and partnerships at the National Immigration Law Center, said that challenging the latest ban 'will be an uphill battle' because the Supreme Court decision is the law of the land. Edward Cuccia, an immigration attorney in New York City, said that blocking the latest ban could be tougher now than in 2017. 'Trump got smarter this time,' he said, explaining that the mix of countries makes it harder to argue that the ban is discriminatory. Also, the implementation won't be as abrupt and the argument that the singled-out nations do not vet the documents of their citizens well may hold up in court, according to Cuccia. Even so, the implications are vast for the people who are affected and are not a security threat, he said. 'What is this going to mean for family unification? There's a lot of countries here!' Cuccia said. 'And then, there are people that maybe had business dealings, people who wanted to do investments here in the United States or come over on temporary work visas, student visas or even just to visit … That seems to be gone out the window.' Wala called the justification for the ban — that visa overstays present a national security threat and the inability to fully vet visa travelers in those countries — a 'fig leaf.' If there is a gap in vetting, 'that's worth taking a look at,' he said, but added that 'all kinds of people overstay their visas — and just because someone overstayed their visa and committed a crime, we just have to get away from this guilt by association concept.' For Wala, the newly announced ban cannot be separated from the president's previous policies and statements. "This ban started as the president saying he was going to have a complete and total shutdown of Muslims in the country. And he also said he wants to ban folks — and pardon my French here — from s---hole countries," Wala said. In Miami, Colina said he was glad the ban would prevent officials of Maduro's regime in Venezuela and their families "who always find a way" to get a visa to enter the country, "but they are a minority, and the partial ban will negatively impact the larger community and it's not fair.'
Powys County Times
a day ago
- Powys County Times
Former Zambia president Edgar Lungu dies aged 68
Former Zambia president Edgar Lungu, who served as the leader of the southern African nation from 2015 until 2021, has died at the age of 68. Mr Lungu's daughter, Tasila Lungu-Mwansa, announced his death in a video posted on the official Facebook page of his political party, the Patriotic Front. She said he died in a hospital in South Africa after having been under 'medical supervision' in recent weeks. Ms Lungu-Mwansa did not give a cause of death. Mr Lungu became president in 2015 to complete the term of Michael Sata after he died in office. Mr Lungu was elected to a full presidential term in 2016, beating current president Hakainde Hichilema. Mr Lungu later lost to Mr Hichilema in the 2021 election. Mr Lungu had sought to challenge Mr Hichilema in next year's presidential election, but a court last year barred him from standing. The court ruled his time as president from 2015 to 2016 counted as a full term and said he had, therefore, served the maximum length of two terms. Mr Lungu alleged there was political interference in the court ruling. His wife and other family members have faced corruption allegations. Mr Lungu claimed last year that his movements were being monitored by police and he had effectively been placed under house arrest to restrict his return to politics. Police said it was standard to monitor former presidents for their safety.
