wanted. But for now, I will give you this:
"Until we get that backstory, all we have is speculation — and Brian Stelter of The New York Times. Last November, Stelter reported that MSNBC was thinking about replacing Schultz with Washington Post wunderkind blogger Ezra Klein, drawing a furious denial from Schultz. "If somebody is telling Stelter that I'm going to be replaced, we know that his nose as a reporter doesn't sniff very well," he said on his radio show.
On Wednesday night, Stelter cited his old story, saying Schultz's ouster "has been expected at least since late last year," and repeated that Klein is still the frontrunner for Schultz's spot, along with Chris Hayes and Joy Reid. He doesn't say why Schultz is being pushed out, but in a March 1 profile of Schultz in the Columbia Journalism Review, Stelter tells Michael Meyer: "When MSNBC talks about its brand, it talks about Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell and Chris Hayes. It doesn't talk as often about Ed Schultz."
http://theweek.com/article/index/241365/why-msnbc-is-demoting-ed-schultz
and this:
"Happy faces aside, it seems clear this was Schultz’s spin and that, in fact, MSNBC had pushed him out of the more far prestigious primetime slot.
No one knows exactly why Schultz was demoted to weekends, but the shift undoubtedly comes as a move towards the young, technocratic image the network has effectively crafted under the Obama administration. As The Week notes, Schultz’s bellicose manner is a relic of the Bush era, when progressives were fired up and on the warpath. But now, it’s likely MSNBC wanted to make room for the youthful, cerebral and mild-mannered Hayes to fill out an evening that also includes young wonk-in-chief Rachel Maddow.
The media world remembers when New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter broke the story back in November that Schultz was likely on his way out of 8 p.m. In return, the fiery host unleashed a flurry of insults at Stelter, accusing him of reporting “media garbage” and not being able to “sniff very well” when digging through a scoop."
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-fooled-ed-schultz-and-the-media-about-his-future-in-primetime/
and note the remark about the ratings here:
"The switch from Schultz to Hayes marks the next step in MSNBC's transformation into a young network dominated by wonky policy discussions. Another rising star cut from the same mold, Ezra Klein, was thought to have a shot at the 8 p.m. slot and instead might fill Hayes' former spot at 8 a.m. on weekends.
MSNBC is counting on Hayes to surpass Schultz's ratings in the valuable 25-54 demographic; according to the New York Times, of The Ed Show's nightly 1 million viewers, only 249,000 fell in that range. On the other hand, Maddow, the network's top host, pulled in 339,000 pairs of eyes in that range. Hayes' early weekend morning show pulled in 139,000 viewers in that range."
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/msnbc-names-chris-hayes-new-428555
Personally, looking at NBC/Comcast's history, it is all about the money. They have that corporate attitude that any "body" is good enough if they save the company money. Ed Schultz made a cool million his first year on MSNBC and Chris Hayes has only had a cable show for 8 months. How much money do you think this switch saved the network?
Sam
= new reply since forum marked as read
whose ever idea that was should be fired.
