It's not the biggest news of the day, but an interesting debate over why MSNBC's 6.m. host, Cenk Uygur, was ousted. OK, he didn't have boffo ratings, but he was also a blogger type who didn't always follow the code of the lame...I mean, mainstream media:
This isn't to say that every journalist working for a large media corporation engages in self-censorship. Some are able to construct real editorial independence, while others -- soul-less careerists and the like -- just don't have much of an inclination to be truly adversarial to the political and financial establishment. But as Uygur's stories make clear, MSNBC very much considers itself "part of the establishment" and demands that its on-air personalities reflect that status. With some exceptions, MSNBC largely fits comfortably in the standard, daily Republicans v. Democrats theatrical conflicts, usually from the perspective that the former is bad and the latter are good. It's liberal -- certainly more liberal than other establishment media outlets have been in the past -- but it's establishment liberalism, and that's allowed. It's wandering too far afield from that framework, being too hostile to the system of political and financial power itself, that is frowned upon.
One of the potential sins of Uygur, by the way, was being too hard on Obama, albeit from the left. Go figure.