Staff Reports
Last week, MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski stirred up a hornet’s nest when they decided to meet with none other than President-Elect Donald Trump. The uproar stemming from their casual chat with a sitting president from the opposite party revealed more about the critics than it did about Scarborough and Brzezinski. Many on the left seemed to think that the proper approach to covering the incoming administration was to distance themselves as far as possible, lest they appear “soft” or, heaven forbid, human.
Jim VandeHei of Axios was among those in the media defending the hosts’ meeting. In a world where sharing information is essential, he argued, it seems ludicrous (and anti-journalistic) to eschew the opportunity to speak with a president-elect. Yet, one should remember that “Morning Joe” has never claimed to be a paragon of impartial journalism. Their tenure has been characterized by a fervent support for leftist viewpoints, particularly during the recent election cycle where they seemed to channel every Democratic talking point they could muster, all while portraying Trump as a fascist threat to democracy.
“Morning Joe” hemorrhaged viewers after hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski announced at the top of the show their meeting with Trump at Mar-a-Lago. (Mediaite/Nielsen) pic.twitter.com/QHdyYAWauu
— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) November 19, 2024
The blowback on social media was swift, and let’s just say, it was a bit more colorful than a pastel palette. Critics unleashed a barrage of comments, some comparing the meeting to cozying up to dictators of yore. It’s as if critics expected Scarborough and Brzezinski to don a paper hat and start serving tea to the soon-to-be-leader of the free world, all while denouncing him on their show. The irony of their ideological portrayal versus their actions certainly didn’t go unnoticed across conservative circles.
The aftermath of this meeting led to a significant drop in viewership for “Morning Joe.” With 770,000 viewers on that fateful Monday, the show saw its audience plummet below a million, eventually cascading down to a measly 647,000 viewers by Wednesday. Perhaps disgruntled liberals are tiring of their go-to morning show not aligning with their anti-Trump crusade. If they were hoping for a secure echo chamber, it seems Scarborough and Brzezinski unintentionally shattered that illusion in a matter of days.
This incident highlights a larger, more troubling trend in the media landscape: opinions often overshadow facts. Historically, there was a concerted effort to separate the two, but the emergence of networks like Fox News opened the floodgates, catering to a conservative audience that felt marginalized by legacy media. Scarborough and Brzezinski may think they’re revolutionizing journalism, but they only serve up a reminder that blending news with opinion doesn’t play out well for those supposedly on a high horse of impartiality.
In an era where personal biases often guide news delivery, the forced marriage of opinion and facts is becoming increasingly evident. As television ratings sink and trust in the media wanes, insight and reason are drowned out by noise and narratives. As members of the media drift further from the ideals of balanced reporting, one must wonder if they’ll ever return or if they’ll just keep inviting chaos into their ratings endeavors.
