Michael Knowles Critiques MSNBC’s Messaging After Network Rebrand and Coverage of National Guard Killing

Staff Writer
2 minutes ago
3 min read

Top Points

Michael Knowles argued that MSNBC’s recent rebrand did not change its underlying messaging: He said the network updated its look and marketing, but its editorial tone and narrative approach remained the same.
Knowles criticized MSNBC’s coverage of the National Guard member’s killing: He claimed the network minimized the significance of the tragedy by shifting attention away from the suspect’s refugee background and avoiding discussion of policy implications.
He compared MSNBC’s reaction to the National Guard killing with its earlier coverage of Charlie Kirk’s death: Knowles argued that in both cases, the network softened or redirected coverage because the victims were conservative figures or represented issues the network was uncomfortable highlighting.

Full Report:

On a recent episode of The Michael Knowles Show, commentator Michael Knowles discussed MSNBC’s recent branding shift and argued that, despite cosmetic changes, the network’s messaging has remained largely the same. Knowles focused in particular on how MSNBC covered the killing of a National Guard member by an Afghan refugee and compared it to the network’s earlier treatment of Charlie Kirk’s death.

Knowles on MSNBC’s Rebranding Effort

Knowles began by noting MSNBC’s updated visual branding and marketing refresh. He said that while the rebrand gave the network a new aesthetic, it did not meaningfully alter its editorial perspective or approach to political stories. In his view, the network’s coverage of emotionally charged incidents continues to follow familiar patterns.

Knowles suggested that audiences should look past superficial stylistic changes and pay closer attention to tone, framing, and narrative choices that remain consistent despite the rebrand.

Coverage of the National Guard Killing

Knowles then turned to MSNBC’s reporting on the recent killing of a National Guard member in which an Afghan refugee has been charged. He argued that the network’s coverage minimized the significance of the incident by directing attention away from the suspect’s refugee background and focusing instead on broader social commentary.

Knowles summarized what he viewed as the network’s central message: that the public should avoid drawing conclusions about the refugee program or immigration policies because of a single crime. He acknowledged that MSNBC framed the killing as tragic but criticized what he saw as an effort to downplay policy implications or avoid discussing vetting procedures.

Knowles told his audience that this reaction revealed a reluctance to address larger challenges within the refugee system, even when a case draws national attention.

Comparison to Coverage of Charlie Kirk’s Death

Knowles then connected MSNBC’s response to the National Guard killing with what he described as a similar pattern during coverage of Charlie Kirk’s death the previous year. Kirk, a prominent conservative activist, was killed during a campus event, and Knowles argued that MSNBC’s coverage at the time likewise downplayed the seriousness of the situation.

He recapped how political commentators on the network framed the event in a way that, in his assessment, softened the gravity of the attack. According to Knowles, the tone suggested discomfort with acknowledging the magnitude of a tragedy involving a figure they disagreed with politically.

Knowles told listeners that, in his view, the two moments were connected by a shared media instinct: to shape the narrative of politically sensitive events in ways that align with the network’s audience expectations and ideological leanings.

Knowles’ Broader Media Critique

Throughout the segment, Knowles emphasized that what concerned him was not just MSNBC’s editorial stance, but what he described as selective emphasis. He argued that the network tends to shift focus or soften coverage when a story involves political actors or circumstances that challenge its preferred narratives.

Knowles said this is why the rebranding matters. While the exterior of the network appears refreshed, he claimed the underlying messaging remains unchanged, particularly when stories involve conservatives, immigration policy, or incidents with national security implications.

Conclusion

Knowles concluded his analysis by urging viewers to pay attention to how news stories are framed, not just how they are delivered. He argued that branding can change graphics, tone, or presentation, but it does not necessarily change editorial priorities.

He encouraged listeners to compare coverage across outlets and to evaluate which stories receive emphasis, which are minimized, and which are reframed entirely. For Knowles, the similarities he highlighted between MSNBC’s recent coverage and its past approach are a reminder that rebranding alone does not alter the deeper currents that shape media narratives.

References

“MSNBC Unveils Network Rebrand and Updated Visual Identity.” Variety, 2025, https://variety.com.
“National Guard Member Killed; Afghan Refugee Arrested.” Associated Press, 2025, https://apnews.com.
“Afghan Refugee Accused in Fatal Attack Entered U.S. Under Humanitarian Program.” CBS News, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com.
“MSNBC Faces Criticism for Framing of Charlie Kirk Killing.” The Hill, 2024, https://thehill.com.
“Media Coverage of Politically Sensitive Crimes Draws Debate.” Reuters, 2025, https://www.reuters.com.