Former President Donald Trump essentially wrapped up the Republican primary with his performance on Super Tuesday. That doesn’t mean MSNBC host Rachel Maddow is willing to hear speeches from the nominee yet.
After airing a portion of Trump’s victory speech Tuesday evening, Maddow chastised producers from her own network for giving the nominee airtime.
“I will say that it is a decision that we revisit constantly in terms of the balance between allowing somebody to knowingly lie on your air about things they’ve lied about before — and you can predict they are going to lie about,” said Maddow.
“Therefore, it is irresponsible to allow them to do that. It’s a balance between knowing that that’s irresponsible to broadcast and also knowing that as the soon-to-be de facto nominee of the Republican Party, this is not only the man who is likely to be the Republican candidate for president, but this is the way he’s running.”
MSNBC cut away from Donald Trump’s #SuperTuesday speech.
Maddow: “Allowing somebody to knowingly lie on your air about things they have lied about before and you can predict they are going to lie about… it’s irresponsible to allow them to do that.”pic.twitter.com/yc6592lgiy
When pressed by fellow host Stephanie Ruhle on a plan to “fact check the hell out of him”, Rachel Maddow did not budge.
“We do that after the fact. That is the best remedy that we’ve got. It does not fix the fact that we broadcast it, honestly,” she concluded.
The MSNBC host has never been shy in her insistence that the network not air Trump’s speeches live. Last year, she argued that “there’s a cost to us as a news organization of knowingly broadcasting untrue things,” alluding to the $787.5 million settlement Fox News paid Dominion Voting Systems for airing false statements about the 2020 election being “rigged” against the former president.
While the news media’s credibility and perception have decreased in recent years, the news credibility of AM/FM radio remains high.
According to a new survey from Morning Consult, trust in AM/FM radio news has risen in the last four years. 63% of respondents said they have “a lot” or “some” trust in radio, up from 60% in 2020. That figure is more than 20 points higher than social media, which featured the lowest trust score in the survey.
AM/FM was the highest-ranking medium in the survey, with network news coming in at 61%, newspapers hitting 60%, and online-only news sites reaching 56% of “a lot” or “some” trust levels.
Meanwhile, Podcasts saw the biggest jump, elevating from 27% in 2020 to 47% in 2024.
The credibility of mainstream news has recovered slightly since 2020. 55% of the adults in the survey called the leading outlets in each medium “somewhat credible”, which is a rise of 4% compared to 2020.
When professional sports leagues were put on pause due to the onset of the global pandemic in the United States, Annie Agar found herself out of work. Leading up to this point, she had been reporting in local news for WOOD-TV in Grand Rapids, Mich. in a multi-faceted role that involved writing, anchoring and editing. Although Agar was not let go from the station, a lack of events to report on led her to move back home with her parents and contemplate her future. The world was full of ambiguity and caused her to think differently about what could come next in her career.
Agar was with her family on Mother’s Day when she decided to explore TikTok, a social media app that she had installed several weeks earlier predicated on video content. She received the impetus to experiment with the platform when her sister told her that she would not understand it. During that afternoon, she extemporaneously thought about staging a video in which teams in the Big Ten Conference had a Zoom meeting to try and restart football through the pandemic.
Without a script and bonafide plan about the video, she used her cell phone to record and combine different clips of herself playing different teams in the videos, indicating the characters through clothing featuring their logos. Once Agar posted the video to her TikTok account, it began to gain traction and was subsequently shared on Twitter, eliciting remarks from brands and other sports media personalities.
“I didn’t have any intention of it taking off the way that it did, and somebody had put it on Twitter and overnight [it] had 2-3 million views,” Agar said. “I just remember thinking, ‘People want this right now. They want something to laugh at, and I think now is the time to do that.’ I think the timing of it was incredible, and it’s still wild to think about.”
As Agar continued to produce videos depicting other conferences and the National Football League, she was determined to build her social media following and avoid being considered a one-hit wonder. Being a football fan herself, she found it easy to genuinely relate to and resonate with others in the space and tried to remain true to her roots as her profile grew. From the beginning, all of the content she was creating was meant to echo the sentiments of fans and generate conversation and interest in the game.
“I’m so glad I kind of thought to do that because there’s always something going on in the NFL,” Agar said. “It’s just exactly how I would talk with friends and family when I’m talking about the NFL; I just put it in video form.”
Everything occurred expeditiously for Agar, and she was suddenly being contacted by various brands and companies to collaborate ahead of the NFL season. ESPN reached out to try and implement her in a segment on Sunday NFL Countdown, something she was willing to do for free. Once she began working with her agent though, Agar attained more clarity about her path moving forward and how to leverage her career path in a highly competitive industry.
“I didn’t want to waste an opportunity because I was now appealing to the fans, which is exactly what I got in this industry to do, so I saw what it could be and I saw potential,” Agar said. “I just wanted to make sure I marketed myself well enough and really took advantage of all these opportunities that were coming to me.”
From speaking to several industry professionals at a young age, Agar evinced a common paradigm of beginning in local news and trying to effectuate consistent advancement in the business. Taking heed to this methodology, she majored in journalism and pre-law at Grand Valley State University and completed an internship with the local NBC-affiliated station.
While in school, Agar remained around sports by working as a bartender for the West Michigan Whitecaps, the Class-A affiliate of the Detroit Tigers. Aside from gaining personal skills and interacting with sports fans, she also met several executives with the team and informed them of her career plans.
“At one point, they needed a host to do this on-field stuff and they knew I was studying sports broadcasting at the time and I was like, ‘Absolutely – it’ll look great on a résumé,’” Agar recalled. “That happened just being around the field and around the guys and bartending.”
Although Agar was initially apprehensive about taking the field, she affirms that it loosened her up and made her more comfortable connecting with fans. In moving to local news, she became more versatile in the process of creating original content, a skillset that has indirectly paid dividends in the process of compiling weekly meeting videos.
Many people assume that Agar has a production team helping her script, record and edit these videos. In reality, she is her own production team and follows a schedule to ensure she has timely, organic content ready at the conclusion of the NFL week. Agar usually watches the games alone on Sunday afternoons and takes notes about key moments in the action. At the same time, she is monitoring social media and trying to gain a feel for what fans are discussing in order to write jokes to use in the video.
When Monday morning arrives, Agar is awake between 6 and 7 a.m. and immediately conducts game-by-game research to remember what occurred. The seven-hour endeavor, while copious, is essential to create an engaging and informative final product, which she begins to record later that day. Setting up her cell phone in front of a white wall, Agar prepares a wardrobe filled with an interminable amount of NFL team gear.
As her videos began to burgeon in popularity, teams started to send her jerseys and shirts to wear so they would be represented in the meetings. The filming takes between three-and-a-half to four hours, a time when she sometimes comes up with new jokes extemporaneously and refines the script. When her filming for the day concludes, Agar watches the entirety of the Monday Night Football game and amends the video as necessary.
Agar has a 3 a.m. wake-up call on Tuesday morning to commence the editing process, all of which is executed on her phone using the Videoleap mobile application. This past NFL season, she began to slightly overlap the audio from different clips to create the effect of conversational fluidity. Additionally, she makes sure that all of the footage is recorded behind a white backdrop to accentuate the wardrobe, even booking hotel rooms based on the walls themselves. All of these videos are recorded with a medium shot in vertical orientation, emitting an element of simplicity rendering the content easy to consume.
“I [have] thought, ‘Well, this is how it started, but people are adapting to the industry, and once you get a better feel for how you shoot the videos, then maybe you can make it a little bit higher production,” Agar said, “but honestly I think the videos do so well because they’re lower production and it feels that you’re just in a room with all of these teams talking to each other in a meeting.”
Once she records the final shots for the video on Tuesday morning, Agar posts the finished outcome and sees as people express their opinions through likes and comments. There are times when she will respond to fans on social media and utilize feedback for future projects while also remaining cognizant of criticism. Messages of enthusiasm and support outweigh those explicating repulsive and acerbic parlance, a community she has built that has become evident at in-person events. Agar recently attended her third Super Bowl and took part in interviews and other initiatives while on site for the league’s championship game.
“I was working my way up as much as I could, and now it just is unbelievable to be recognized by the people that I watched on TV and looked up to and hearing them say that they like the videos – I can’t even explain how cool it is,” Agar said. “….I wanted to make it to a big network, but I wanted to do it in kind of a different way, and I’m just so glad it worked out this way.”
While the meeting videos have proven to be an integral part of her building a career, Agar’s presence spans far beyond this setting. She frequently posts photos and videos with pithy captions, sometimes containing sardonic undertones, that both amuse and agitate fans spanning beyond football. For example, Agar recently attended a Chicago Blackhawks game against the Detroit Red Wings at the United Center on a significant night for the organization and its fans.
Former Blackhawks forward Patrick Kane made his return to Chicago as an opponent for the first time after playing parts of 16 seasons with the team and capturing three Stanley Cup championships. Kane ended up scoring the game-winning goal in overtime for Detroit, prompting Agar to post, “Got to see Patrick Kane last night. You know Chicago should really get someone like him.” The X post alone has 17,000 likes, 532 comments and 1.5 million impressions, which in turn leads to traffic towards her other content and sports media commitments.
“I do all the work and all the research so that fans are laughing at the end of the day and the fans are happy,” Agar said. “It helps maybe when their team – like the Panthers fans when they only get two wins a season – it gives them something to laugh about.”
got to see patrick kane last night. you know chicago should really get someone like him pic.twitter.com/NPpQFv57Gt
The niche of comedy and sports is an area that she hopes to help augment as time goes on with dreams of one day launching her own network. A challenge in the process, however, has been converting the elements of short-form content into different areas of the sports media space. Nearly a year after her videos went viral, Agar accepted a position with Bally Sports as its national NFL and college football correspondent while also serving as a host. The regional sports network brand of Diamond Sports Group allowed Agar to continue establishing her digital presence while providing content for the platform and appearing on select programming.
“When I’m on air, I try to be as fan-based as possible,” Agar expressed. “Some people try to be unbiased, but I love knowing your bias. Everybody I interview, whether [it is on] the sports media side or [a] player, I want to know who your team is because you’re going to respond differently whether you try to be biased or not.”
Akin to her approach on social media, Agar seeks to convey her legitimate self to the audience through her zealous passion for sports. It is an aspect of her career she attributes to her family always stressing authenticity over the years and remains a key factor in pondering over her future. The proclivities and predilections she has shared in public forums have made her more relatable to the audience and cultivates a deeper understanding of the theory behind her comedy as well.
“People have asked if I want to go to an ESPN or these higher networks, and of course everybody wants to, but I also don’t want anybody to limit my jokes,” Agar said. “I’ve come to realize a lot of these bigger networks – they don’t want the right-on-the-line joke, which [are] the jokes that I’m going to make, so we just have to be careful about that.”
As a content creator working in a journalistic correspondent role, Agar seeks to bring entertainment and lightheartedness to sports with an ability to discuss sports objectively. Furthermore, she implements the audience through social media polls and calls to action. For her meeting videos after the AFC and NFC Championship games, Agar asked fans to submit videos to be included as part of the meeting. Many of them demonstrated feelings of disappointment because of their absence from the Super Bowl, and Agar was able to play off of that to create a unique and memorable content offering.
“Comedy is my defense mechanism; it’s how I cope with things,” Agar said. “I think it’s just a natural tendency for me to want to bring light to situations because I hate when people are upset. I’m a people-person, [and] I can’t stand when people are hurting or upset, so I try to lighten the mood with certain things.”
Agar will be hosting a panel at the 2024 BSM Summit centered on garnering social media success, focusing on specific types of content and strategies for growth. Participating in the session, which is presented by World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), is Steve Braband, WWE vice president of digital; Marc Kohn, chief content officer at Overtime; and Omar Raja, ESPN digital and social commentator and creator of House of Highlights. Aside from taking the stage in this capacity for the first time, Agar also looks forward to listening to industry colleagues and gaining new perspectives on sports media.
“The networking is going to be great, and especially in these kinds of spaces, everybody’s guard is down a little bit, I think, because we’re all in the same boat; we’re all in the same industry, so I’m excited to network and hear what everybody else has to say,” Agar explained. “I’m just going to take a little backseat and listen this time.”
Over the last year, Agar has observed growth in the video metrics and feels good about her work with Stadium and other brands. Even though her path may seem atypical compared to others, she is aware that the path to industry success can differ between professionals. More creators continue to gain notoriety and foster sustainable business propositions through digital verticals both within original and derivative content schema. In order to remain cognizant of new trends and best practices, Agar has consulted with new creators and industry veterans in her prudent quest for viability.
“Look at all these creators that are now on a big stage and going to NFL Honors because they were seen on TikTok,” Agar divulged. “It’s just opened up a different world, and I think it would be frustrating to people that are already in the industry that are like, ‘Well, I worked my way up this way and you guys are just jumping on a phone and doing it,’ but I think the best way to not be cynical of the industry is to learn and be open to learning.”
As she continues to build her career in the industry, Agar is concentrating on how she can continue to make people laugh and imbue levity into sports. Despite the content she creates resonating with fans, she does not consider herself an influencer per se because it goes against why she is doing this work. Conversely, she is trying to assemble content as a sports fan to benefit the aggregate community of sports fans as a whole. With new creator networks emerging and finding ways to withstand potential pitfalls, Agar is ready to adapt with the industry while blueprinting a pliable strategy to continue moving forward and giving a voice to sports fans through trials and tribulations alike.
“Just be original to what you are and the content you want out there, and just do it; just start putting out content,” Agar said. “It sounds so simple, but really, you’d be surprised how many people don’t do it because they think people are already out there doing it.”
As Americans begin to follow the news less closely are outlets taking a cue and changing the type of news they cover in the worst way possible.
In October, Pew Institute Research released data showing only 38% of Americans follow the news “all or most of the time.” This is down from 51% in 2016. Likely driven by the public’s growing distrust in the media, is the industry’s positive cash revenue flow causing a negative effect on the industry as a whole?
While small outlets (especially newspapers) have a hard time finding positive revenue, giants like Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN are raking in billions. As giants succeed, well-known but still smaller outlets (like Sports Illustrated, BuzzFeed, and CNet) have cut jobs or shut their doors because they are after the same stories the large media outlets are chasing.
Phrases like “viral video” and “TikTok clip” are now seen daily in news articles and newscasts. Meaning, outlets are now following social media’s lead on stories instead of outlets cultivating their own. Check out these headlines:
Vice: Meet the Man Who Eats Raw Chicken Every Single Day
Buzzfeed: A Woman Went Viral For Sharing “Hidden Clues” That Indicate You Grew Up With Emotionally Unavailable Parents
MSN: Kids Go Viral For Fighting During Mets-Astros Spring Training Game
All of these stories made national news — not because they have a direct effect on people but because they create an emotional reaction. It is this visceral reaction that makes you click. More importantly, it’s your clicking of “viral videos” which get stories like the above featured on countless news websites.
Since social media algorithms are affecting what people see they aren’t going to just show you what they think you want. They are also going to show you the stories they think you want from where you want them so long as they are trending. When outlets use artificial intelligence to develop SEO, the computer is not smart enough (or creative enough) to think of eye-catching clickable headlines like the New York Post’s classic “Headless Body Topless Bar.”
Americans not only feel social media is the number one source of misinformation, but social media is where half of Americans are getting their news. While algorithms are controlling what you see, there is another sinister big tech move that is having a negative impact on the industry, Artificial Intelligence. Yes, AI videos on social media are typically identifiable, but written words by AI are much more difficult to discern.
In fact, Sports Illustrated used AI to write stories until they were caught by Futurism last year. Most people would not have noticed, except for one mistake, photos of Sports Illustrated’s AI writers were up for sale on another site.
Futurism has also caught several outlets, like CNet and BuzzFeed, for their use of AI to boost the number of articles on their website. As futurism noted, AI caused CNet to no longer be a trusted site by Wikipedia because of several mistakes and plagiarism. Similarly, BuzzFeed was called out for using AI to save costs after their CEO said they would not.
If Sports Illustrated, CNet, and BuzzFeed cuts have taught the industry anything it’s the digital media revolution is not as lucrative as once believed. More importantly, when outlets start using AI mistakes abound, creativity disappears, and while people may not know AI wrote an article they stop clicking. The smaller the number of clicks, the less likely their stories will pop up in newsfeeds. This cyclical problem is what’s causing many outlets to have problems in today’s world.
Most news outlets are looking at social media stories to report and develop clickbait (this gives them money). While smaller outlets are beginning to use AI to write their story, larger outlets are relying on algorithms to provide clicks. Neither option is practical. Relying on AI is likely what got some outlets into trouble in the first place and algorithms can change faster than the drop of a hat.
Let me be clear, AI and algorithms are not the same. However, they are often conflated because AI would not be able to exist without algorithms. Regardless of the technicality, former Google executive Jim Albrecht’s op-ed in The Washington Post pointed out how technology is killing news. While Facebook is getting rid of its “news tab” the loss of thousands of industry jobs are on their (and other big tech companies’) hands.
Artificial intelligence will be no different than the algorithms of yesteryear. It even may cause more job cuts in the industry. So as we decide what to cover, ask yourself if this story is actual news or if it is a social media trend.
As we are beginning to see following social media’s trend may cause your outlet to fall and die in the clickhole because you are covering the same viral stories as everyone else.
Jason Kelce isn’t the first recently retired player to be chased by media outlets. And he won’t likely be the last. However, with this song and dance being a somewhat regular occurrence, I hope ABC/ESPN, CBS, FOX, NBC, and Amazon Prime Video have learned some valuable lessons.
I, like I think most people, want to see Jason Kelce succeed in his media career. He’s fun, entertaining, unapologetic, boisterous, and appears to be an all-around good guy.
Some of those qualities are shared by many of the other players who have transitioned from player to analyst, whether it be a studio or game role.
Similarly to players who “broke the mold” or were “ahead of their time”, my fear is that networks won’t know what to do with Kelce, and rush him to a spot he’s not ready for. And that’s unfair to him.
I think the closest comparisons to the current chase of Jason Kelce are Tony Romo (CBS), Drew Brees (NBC), and Jason Witten (ESPN).
All three left their playing careers and moved to broadcast booths.
At first, Romo was heralded as a wunderkind analyst, who many would argue has fizzled and faded after showing great promise.
Brees was tabbed by NBC Sports as an analyst, and flamed out quickly. What shouldn’t have been a surprise — a player who lacked personality and an ability to showcase information quickly — was apparently a shocking development to the suits at NBC.
Finally, Witten might likely be the biggest mistake of them all. He jumped straight from the playing field to the Monday Night Football booth, which was in its own state of flux and instability. Witten was a much-needed case study in the “Just because they played for the Cowboys doesn’t mean they’d be a great analyst” media trope seen for the past nearly three decades. Like Brees, while a great player, Witten never really showcased the energy or personality that you might expect from a network’s lead analyst, before departing one of the biggest assignments in American sports television.
What do all three of those analyst have in common? They immediately left the field and joined a network as an analyst in a prominent position. No on-the-job training. No figuring it out in front of smaller audiences. They were thrown to the wolves from day one, and expected to succeed.
Now, let’s use our thinking brains for a moment. Name me another profession — media or otherwise — where you’re simply expected to show up on day one and be at the top of your field. Can’t think of one? There’s a reason for that.
Jason Kelce has all the markings of being a fantastic NFL personality. But there’s a difference — and Rob Gronkowski might be the case-in-point — between “NFL personality” and “NFL analyst.” I truly believe he can be either, but it’s up to him to decide what he wants.
To pretend as if his playoff antics in Buffalo preclude him from being a network-level analyst is asinine. If he wants to button down, wear a suit, and talk about the game alongside Spero Dedes, Kenny Albert, or some other broadcast, I believe he could do that. If CBS brought him in to star alongside a revamped cast of The NFL Today, I believe he would excel there, too.
But to expect Jason Kelce to sit down in an analyst role from day one and be of the level of Cris Collinsworth, Troy Aikman, or Greg Olsen isn’t fair to him or to the viewer. We — and he — deserve better.
I hope he’s brought along slowly, with an increasing role over time, if he so chooses. He could be an invaluable ambassador for the sport if put in a position to succeed. But his ultimate landing spot, and his subsequent role (if he wants one), will tell a lot about whether or not he’s been set up for success.
We had a guest on my news/talk radio show this week who was the face of a non-profit organization that trained dogs to be service animals for combat veterans.
She came in with an adorable puppy to gin up more volunteers to be puppy raisers as there is now a two-year waitlist for vets to get a dog.
Great cause. Cute dog. Easy, slam dunk conversation.
To make a long story short, she is a former journalist, and we got to talking before and after the interview, which was fun and went well.
In passing, she gave me a light-hearted compliment on my questions, and I basically responded that it wasn’t that difficult.
She countered with an anecdote about an anchor in another city who recently started their interview with something to the effect of “So, we need to find this little guy a new home.”
Nope. The dog, with the vest and all, was not up for adoption. Not even close. The guy had no idea about the purpose of the interview. None. Nada. Zippo.
This is not a knock on local TV anchors. There are plenty of people out there in both radio and television who don’t care – and don’t prepare.
I get it to a certain degree, especially for television. Interviews are so basic – 3-4 questions, a thank you, and a toss-to-break. In the daily grind of news, a lot of anchors – even good ones – sometimes punt on prep.
Ultimately, though, it is embarrassing for the people involved – even the person getting interviews who has to toe the line between being respectful and also correcting the anchor.
It’s also kind of ridiculous when you ponder it a bit.
Why? Because it is so easy to be prepared. Way easier than 10 years ago and way easier than 20 and more years ago.
In 2024, not being prepared for an interview is the equivalent of failing second-grade reading.
Preparation these days is that easy.
In two clicks, you can have a guest’s work history. One click, and you know about the non-profit that works with the dogs. Two clicks for other stories done on the organization. A quick search on Instagram, and you have a sense of the dog’s popularity (a column on the magic of animals and food on social media is coming soon).
You know this. So, why don’t you do it all the time?
Literally, it takes five minutes to know what you are doing. That’s the minimum for competency, and yet, there are people who still don’t do it.
Maybe you do it, but in real-time or during the break right before the segment. I would say, one thing I’ve learned from past experience is that even doing it before the show, or God forbid, the day before, makes you even better prepared.
I realized this all the way back in college. My only “C” was in an art history class. It was an 8:30 AM class, and I always missed it. I should have known better than to enroll in an 8:30 class. When the final exam came around, I was studying dozens of images I had never seen. And I bombed.
Flash forward to my second art history course – a much more manageable 10:30 AM kickoff. I cruised to the ubiquitous “B+” not by studying more, but rather, just by showing up. No, not that attendance alone got me an 88. Showing up and watching the slides got me the grade because studying material you’ve seen before is markedly easier than if it’s being seen for the first time.
The same goes for preparing for an interview.
Do it well before, and let it sit. When you pick it back up, it all will seem so easy. And if you end up riffing on a line of questions or even lose your train of thought during the interview, you have this body of work to fall back on.
All of this reminds me of how our resources of 2024 compare to the past. Take a minute and think about where you were research-wise when you began your radio career.
I remember (although it’s starting to get a little hazy) when I started at ESPN in 1998. I would go to the morning SportsCenter meeting, and there would be a pile of packets. Inside, there were key sports articles from all across the country. It was about the thickness of that bible next to your bed at the Red Roof Inn. Remember, this was early browsing days, and things weren’t quite as fast and easy to find as they are today.
Then, if there was a game that ESPN was broadcasting live – which was hundreds a year – there would be hard-copy research packets that were almost as thick and ridiculous in terms of information. If you wanted to know the Boston Bruins’ record on Wednesdays in March, that stat was in the packet.
ESPN Radio had its own research material, too.
In fact, an untold story at ESPN back then was how much freakin’ paper they wasted.
It was all overwhelming, but if you could not work through the massive piles of paper, you struggled to find the factoids needed to sound smart, separate yourself, and do your job well.
In 2024, all the information from those fat packets is available on your phone for crying out loud. So, even if you are a seasoned radio veteran and about to talk to the guy who comes on every week, do a little homework.
Barring a Super Tuesday comeback by Nikki Haley for the Republican nomination, the primary election races of 2024 have thus far proven that the general election rematch of President Joe Biden and Donald Trump is fait accompli.
Most likely it’s this inevitability that has decreased the viewership in cable news coverage from 2020 of the primary results in South Carolina and Michigan on Feb. 24 and Feb. 27, respectively. After all, the major outlets announced the projected winners of each race at the start of each respective evening, leaving no suspense in awaiting official results.
For South Carolina from 7-9 p.m. on Saturday, Feb. 24, the three major cable news outlets — Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN — combined to deliver 4.32 million viewers including 596,000 within the key 25-54 demographic, according to Nielsen Media Research.
Compared to Feb. 29, 2020 in the same time slot, when the state marked a pivotal positive turning point in the fortunes of then-candidate Biden and his campaign, the total audience was off by 18 percent (5.31 million) and off a steeper 42 percent among adults 25-54 (1.035 million).
By including Newsmax (487,000 viewers; 37,000 adults 25-54) and NewsNation (76,000 viewers; 9,000 adults, 25-54) into the mix that night — two outlets way less prominent in 2020 than they both are currently,— the total declines from four years prior softened to 8 percent (in viewers) and 38 percent (in demo).
Fox News made up more than half of the cable news coverage audience figures on Feb. 24. averaging 2.35 million viewers (327,000 in 25-54). They actually increased by 15 percent (in viewers) and 3 percent (in 25-54) from the last South Carolina primary, albeit an extensive Biden-centric focus on that night in 2020.
MSNBC (1.18 million viewers, -38% from Feb. 29, 2020; 137,000 adults 25-54, -58%) and CNN (782,000 viewers, -42%; 132,000 adults 25-54, -66%) accounted for the huge primary-over-primary declines.
4.61 million watched the three major cable news outlets in prime time (8-11 p.m.) for Michigan coverage on Feb. 27, but that was approximately half of how much Michigan drew on Mar. 10, 2020 (9.06 million) — then, a night that showed continued momentum for Joe Biden over Bernie Sanders and the last primary prior to the nationwide COVID lockdowns.
Fox News (2.51 million viewers, 0.24 A25-54 rating) led all while MSNBC (1.35 million) bested CNN (748,000) in total viewers but CNN (0.14 A25-54 rating) edged out MSNBC (0.13) in the key demo. (Note: a 1.0 rating in 25-54 equates to 1.21 million viewers within the aforementioned age range.)
Newsmax posted 442,000 viewers at 7 p.m.; 399,000 at 8 p.m. and 324,000. at 9 p.m.
The passing of industry giant Chris Mortensen produced reams of tributes both inside and outside of journalism, in part because Mortensen had developed such longtime relationships with coaches, GMs, owners and power brokers – but most of all with the athletes he covered.
So it shouldn’t shock anyone that athletes as different as Peyton Manning and Michael Vick were quick to praise Mortensen, who was taken by throat cancer at age 72. They actually knew the journalist, and he actually knew them.
In some ways, then, we’re not only mourning the loss of a great reporter and a good man. We’re also thinking back wistfully on an era of media relations that no longer exists in sports – and it’s to the absolute detriment of every team that follows the idiotic advice that has led to this corrosion.
Mortensen, known by friends as Mort, had great relationships with many of his story subjects partly because he came of age in a journalistic era in which that could happen. This was before the iron curtain came down between teams and the people who cover them.
Like most sportswriters who broke in during the 1980s or ‘90s, Mort had substantially free rein to do his job. He had what would today be considered wild levels of access to the locker room, clubhouse, pre- and post-game scenes, batting practice (during his time as an MLB writer) and more. Casual conversations, most often with no notes taken, later begat better stories.
And it wasn’t only a matter of building trust, which is always the job of the journalist and never the job of the team. When reporters and their subjects spend more time together, the people being written or spoken about feel there’s a level of accountability that they can access.
If they don’t like something, they can let the person responsible know what they’re thinking. Even if it doesn’t change the result, it can deepen the professional relationship. It’s almost never a waste of time.
But the access that would foster such a relationship has been systematically choked down to almost nothing. A strain of badly conceived P.R. and marketing strategies has led franchises into ever-increasing levels of paranoia about who’s covering them and what they’re saying, and they’ve chosen to cower rather than walk upright.
Mortensen’s life work is a great time to remind teams (and their owners) to step back. Mort’s career reflected the best of relationship-building. Aside from the Patriots’ Deflate Gate episode, the man’s body of work was practically flawless. If any of us gets through a full career with one single major gaffe, we’re living right.
But Mortensen knew people. He took the time and put in the work. Again, that is a reporter’s responsibility, but it has become incrementally more difficult in an era in which teams – almost all teams, in almost all sports – have decided that the best way to guard the news about them is to make access to information and people almost impossible.
The smart move upon the advent of social media would’ve been to use this incredibly valuable new tool to augment what fans know about teams, not restrict it. But that’s not what happened. Social media is now used as a dodge.
The P.R.-driven decision to take teams’ information internal has done absolutely nothing to elevate those brands. Nor has the bizarre practice of making even assistant coaches off limits to reporters in the name of accurate messaging. Too, keeping players cloistered by restricting when they may be addressed speaks to a deep dysfunction in basic human relations.
The easiest thing to do, for teams, is pull up those covers. It’s a massive mistake, and that mistake begins with the basic misunderstanding of the dynamics of fandom. Most folks watch games because they’re interested in other human beings doing cool things. There is no planet upon which that dynamic is enhanced by making it harder for us to get to know the athletes.
Chris Mortensen played at the highest levels, and he certainly broke his share of stories that were purely numbers-driven. He had new signings and record contract deals, just as Adam Schefter does today. He was deeply conversant with agents. It’s part of the gig.
But Mortensen loved to write about players and coaches and strategies, too. And the only way to do that effectively is the way he did it, by getting to know the people involved well enough that they’d trust him to tell a really interesting story. All sportswriters and great broadcasters through the modern history of games have used that formula. You’ve got to start with trust.
Mort would have a hard time initiating that trust-building process if he were starting out today, because at every turn he’d be met by a team regulation that says, basically, We’re not interested in helping you get to know anybody. It’s the strangest, most self-defeating way to operate a people business. May wiser heads prevail.
The Athletic’s top two sports media writers joined forces this week for a conversation. On the Sports Media with Richard Deitsch podcast, Andrew Marchand and Richard Deitsch discussed a variety of sports media topics including the story they believe will dominate 2024 – Tom Brady starting his career with FOX Sports.
“I think you could make a pretty good argument, it’s the biggest story in sports media,” said Marchand. He mentioned that it’s not rare for a great NFL quarterback to be in the broadcast booth in the modern era of football. However, Brady instantly becomes the biggest celebrity sports broadcaster that exists.
Marchand thinks Brady will be set up to succeed, similarly to the same way Greg Olsen was. Getting the former quarterback into a groove will fall on play-by-play announcer Kevin Burkhardt’s shoulders.
“Kevin Burkhardt is a very good play-by-play’er, but what he’s really the best at is getting a lot out of his teammate,” added Marchand. “I think Olsen’s success had something to do with [having] Burkhardt as a partner. Kevin is unselfish, and wants his analyst to do well. He [made] it about Olsen, and he will make it about Brady. That’s a huge advantage for him that the point guard that he’s going to have is someone who wants to make him look good and put him in good situations to do well.”
Deitsch has said before he believes Olsen should stay with FOX and move to the number two team. That would allow him to see what else opens up or even stay and eventually replace Brady. “I’d bet all the money I own that Tom Brady will not complete the FOX contract,” Deitsch said. “I can’t tell you how many years he will be there, but it seems inconceivable, to me, that he would be there for all 10.”
Marchand mentioned that the difference between number one and two team money could be around $7 million less. That’s assuming Olsen was even interested in moving down. Fox could also add payroll and feature the highest paid number two guy in an NFL booth.
The comparison for Olsen’s future was drawn to Cris Collinsworth. Marchand says that’s the type of career he can see for the promising analyst.
Earlier in the week, FanDuel announced that it is entering into a new multi-year partnership with the Carolina Panthers to serve as the team’s official sports betting partner. This announcement comes ahead of next Monday, March 11, the launch date for mobile sports betting in the state of North Carolina. As a result of the agreement, FanDuel will utilize team marks across its marketing channels, along with partnering with the franchise on content for digital and social media channels. Additionally, FanDuel TV will broadcast the Up & Adams show live from Bank of America Stadium on Wednesday, March 6 for a special edition of the morning program.
“Bringing FanDuel to sports fans across North Carolina is an important moment for our business, and we’re thrilled to be able to work with the Carolina Panthers to introduce their fanbase to America’s #1 Sportsbook,” Mike Raffensperger, chief commercial officer of FanDuel, said in a statement. “We look forward to supporting the team next season and to engaging the passionate sports fans across North Carolina with our product.”
Guests expected to appear on Wednesday’s edition of Up & Adams include former NFL Defensive Player of the Year Luke Kuechly and Panthers head coach Dave Canales. Additional members of the Panthers organization will also be featured during the program as well. The show, hosted by Kay Adams, will be broadcast live on FanDuel TV, FanDuel TV+ and YouTube at 11 a.m. EST/8 a.m. PST. Fans can also watch the program later in the day on Max using its Bleacher Report Sports Add-On.
The broadcast of the Up & Adams show from Charlotte, N.C. marks the latest live edition of the program, which recently aired live from Media Row at Super Bowl LVIII in Las Vegas, Nev. Moreover, the program also broadcast from the New York Stock Exchange in late January to celebrate Flutter Entertainment, parent company of FanDuel, being listed on the stock exchange.
