‘Maddow' Producer Andrew Dallos Leaves Show After 17 Years
Veteran 'Rachel Maddow Show' producer Andrew Dallos is leaving the show and MSNBC, he announced on X on Thursday morning.
Dallos has been with MSNBC for nearly 25 years, he noted, and he has been with 'Maddow' since the program's first episode in 2008.
'During my time here, I've been privileged to work alongside some amazing colleagues,' Dallos wrote on X. 'Special thanks to Rachel Maddow for the opportunity to join her team on the very first day of her show and giving me the journey of a lifetime.'
His exit comes as 'Maddow' is set to return to airing one day per week on Mondays, after the show moved to a full Monday-Friday schedule to coincide with President Trump's first 100 days back in the White House.
MSNBC did not immediately respond to TheWrap's request for comment on who, if anyone, will fill the void left by Dallos.
Dallos is leaving 'Maddow' as it has been on a bit of a hot streak lately. The program, which airs at 9:00 p.m. ET, averaged more than 2 million viewers during April, making it MSNBC's top show.
The strong showing for 'Maddow' comes as MSNBC and CNN have failed during President Trump's first 100 days back in office to match the ratings both channels received during the first months of his presidency in 2017. On the other hand, Fox News, as TheWrap reported earlier this week, saw its ratings increase during the president's first 100 days when compared to his first term.
The post 'Maddow' Producer Andrew Dallos Leaves Show After 17 Years appeared first on TheWrap.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge dismisses Justin Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit against Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds
A judge on Monday dismissed Justin Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit against Hollywood power couple Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds, a major development in the ongoing civil litigation between former co-stars Lively and Baldoni. In January, Baldoni sued Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds, alleging that the Hollywood couple sought to 'destroy' him and his career, after hijacking his film, 'It Ends With Us.' Baldoni's complaint escalated the ongoing legal battle stemming from the film that Baldoni directed and co-starred in with Lively. In a statement, Lively's lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb called the ruling 'a total victory and a complete vindication.' 'As we have said from day one, this '$400 million' lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it,' the statement added. Motions to dismiss Baldoni's claims by Lively, Reynolds and their publicist, Leslie Sloane, were all granted. The judge also granted a motion to dismiss by the New York Times. Baldoni had sued the publication for $250 million for libel, claiming that the newspaper published an article 'rife with inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and omissions' that relied on Lively's 'self-serving narrative.' The judge ruled that Baldoni can file an amended complaint on the allegations of tortious interference with contract, relating to Reynolds and Lively, and breach of implied covenant, relating to Lively, by June 23, if they choose to do so. CNN has reached out to representatives for Baldoni and the New York Times for comment. The ongoing saga between Lively and Baldoni erupted in December 2024, when Lively first filed a civil rights complaint, claiming that she was sexually harassed by Baldoni during production of the film and then was retaliated against for speaking up about her alleged mistreatment. Baldoni immediately denied Lively's claims. Lively eventually escalated her civil rights complaint, officially filing a lawsuit against Baldoni. She alleged that after being sexually harassed with inappropriate comments and behavior on set, Baldoni's team then orchestrated a smear campaign against her to ruin her reputation in the public sphere. Lively's complaint contained hundreds of text messages between Baldoni and his crisis PR team, including one text that read they could 'bury' her. Since, the legal teams for both stars have been in a bitter and public back-and-forth that at one point saw superstar Taylor Swift subpoenaed in the case. Baldoni's lawyers eventually withdrew the subpoena. Baldoni's team at one point launched a public website containing documents pertaining to the litigation and a 'timeline of relevant events.' This story is developing and will be updated.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's ‘California in Chaos' Dystopia? Not if You Live Here
For most people in Los Angeles, it was a run-of-the-mill weekend. There were kids baseball and soccer games, pleasant weather for getting outdoors, and Dodgers games on TV. On cable and local news, though, as well as X and other strident quadrants of social media, the scene was far less idyllic, playing into the dystopian narrative the Trump administration clearly wanted to advance regarding demonstrations over immigration policy. To put it the way an alliterative TV news chyron might, think 'CALIFORNIA IN CHAOS,' with President Trump stoking the fire by tweeting about immigrant invasions and rampant lawlessness. TV news and social media excel at offering snapshots of what's happening, but not the big picture. So the images emanating from L.A. (and the outlying city of Paramount, one many Angelenos likely couldn't find on a map) fueled the distorted scenario that Trump and his acolytes pushed, capitalizing on the fact that those information conduits and their viewers are drawn to the conflict like moths to the (literal, in this case) flames. Granted, more sober voices tried to clarify the overall dynamic — observing that Trump's tweets, for starters, were untethered from reality. Yet given the power of his megaphone and the legions who parrot his claims, it's hard to sway an audience that might have never been to California, or that lacks the media literacy to grasp a few hundred people taking to the streets — in a state with 40 million residents — doesn't translate into widespread chaos. 'Most people in L.A. probably don't even know that this is going on,' CNN national security analyst and Harvard professor Juliette Kayyem pointed out on Saturday. 'It's such a big city, and we need an administration that's not going to get to Defcon 1 every time they see something on TV they don't like.' Expecting or even hoping for restraint from Trump, however, merely reflects naïveté, especially because he and his advisors so obviously relish the idea of painting a blue state as something out of a 'Mad Max' movie, provoking confrontation and creating cover to try implementing a military response. That's all red meat for Trump and his base, playing into the stereotypes of California that Fox News pushes with regularity. Small wonder he's been spoiling for a fight with the state and its leaders, threatening to cut off federal funding even before the weekend's flare-up. By that measure, the few protesters that engaged in violence are playing right into his hands, as his weekend social media tirade — 'BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!,' he said in one all-caps, three-exclamation-point salvo — made utterly transparent. The onus for behaving responsibly thus shifts to news organizations and social media commentators with cooler heads, not to downplay or diminish what's happening but rather to provide what's so often the first casualty in the breaking coverage of such events: Context. 'There are a few protests downtown, and yesterday's drama was in a suburb 30 minutes away,' Pod Save America's Jon Favreau tweeted in response to Trump's bluster, accurately capturing the geography of what had transpired. 'We're the biggest county in America, with 10 million people, and you wouldn't know anything is up unless you read the news or happen to be downtown.' So how has the media fared in the early stages of this manufactured crisis? Predictably, not terribly well. On Saturday, for example, CNN cut away from its post-game coverage after televising a live performance of 'Good Night, and Good Luck' to interview a reporter at the scene in Los Angeles. Then again, the panel assembled to discuss the Broadway show's lessons in a town-hall-type setting represented the kind of journalism the play's subject, Edward R. Murrow, almost surely would have hated, a bit of irony that seemed to elude everyone participating in the forum. Ultimately, having a reporter going live at a chaotic, fast-moving event often doesn't tell you very much. That's certainly the case in a situation like the one unfolding in Los Angeles, where Trump's ICE raids rounding up undocumented immigrants have unleashed anger and prompted fear within local communities, while playing to Trump's xenophobic appeal and helpfully shifting the focus away from other topics, like the pending tax bill and breakdown of Trump's relationship with Elon Musk. Thanks to social media and satellites, the immediacy of information has never been faster, but the tradeoff is that the ability to digest and understand what we're seeing easily gets lost in the shuffle. And unless you live in L.A., the images create powerful impressions that play into preconceived notions without knowing exactly what you're seeing, in the same way footage out of Gaza or Ukraine can often turn out to be misleading once we've had a chance to absorb and sort out the details of the deeper story behind the pictures. Murrow could have explained all this, were he still alive, but he'd need to find a sympathetic platform to amplify those views. Alas, as things stand right now, the odds are Fox News wouldn't have put him on at all, MSNBC would simply let him preach to the choir, and CNN would have cut away from interviewing him to see what its squabbling, both-sides-ing panel of experts had to say. The post Trump's 'California in Chaos' Dystopia? Not if You Live Here appeared first on TheWrap.
Bloomberg
34 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Warner Bros. Split Puts Bondholders in a Bind
These days the real art of television and film lies in repackaging existing formats, presenting them as something new and getting consumers to pay for it all. Warner Bros Discovery Inc. is attempting this at a grand scale with its planned separation into businesses focused first on streaming and studios, and second on legacy television. It's a sequel that pits bondholders and shareholders against each other. Liberated as a focused company, Warner's streaming and studio business promises to fetch a higher stock-market valuation as it attracts investors otherwise deterred by the current company's ties to old media. The cable television outfit, whose assets include CNN, TNT, TBS and Discovery, is likely to take on a lot of the company's debt. True, the cable industry has been losing audience to streaming upstarts, but its sizeable cash flows can still support a little extra debt leverage. Warner's cable business could generate $6.1 billion in earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization in 2025, Bloomberg Intelligence forecasts. That's twice what the studio business is expected to bring in.
