Jump to content

David Gregory out, Chuck Todd in at Meet The Press


Jess

Recommended Posts

When Stelter tweets "stand by for news", you know shot is going down. And it has - Gregory is out at MTP. Chuck Todd is the new host. Official announcement this afternoon.

 

There will be a swift transition. How swift? Gregory won't even anchor this weekend.

 

Article: http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/14/media/meet-press-david-gregory-chuck-todd/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like this will actually boost the ratings. If Gregory is spoiled porridge then Todd is rotten bran cereal.

That's confusing to me. What exactly are they hoping to do by swapping David for Chuck? I cannot believe that the powers that be seem to have learned nothing from the Ann Curry situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's confusing to me. What exactly are they hoping to do by swapping David for Chuck? I cannot believe that the powers that be seem to have learned nothing from the Ann Curry situation.

 

Ever since David took over for Tim Russert, Meet the Press' ratings have done nothing but gone down hill. They went from a dominant powerhouse at first to a lackluster 3rd that's close to falling to fourth. This situation is NOTHING like Ann Curry .David has/had six years to do something with Meet the Press and he hasn't/didn't. Ann Curry only had one year. Plus, I don't think I would call David one of NBC's most popular personalities. However they could at least give him the dignity of hosting for the rest of the month and let Chuck Todd take over in September.

 

Either way I highly doubt that Chuck Todd will be much better. I really don't. I don't know who I would have replaced Gregory with, but Todd certainly wouldn't have been it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think they should have waited out for Savannah Guthrie's maternity leave and then have her be the new moderator of MTP. I definitely think there would be a ratings boost there and, despite what people say, she has the chops for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I honestly think they should have waited out for Savannah Guthrie's maternity leave and then have her be the new moderator of MTP. I definitely think there would be a ratings boost there and, despite what people say, she has the chops for it.

 

Too bad it would result in an Ann Curry 2.0 at the Today Show again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, if George Stephanopoulos did This Week and GMA (he's since scaled back with This Week to once a month), then what's to say NBC can't have Savannah Guthrie do both MTP and Today? That likely won't happen because of Savannah being a new mom and NBC possibly wanting to accommodate her, but it could happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hey, if George Stephanopoulos did This Week and GMA (he's since scaled back with This Week to once a month), then what's to say NBC can't have Savannah Guthrie do both MTP and Today? That likely won't happen because of Savannah being a new mom and NBC possibly wanting to accommodate her, but it could happen.

 

In addition to her new role, I can't imagine that NBC would want an unstable arrangement of her only working 2-3 Sundays a month. And, while ABC has somehow made the NYC arrangement work, I just can't see the peacock execs moving production to the Big Apple.

 

NBC's biggest problem is MSNBC. They try to act like they're two separate entities, but with the amount of crossover of talent and promotion, the network has lost much of its credibility. I can't help but associate those on NBC (Savannah, Chuck, and to a lesser extent Willie) who started on cable with the pathetic drivel that is MSNBC. Anbody plucked from the cable side to host such a deeply political program cannot be trusted to keep their ideologies to themselves. It's the same problem that Fox News Sunday has. Chris Wallace is a very good journalist, but his whole show doesn't register with me as credible due to the association with FNC (it's a gray area to say that it's more of a Fox show versus an FNC show, though I do consider it to be the latter).

 

And one could say that Stephanopoulos is in that boat more than anybody else, but in my view he has the redeeming quality of being a damn solid anchor who's rather subtle in displaying his opinions compared to his competitors, but that's a discussion for another day.

 

Long story short, MTP is no better off with Chuck Todd. I still think they should've found a way to hire someone from another outlet. Frankly, I liked David Gregory as a personality (but not necessarily as an anchor), and I can't stand Chuck Todd, so for that reason alone I won't watch a minute of the new MTP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really bad!!!! And I LOVE NBC!!!!!!!!!!!!! Chuck Todd is not all that well known. The rating will go up in the next months because of three things: 1) People flock to see new anchor takeovers, then they'll go right back to their old ways. 2) All the NBC lovers, but David Gregory haters will come back. 3) The midterm is in November so all Sunday shows like this naturally see a boost in the ratings. IDK who NBC should've but in this role (Savannah Guthrie? Bring someone from another network on?), but Todd was not the right choice. Sorry to see Gregory go, wish he couldve have a "bye bye" show, but I wish him true luck in the future!

 

 

As a side note, wonder who is replacing Todd as Chief WH Correspondent and on the Daily Rundown?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people are blaming David Gregory too much for the recent failure of Meet the Press... NBC has always bragged about how the program hasn't changed dramatically in a very long time... the last major change occurred in 1992 when it was expanded to an hour. Just like GMA revamped its 8am hour to improve ratings, which turned out to be very successful, if MTP is going to be a competitor to CBS and ABC, the format needs to adapt to that. (And for the record, Deborah Turness, President of NBC News, did say in the NBC press release that they are looking at changing some things)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever since David took over for Tim Russert, Meet the Press' ratings have done nothing but gone down hill. They went from a dominant powerhouse at first to a lackluster 3rd that's close to falling to fourth. This situation is NOTHING like Ann Curry .David has/had six years to do something with Meet the Press and he hasn't/didn't. Ann Curry only had one year. Plus, I don't think I would call David one of NBC's most popular personalities. However they could at least give him the dignity of hosting for the rest of the month and let Chuck Todd take over in September.

 

Either way I highly doubt that Chuck Todd will be much better. I really don't. I don't know who I would have replaced Gregory with, but Todd certainly wouldn't have been it.

David didn't took over MTP in 2008 I believe. I don't remember the show's ratings really suffering until about a year or so ago. Either way I guess I understand why they're replacing him, what I don't understand is why they believe Chuck Todd is any better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think they should have given it to Savannah (seeing as there has been a ratings bump when's she's hosted) but with a newborn it would be difficult. That being said I am disappointed at what MTP has become but no one could continue Tim Russerts reigning he would be a hard act to follow. I do like David Gregory but he shouldn't have been given the option to host Meet The Press in the first place.

 

 

NBC's biggest problem is MSNBC. They try to act like they're two separate entities, but with the amount of crossover of talent and promotion, the network has lost much of its credibility. I can't help but associate those on NBC (Savannah, Chuck, and to a lesser extent Willie) who started on cable with the pathetic drivel that is MSNBC. Anbody plucked from the cable side to host such a deeply political program cannot be trusted to keep their ideologies to themselves. It's the same problem that Fox News Sunday has. Chris Wallace is a very good journalist, but his whole show doesn't register with me as credible due to the association with FNC (it's a gray area to say that it's more of a Fox show versus an FNC show, though I do consider it to be the latter).

Savannah and Chucks show on msnbc was more down the middle and they saved the partisan politics for the guests but since Savannah left to go do Today it has definitively gotten a little more partisan with Chuck only (some liberals would say he's conservative). But then I keep remembering what their spouses do Savannah is married to a former democratic strategist and Chuck is married to a woman who confounded a direct marketing company that caters to democratic sand progressive causes.

 

Willie Geist was more of the straight man when he co-hosts Morning Joe and hosted Way Too Early. You would find that he wouldn't take any position on political topics but he spoke out (like everyone else did) during Roger Sterling comments. But his first on air role was when he was a producer for Tucker Carlson's show where he would do more lighthearted segments and general silliness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I still think they should have given it to Savannah (seeing as there has been a ratings bump when's she's hosted) but with a newborn it would be difficult. That being said I am disappointed at what MTP has become but no one could continue Tim Russerts reigning he would be a hard act to follow. I do like David Gregory but he shouldn't have been given the option to host Meet The Press in the first place.

 

 

Savannah and Chucks show on msnbc was more down the middle and they saved the partisan politics for the guests but since Savannah left to go do Today it has definitively gotten a little more partisan with Chuck only (some liberals would say he's conservative). But then I keep remembering what their spouses do Savannah is married to a former democratic strategist and Chuck is married to a woman who confounded a direct marketing company that caters to democratic sand progressive causes.

 

Willie Geist was more of the straight man when he co-hosts Morning Joe and hosted Way Too Early. You would find that he wouldn't take any position on political topics but he spoke out (like everyone else did) during Roger Sterling comments. But his first on air role was when he was a producer for Tucker Carlson's show where he would do more lighthearted segments and general silliness.

 

Anyone who isn't to the left of Obama or Elizabeth Warren, is an evil "conservative". The Clintons fit this example. Don't get too keyed into the air quote, the DNC has been for a lack of a better word, raped by the progressives.

 

I'm a Bob Scheiffer kinda guy. Sure the old guy shows his politics, but for me its a "lead in" from Sunday Morning and half hr buffer to WCVB's On the Record, FNC's MediaBuzz or CNN's Reliable (which is like watching NPR on TV if you asked me...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Will "Face the Nation" ever expand to one hour? Didn't CBS try that during their last SuperBowl?

 

It depends on your station. CBS has expanded "Face the Nation" to be a hour, but has given affiliates the option to preempt the second half hour of the program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Will "Face the Nation" ever expand to one hour? Didn't CBS try that during their last SuperBowl?

 

 

It depends on your station. CBS has expanded "Face the Nation" to be a hour, but has given affiliates the option to preempt the second half hour of the program.

 

all of them should because its lame for the viewers who watches it gets abruptly cut off, and other programming suddenly appears since the program does in fact have a proper close and credits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all of them should because its lame for the viewers who watches it gets abruptly cut off, and other programming suddenly appears since the program does in fact have a proper close and credits.

From what I understand, it's not an abrupt cutoff. They end the first half hour so that it would appears as a close for those stations that cut off, but also appears as a break for those that continue. I'm surprised CBS hasn't pushed for more stations to carry the full hour, and I'm also surprised that more stations haven't picked it up with the ratings boost. I think only about 60% of affiliates carry the second half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it should be noted that it's only rated on the half-hour, which some have argued gives the show some sort of advantage.

Very much so. There was an article NY Times which mentioned that one week Today played all the national commercials in the 7AM hour leaving the 8AM hour to the affiliates which is a way to play the system since Nielsen only counts times the half hours when national commercials air. So I am assuming that's what CBS does because I don't think national advertisers would be keen if their ads didn't air in 36% of the country which doesn't air the second half hour.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using TVNewsTalk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.