I can't think of an instance at MSNBC where anything I said on the air was influenced by what was going on behind the scenes.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
This brought on the news media, TV crews, interviews, and numerous public appearances.
Whether you're talking about MSNBC or Fox or CNN, it's all about getting enough interest out there, sensationalizing the story in such a way that people are compelled to tune in.
Look, obviously that was - created quite a firestorm, but Newsweek editors have made clear that this was a situation where, you know, a solid, well-placed source provided some information.
There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair. I would hate to see that fall victim to a panic about the Fox effect.
Well, we think the broadcasts did have some effect, because we see the antiwar movement in the U.S. building up, growing and so we think that our broadcast is a support to this antiwar movement.
When I came to MSNBC, its identity as the place for politics was growing.
You turn on the TV, and you see very bland interviews. Journalists in the United States are very cozy with power, very close to those in power.
Throughout the lead-up to the war, CNN worked hard to air all sides of the story. We had a regular segment called Voices of Dissent in which we spent time covering antiwar protests and interviewing those who were opposed to the war with Iraq.
In the alternate universe of conservative talk radio, the killing of Bin Laden coincidentally happened on Barack Obama's watch. He had to be kicked dragging and screaming into authorizing it, and even then he made lots of mistakes.
CNN is pretty consistently on the left, if you look at their choice of stories, what they play up. It's not what they say. It's what they highlight.
No opposing quotes found.