It was hard to keep a straight face when I saw this nugget that somehow qualified as breaking news in the cable industry come in from multiple sources yesterday. Even though it was written rather plainly, it was practically trolling that one such source was CNN’s Brian Stelter:
As the cable news channel MSNBC splits up with NBC News, it is also dropping the NBC from its name.
Later this year, the channel will become MS NOW, which stands for My Source for News, Opinion, and the World.
“This new branding underscores our mission: to serve as a destination for breaking news and best-in-class opinion journalism, all rooted in accurate and reported facts,” MSNBC president Rebecca Kutler said in an internal memo.
Allow me a second to deposit last night’s undercooked swordfish in my hurl cup. And then please let PEOPLE’s Julia Moore fill in a few more details:
During this time of transition, NBCUniversal decided that our brand requires a new, separate identity,” Kutler revealed. “This decision now allows us to set our own course and assert our independence as we continue to build our own modern newsgathering operation.”
“While our name will be changing, who we are and what we do will not. Our commitment to our work and our audiences will not waiver from what the brand promise has been for three decades,” she continued.
At least she seemed to please her boss:
Versant CEO Mark Lazarus said that the name change “underscores the brand’s mission to serve as the destination for domestic and international breaking news and the best-in-class opinion journalism.”
And one of the few reasons her boss and she have had any reason to heretofore smile seems to be on board as well:
Rachel Maddow told Variety of the rebrand news: “If there was ever a time for us to change our name, this is it — because we’re not just separating from NBC News in corporate terms, we’re competing with them now. So I think the distinction is going to be good for us. “What NBC is doing in its legacy timeslots — the Today Show, Nightly, Meet the Press — is just a world away from the 24/7 totally independent news operation that we’re able to stand up now, thanks to the spin-off,” she continued.
The last time I checked–and thanks to my YouTube algorithm that’s often–her now corporate stepbrother is perhaps the only broadcast news entity that hasn’t done what Maddow’s implying. But guilt by association, I suppose.
And in terms of making a true connection with folks that weren’t generously compensated to weigh in with their thoughts–whether those were paid respondents to what one can assume was yet another six (seven?) figure research study or just fellow executives spitballing around a boardroom table (or, these days, more likely a Zoom grid)–they might still seem to be a little more convincing.
The one-man newsgathering operation that is THE DESK’s Matthew Keys offered up a few more reactions atypical to Maddow’s:
Some critics drew comparisons to other corporate rebrands, while others noted the name’s similarity to multiple sclerosis, which became a trending topic on X (formerly Twitter) in the United States on Monday.
Former MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann, who left the network in 2011, said in an email that the rebrand doubled down on a long-running issue. “‘MS’ was an indicator that this was a network designed for women viewers,” he wrote. “‘NOW? Like the National Organization For Women?’”
Other media observers compared the rebrand to Warner Bros Discovery’s (WBD) renaming of HBO Max to Max. Washington Post media reporter Scott Nover joked, “After MS Now will be MS Go, and then MS Max, and then just MS.”
And how Keys chose to share those snarks via his LinkedIn feed kinda sums up his version of objective reporting:
This is a remarkably confusing rebrand. All the good names were taken.
Having led executive teams through this exercise several times along my own journey, I do wonder if any truly good ones were even offered as forced-choice alternatives. I’ve written about this extensively before, when The Family Channel was going through an ownership change, they were in the same pickle that MSNBC finds itself with, with the punch line being:
The two leading candidates for the rebrand? XYZ (the opposite of ABC, get it?). And–Glue. For programming that sticks to you.
Ironically, I’ve since learned that the marketing guru that actually though Glue was worthy of consideration is about as red-pilled and politically opinionated as anyone who used to be in my social media feed. I emphasize the words “used to be”, as even I have my limits on what I’d tolerate. Given his “status” in the industry I shudder to think if perhaps his firm might have at least had a chance to bid on this project. If so, he was probably motivated to withhold such a gem, but at least he eschewed the temptation to emphasize the letters “DNC”.
One also wonders how the other marketing “guru” that dreamt up that monicker is going to react now that his favorite taunt is off the table. I’d offer up MSNOT, both for the expression of disdain for its unchanged lineup and apparent POV and if you split the acronym different you’ll get what was coming out of my nose when I saw the drivel coming from Kutler.
What it appears this iteration of the network will be is an unabashedly blue-leaning resource; as Moore further shared:
In preparation for its split from NBC News, the network has hired more than three dozen journalists from outlets including CNN, Bloomberg, Politico and The Washington Post. In addition, it’s developing its own independent newsgathering process and also stood up its first-ever Washington Bureau.
It sure seems like they’re choosing quantity over quality, considering who’s not around for this rodeo:
Andrea Mitchell was the first of many MSNBC faces to depart the network at the beginning of the year. She made her final appearance as anchor on Feb. 7 after nearly 17 years at the desk…Days later, Joy Reid’s exit from MSNBC was announced, which Maddow said it was “very, very, very hard to take.” I’d imagine losing a bargaining chip like Reid that made Maddow’s audience size and importance to the network seem all that more massive and needed and therefore minimize the pay cut she took was a bitter pill to swallow.
I’ll assume she actually still reads ratings reports like the one ADWEEK’s Mark Mwachiro dropped last month that reflected the first full quarter without these personalities:
During Q2 2025, MSNBC averaged 1.008 million total primetime viewers and 91,000 primetime demo viewers. During total day, MSNBC had 596,000 total viewers and 57,000 A25-54 viewers. When looking at MSNBC’s performance vs. the first quarter in 2025, it was down in total viewers and the demo by -2% and -5%, respectively, during primetime. However, during total day, the network was up +1% in total viewers and was flat in the demo—the only network not to lose viewers during this daypart.
Yes, in other words they did better–albeit slightly–with the old school NBC NEWS content than they did with their eye-rolling talking heads. That independent newsgathering process does have some significant shoes to fill.
That’s a task where given where they are starting and where Comcast hopes they will be might have put better use to the many hundreds of thousands (several million?) this exercise required. As I’ve repeatedly learned and advised, virtually no one chooses a viewing destination based on its name. Identifying and amplifying voices as qualified and popular as Mitchell and, yes, even Reid isn’t cheap.
Glue more than likely wouldn’t have made a damn bit of difference, certainly to what eventually became FOX Family and I suspect this network as well. But I will offer up MSNOT — My Source for News, Opinion and THE World–as something to keep in abeyance. If you don’t lay claim to it first, don’t be surprised if someone else does.
Until next time…