Latest news with #ChrisHayes
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Farewell, MSNBC. Hello, 'My Source for News, Opinion and the World.' Wait, What?
The MSNBC name is about to be phased out. Early Monday, as the news brand preps for a future separated from NBC News, the cable TV stalwart unveiled a new name, logo and acronym-driven identity: MS NOW, meaning 'My Source for News, Opinion and the World.' The shift retires a name that was christened in 1996 with the launch of the co-branded partnership between Microsoft and NBC News that carried the MSNBC name. And, while Microsoft exited a couple years later, the cable brand home to Rachel Maddow, Jen Psaki, Chris Hayes, Lawrence O'Donnell and more had stuck with the original branding for decades. More from The Hollywood Reporter Jacob Soboroff Joining MSNBC As Split From NBC News Looms 'NBC Nightly News' EP Meghan Rafferty Exits to Join Versant MSNBC Brings Back Live Fan Event In Bid to Build New Revenue Lines The impetus for the change? NBCUniversal owner Comcast is spinning off most all of its TV channels into a separate publicly-traded company, Versant, in a deal that may close this fall. Because of that, the formerly named MSNBC is rebuilding its news organization for a world in which it doesn't collaborate directly with NBC News and carry the peacock imagery that's staying with the home base. As the rebrand hit inboxes today, Hollywood Reporter editors chatted about the move, and read in-between the lines on what it could signify. Erik Hayden: For months, with Comcast planning to spin off its declining cable TV assets — MSNBC, CNBC, USA Network, Oxygen, E!, Syfy and the Golf Channel — into a new company, the nondescript Versant, the question was, 'What does MSNBC look like without NBCUniversal and NBC News?' So while it was surprising to see this rebrand for the Rebecca Kutler-run news brand, the writing was on the wall that there needed to be some pivot. And while it's also not that surprising that Comcast wanted to keep the peacock imagery and NBC lettering for its own flagship news services, it's still a bit jarring to see the new identity. What was your first read? Tony Maglio: My first read went something like this: 'Um, what's-that-now?' The MS thing is so weird: Microsoft has had exactly zero ties to MSNBC since 2012 (and from the TV channel, since 2005). Back then, you wouldn't want to change a web address or an established channel/brand name. But now, why not? Instead, Versant (already a confusing name itself) elected to back in to an acronym? Who is making these choices? If you want your own brand, as Versant CEO Mark Lazarus and Kutler have said, just start over. 'MS NOW' to me reads like it's a random Microsoft application I'd uninstall from my PC when storage space got tight. EH: Also, this wasn't a decision made from a position of strength. I doubt that, were it not to be cleaved off from Comcast, that MSNBC executives would like to undertake a rebrand that nearly erases its entire name. I can't think of a single major news organization that has undergone that sort of name change. Usually, it's the corporate parent that changes its name when times get bleak (thinking of Los Angeles Times' owner Tribune trying to go BuzzFeed with ill-fated Tronc) but the names of the news brands themselves stay. I can't imagine many will be using the acronym's meaning, My Source for News, Opinion, and the World, on second reference either. TM: Yeah, that part is just crazy. But it is Versant's expectation, and also just how we would often do it to remind readers that this is, indeed, an acronym, and not some stylization choice. (Example: STARZ is not an acronym, so we write it as Starz, no matter how StArZ wants it written in the media.) But My Source for News, Opinion, and the World is an absurd way to write or to speak. No one will ever say this except with a mocking tone. The acronym is so reverse-engineered and forced. MSNBC was a mashup of Microsoft and NBC News — it actually called for an acronym. EH: Also, what does it say about the relative strengths of the brand — and internal politics at Versant — that CNBC was able to keep its name under the explanation that it was originally known as 'Consumer News and Business Channel' (i.e. not National Broadcasting Channel, trademark Comcast)? That reads to me like it's seen as a safer, more durable brand. Finance news has generally seen more stability than political news and there appears to be a template that CNBC chiefs are following (build like Bloomberg or The Wall Street Journal with Pro tiers while leaning on strengths and access of live TV). TM: CNBC is so interesting because it launched as a bogus acronym itself. Yes, 'Consumer News and Business Channel' is ostensibly what it stood for, but in reality, the acronym stood for Cablevision NBC — as in National Broadcasting Channel — because those were the joint venture partners. We can all play pretend on this one a bit more because the double entendre happened way back in 1989. To be fair, MSNBC losing the MS and now the NBC does put Versant in a tough spot. It is really hard to rebrand from scratch, but this attempt at a half-rebrand (and hope no one asks about the acronym) feels desperate and beneath what MSNBC has achieved. EH: If I was to try and think of a silver lining on this rebrand, at this time, I might say, 'Well, this is a new political moment with massive disruption for traditional media. Brand names, in general, aren't as powerful as they once were and if MS NOW really hopes to thrive it'll need to lean in to the big Rachel Maddow-like names (and hire more) to try and distinguish itself in a fractured environment.' But the problem is that the MSNBC name does mean something, especially to the audience that watches it regularly on linear TV. And yes, that may be an older audience that is getting smaller as more viewers cut the cord. TM: Right. Clearly, Versant wanted the closest-possible thing to 'MSNBC' without the 'NBC.' But the 'MS' was never the point (for television) — the 'NBC' was. So to make the exception for CNBC but not MSNBC feels not tethered to a whole lot. Unfortunately, 'MS NOW' is just like a 'NowThis News' to me. It feels like a media publication that launched 30 minutes ago, not 30 years. MS NOW will have strong resources, but a name that — initially, at least — implies no differentiation from any other ALL CAPS play. EH: It does remind me of NowThis News, or a bunch of similar start-up names that maybe fell by the wayside in the BuzzFeed-Mashable 2010s Facebook traffic era. To use a different example, Cable News Network was the origin of CNN's name. I can't see, even when the last lights are turned off on Cable TV, CNN pivoting from that name — it's like National Public Radio and NPR, the acronym means something at this point, not the medium it originated in. TM: Exactly. Those are branded phrases that became acronyms. Acronyms exist as an accepted societal shorthand for things we all know. Versant is doing this fully backwards. You can picture how this went down, right? A conference room and a whiteboard with:M ______S_______N ______________________ And tuna subs. 'No one leaves this room until we have a new five-letter brand name that starts with MSN and stands for … something.' It's the worst Wheel of Fortune puzzle ever. EH: Speaking of which, MSN still exists as a giant web portal that millions of readers visit, so the argument that the 'MS'-Microsoft connection is not relevant because it was an old reference to a partnership ended long ago when Microsoft was in the news business doesn't quite track. TM: Great point. Those of us in the media are well aware of the reach of MSN. It's a lot more than non-MSN users might think. It's just a staple landing page for endless news content. I don't personally use it, but I can see a universe in which I never left finance for journalism and it is My Source for News and something World… and I've already lost what MS NOW stands on the subject of CNN vs. MSNBC MS NOW: MSNBC had momentum in the fight for second place behind Fox News Channel (FNC to some, because that's actually how initials work!). This feels like a moment for CNN to actually rally — they must be thrilled. EH: The rebrand also does feel like it undercuts efforts to take the MSNBC brand to more platforms than just live TV. There is a burgeoning live events business (the next one is MSNBCLIVE '25, at the Hammerstein Ballroom in October) that now will need to be retrofitted. Obviously the news business relies on talent that can cut through the clutter, or creators with a ton of audience. But, barring that (and in an era of belt-tightening for TV news, which is something relatively new to that side of the media business, unlike print or digital media), brand names are all you have to differentiate yourself. It's tough thinking that 'My Source' stands out in an era of just YouTube tiles asking for clicks. TM: Maybe it's a 'Thai Food Near Me' situation. What I want to know, is did much of the marketing team that came up with 'Peacock,' which was widely mocked at the time, go over with Versant? I do want to give Versant and MS NOW an opportunity for optimism here. The reality is, most brand names don't make all the sense until they do. (Tronc had no chance.) So if MS NOW does an absolutely killer job and becomes essential in the news-gathering and news-reporting industry, we will all become numb to it. In a good way. EH: I remember, back in 2011, when MSNBC's marketing tagline 'Lean Forward' was seen as a bet on embracing an identity. Even if 'forward' was vague in the eye of the beholder. Arguably, this new rebrand does the opposite. TM: Are we able to put a gif in a story? Because… Best of The Hollywood Reporter How the Warner Brothers Got Their Film Business Started Meet the World Builders: Hollywood's Top Physical Production Executives of 2023 Men in Blazers, Hollywood's Favorite Soccer Podcast, Aims for a Global Empire
Daily Mirror
09-08-2025
- Business
- Daily Mirror
Right to Buy discounts have cost taxpayers £200 billion since days of Thatcher
A report from the Common Wealth think tank shows the 1.9 million council homes sold in England since 1980 are now worth £430 billion Right to Buy discounts have cost taxpayers nearly £200 billion since 1980, new research has found. A report from the Common Wealth think tank shows the 1.9 million council homes sold in England since 1980 are now worth £430 billion. Of this sum, £194 represents equity that was effectively given away through discounts that averaged 43% from 1980/81 to 2023/24. Local councils received just £51 billion for these sales. Today, one in six private tenants in England rents a former council home, paying substantially higher rents for the same homes. The report estimates council homes worth £176 billion have entered the private rental sector. Chris Hayes, Chief Economist at Common Wealth, said: 'The severe financial straits facing councils should be seen in context of a decades-long assault on local government, in which Right to Buy was a central pillar, denying councils discretion over how best to use assets that they had built. 'Now those assets are in dire shortage and councils still bear the heightened cost of seeing people through the housing crisis.' Adjusted for inflation, Right to Buy has been the second biggest privatisation in UK history, after land sellofs. Economic geographer Brett Christophers has estimated the value of land privatisation was around £400 billion in 2016 prices. By that point, the Right to Buy giveaway had already cost £147 billion in discounts - with the total value of homes sold at £326 billion. It's the only privatisation that has combined widespread discounts with this kind of scale. Kwajo Tweneboa, a social housing campaigner and author of 'Our Country in Crisis', said: 'We're in a housing emergency. Millions stuck on waiting lists. Tens of thousands living in temporary accommodation that's unfit and unsafe. 'All while homes that were once publicly owned are now profit-generating assets for private landlords. That's the legacy of Right to Buy - a policy that gutted council housing and transferred public wealth into private hands.'
Time of India
08-08-2025
- General
- Time of India
Our lives are what we pay attention to
Information glut isn't the real problem of these times Anxiety over the hold of technology on daily lives and minds drives everyday conversations – the ills of fake news and misinformation, how politicians exploit algorithms, what social media is doing to our thoughts, to our children and body politic, are analysed to the last byte. Availability of, and access to, information right, wrong and indeterminate is infinite and plentiful. It is a cheap resource. There is no dearth of predictions on the scary outcomes of the stranglehold of this surfeit of information. Yet all of it misses the reality that we are not living in an Information Age, but in an Attention Economy, argues journalist Chris Hayes in The Sirens' Call: How Attention Became The World's Most Endangered Resource. Way more critical than all the muchly debated ills of an information glut is that we have ceded control over who and what has our attention – a finite resource. Hayes uses American legal scholar Lawrence Lessig's example of a picnic table to explain his point. Information is the idea of a picnic table in your backyard. Even if others pick up the idea of that picnic table – your information – it doesn't really impact your own picnic table, it is still yours, you still have it. But, the picnic table itself – that's attention. So, if your picnic table is taken away – well, that entity has your attention and you don't have it. That's how finite attention is. You either control who has your attention, or you're flitting from one to another. The fight is for your attention. Our capacity to focus is limited, which makes attention a scarce and sought-after commodity. Reality is grainy and grey, so we much better enjoy glitzy tinsel-tinted bright hi-def images and noise – it grabs our attention. The book explores how industries have evolved to capture and monetise our attention. Social media platforms' and news outlets' systemic effort to design content and experiences that keep us engaged, often at the expense of our well-being. The book delves into how modern technologies tap into our neurological responses, creating addictive patterns similar to those found in gambling. This exploitation leads to a state where our attention is continuously hijacked, diminishing our ability to engage in deep, meaningful focus. The attention economy thrives on sensationalism. Content that provokes emotional reactions is rewarded, mostly at the expense of accuracy. Hayes argues that propagandists exploit this to manipulate public opinion. This creates an environment where misinformation spreads faster than truth, eroding trust in institutions and making consensus-building nearly impossible. Algorithms tailor content to individual preferences, creating echo chambers and filter bubbles. Such personalisation reinforces ideological divides. Citizens no longer share a common information base. Without a shared reality, public discourse fractures. Society loses the ability to even agree on what needs solving. The public sphere turns reactive. Hooked to this stream of information/misinformation translates into not paying attention to grainy realities of governance. Digital distraction directly impacts democracy, which depends on citizens paying attention to governance. But attention is hijacked by entertainment and outrage in equal parts. People disengage from civic life. This, the book argues, opens the gates for authoritarian tendencies because fewer people are participating in democratic process or holding leaders accountable. Commodification of attention is more than a cultural or technological issue. It's a structural threat to democratic society. Our lives are what we pay attention to. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Globe and Mail
08-08-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Spruce Power Signs Multi-Year Multimillion Dollar Agreement to Sell Renewable Energy Credits in New Jersey
Spruce Power Holding Corporation (NYSE: SPRU) ('Spruce' or the 'Company'), a leading owner and operator of distributed solar energy assets across the United States, announced a multi-year agreement to sell Spruce's Solar Renewable Energy Credits ('SRECs') in the state of New Jersey to an investment-grade energy sector counterparty that is ranked among the Fortune Global 50. The transaction is expected to generate approximately $10 million in fully-hedged revenue for Spruce through 2029. This partnership is part of a broader Spruce initiative to leverage the Company's platform and experience to capture the benefits of our SRECs. Chris Hayes, Chief Executive Officer of Spruce said, 'We view scaling SREC registration as a low cost, low risk opportunity to generate capital-light high margin, cash flow for the Company. This transaction is another example of Spruce's expertise in maximizing value from our assets while hedging against future price movements. The forward contract provides an important ongoing hedged revenue stream and reinforces the dependability of Spruce's cash flow generation.' Hayes concluded, 'We believe the counterparty is utilizing Spruce's SRECs as a compliance instrument to hedge their electricity supply positions in the state of New Jersey. We anticipate similar opportunities may be available to Spruce in certain northeastern states as well as California, which we are actively pursuing.' Distributed generation solar owners interested in maximizing SREC revenue should contact Spruce's Environmental Commodities Markets ('ECM') Desk at ecmdesk@ to learn more about Spruce's SREC operations and trading expertise. Potential SREC compliance buyers should also contact Spruce Power. Spruce PRO offers a suite of services that can be tailored for third-party owners of distributed generation assets, including financial and asset management operations, customer service support, and environmental commodities trading. For more information on Spruce PRO, please visit About Spruce Power Spruce Power Holding Corporation (NYSE: SPRU) is a leading owner and operator of distributed solar energy assets across the United States. We provide subscription-based services that make it easy for homeowners to benefit from rooftop solar power and battery storage. Our power as-a-service model allows consumers to access new technology without making a significant upfront investment or incurring maintenance costs. Our company owns the cash flows from approximately 85,000 home solar assets and contracts across the United States. For additional information, please visit Forward Looking Statements Certain statements in this press release may constitute 'forward-looking statements' within the meaning of the federal securities laws, including the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and rules promulgated thereunder. Forward-looking statements generally are characterized by the use of certain words or phrases (and their derivatives) such as 'believe,' 'continue,' 'may,' 'will,' 'estimate,' 'continue,' 'anticipate,' 'intend,' 'expect,' 'should,' 'would,' 'plan,' 'goals,' 'predict,' 'potential,' 'seem,' 'seek,' 'future,' 'outlook,' and similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of historical matters. Forward-looking statements in this release include statements regarding the Company's initiatives and future opportunities with respect to SRECs and the expected benefits with respect to this transaction and future similar transactions, including expectations with respect to the fully hedged revenue expected to be generated by this transaction. These statements are based on our current plans and strategies, as well as various assumptions, whether or not identified in this press release, and on the current expectations of management, all of which management believes are reasonable as of the date of this report, and reflect our current assessment of the risks and uncertainties related to the Company's business and are made as of the date of this press release. Although we believe that our expectations with respect to forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions within the bounds of our existing knowledge about the Company's business and operations, there can be no assurance that actual future results, performance or achievements of, or trends affecting, us will not differ materially from any future results, performance, achievements or trends expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by forward-looking statements, including but not limited to: expectations regarding the growth of the solar industry and home electrification; uncertainties relating to the solar energy industry; the ability to identify and complete strategic acquisitions or strategic relationships; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions; the ability to develop and market new products and services; the effects of pending and future legislation; the highly competitive nature of the Company's business and markets; the ability to execute on and consummate business plans in anticipated time frames; litigation, complaints, product liability claims, government investigations and/or adverse publicity; cost increases or shortages in the materials necessary to support the Company's products and services; the introduction of new technologies; the impact of natural disasters and other events beyond our control, such as hurricanes, wildfires or pandemics, on the Company's business, results of operations, financial condition, regulatory compliance and customer experience; privacy and data protection laws, privacy or data breaches, or the loss of data; general economic, financial, legal, political and business conditions and changes in domestic and foreign markets; risks related to the rollout of the Company's business and the timing of expected business milestones; the effects of competition on the Company's future business; the availability of capital, including the availability and cost of borrowings; and the other risks discussed under the heading 'Risk Factors' in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the SEC on March 31, 2025, subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other documents that the Company files with the SEC in the future. These factors are not exhaustive. New risk factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible to predict all such risk factors, nor can the Company assess the impact of all such risk factors on its business or the extent to which any factor or combination of factors may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. You should not put undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.
Business Wire
08-08-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Spruce Power Signs Multi-Year Multimillion Dollar Agreement to Sell Renewable Energy Credits in New Jersey
DENVER--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Spruce Power Holding Corporation (NYSE: SPRU) ('Spruce' or the 'Company'), a leading owner and operator of distributed solar energy assets across the United States, announced a multi-year agreement to sell Spruce's Solar Renewable Energy Credits ('SRECs') in the state of New Jersey to an investment-grade energy sector counterparty that is ranked among the Fortune Global 50. The transaction is expected to generate approximately $10 million in fully-hedged revenue for Spruce through 2029. This partnership is part of a broader Spruce initiative to leverage the Company's platform and experience to capture the benefits of our SRECs. Chris Hayes, Chief Executive Officer of Spruce said, 'We view scaling SREC registration as a low cost, low risk opportunity to generate capital-light high margin, cash flow for the Company. This transaction is another example of Spruce's expertise in maximizing value from our assets while hedging against future price movements. The forward contract provides an important ongoing hedged revenue stream and reinforces the dependability of Spruce's cash flow generation.' Hayes concluded, 'We believe the counterparty is utilizing Spruce's SRECs as a compliance instrument to hedge their electricity supply positions in the state of New Jersey. We anticipate similar opportunities may be available to Spruce in certain northeastern states as well as California, which we are actively pursuing.' Distributed generation solar owners interested in maximizing SREC revenue should contact Spruce's Environmental Commodities Markets ('ECM') Desk at ecmdesk@ to learn more about Spruce's SREC operations and trading expertise. Potential SREC compliance buyers should also contact Spruce Power. Spruce PRO offers a suite of services that can be tailored for third-party owners of distributed generation assets, including financial and asset management operations, customer service support, and environmental commodities trading. For more information on Spruce PRO, please visit About Spruce Power Spruce Power Holding Corporation (NYSE: SPRU) is a leading owner and operator of distributed solar energy assets across the United States. We provide subscription-based services that make it easy for homeowners to benefit from rooftop solar power and battery storage. Our power as-a-service model allows consumers to access new technology without making a significant upfront investment or incurring maintenance costs. Our company owns the cash flows from approximately 85,000 home solar assets and contracts across the United States. For additional information, please visit Forward Looking Statements Certain statements in this press release may constitute 'forward-looking statements' within the meaning of the federal securities laws, including the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and rules promulgated thereunder. Forward-looking statements generally are characterized by the use of certain words or phrases (and their derivatives) such as 'believe,' 'continue,' 'may,' 'will,' 'estimate,' 'continue,' 'anticipate,' 'intend,' 'expect,' 'should,' 'would,' 'plan,' 'goals,' 'predict,' 'potential,' 'seem,' 'seek,' 'future,' 'outlook,' and similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of historical matters. Forward-looking statements in this release include statements regarding the Company's initiatives and future opportunities with respect to SRECs and the expected benefits with respect to this transaction and future similar transactions, including expectations with respect to the fully hedged revenue expected to be generated by this transaction. These statements are based on our current plans and strategies, as well as various assumptions, whether or not identified in this press release, and on the current expectations of management, all of which management believes are reasonable as of the date of this report, and reflect our current assessment of the risks and uncertainties related to the Company's business and are made as of the date of this press release. Although we believe that our expectations with respect to forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions within the bounds of our existing knowledge about the Company's business and operations, there can be no assurance that actual future results, performance or achievements of, or trends affecting, us will not differ materially from any future results, performance, achievements or trends expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by forward-looking statements, including but not limited to: expectations regarding the growth of the solar industry and home electrification; uncertainties relating to the solar energy industry; the ability to identify and complete strategic acquisitions or strategic relationships; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions; the ability to develop and market new products and services; the effects of pending and future legislation; the highly competitive nature of the Company's business and markets; the ability to execute on and consummate business plans in anticipated time frames; litigation, complaints, product liability claims, government investigations and/or adverse publicity; cost increases or shortages in the materials necessary to support the Company's products and services; the introduction of new technologies; the impact of natural disasters and other events beyond our control, such as hurricanes, wildfires or pandemics, on the Company's business, results of operations, financial condition, regulatory compliance and customer experience; privacy and data protection laws, privacy or data breaches, or the loss of data; general economic, financial, legal, political and business conditions and changes in domestic and foreign markets; risks related to the rollout of the Company's business and the timing of expected business milestones; the effects of competition on the Company's future business; the availability of capital, including the availability and cost of borrowings; and the other risks discussed under the heading 'Risk Factors' in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the SEC on March 31, 2025, subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other documents that the Company files with the SEC in the future. These factors are not exhaustive. New risk factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible to predict all such risk factors, nor can the Company assess the impact of all such risk factors on its business or the extent to which any factor or combination of factors may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. You should not put undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.
