Is the awarding of the Meritorious Service Medal being watered down due to lack of standardization across the services?

The Marine Corp has always been a Service of Pride and Integrity. The other Services are Honary but not like the Marine Corp. Everything is Special, that's why we say maybe you can be one of us!

Come on Gunny, a freaking financial desk jockey in the Air Force got a Bronze Star for doing their job - sitting at a desk - wtf?

Awards in general are handed out like candy now days.

One thing that I noted in my 21 years of service. Medals are given to folk that go beyond the call of duty. One of the requirements is that some one that has: The rank to put the person in for the medal and the writing skills to word it right. I saw a lot of folk that earned a medal but did not receive one. I also saw quite a few folk that did not earn a metal but go one.

Your point is well taken. Let take a history lesson. (I am going to speak mostly about the Army because that's what I am most familiar with.) First, the MSM was established in 1969 as an intermediate award between the Legion of Merit (then awarded almost exclusively to senior officers) and the Navy and Army Commendation Medals which were awarded to lower ranks. Each service, of course, has its own philosophy as to awards. In the case of the MSM around the year 2000, the Marines awarded them only to majors and above for officers and E-8s and E9s on the enlisted side. In the Army they were awarded to captains and above for officers and to outstanding E-6s but more usually to E-7s and above. Then 9-11 era started when combat deployments were more the norm than the exception. One of the flaws in the regulation is that the MSM, being a non-combat award, was in the regulation as a "peacetime" award and, therefore, could not be awarded for service "in theater". (The same was the case with the Army Achievement Medal.) The created the Bronze Star debacle which was that Bronze Star Medals can be awarded for either valor or meritorious service. The problem was this - who is going to get what decoration? To make matters worse, there were few options. A commander had, basically, three options to recognize service on a deployment - 1. Bronze Star Medal, 2. Army Commendation Medal (ARCM) or 3. nothing. So what happened? Basically - E-7s and above got mostly Bronze Stars and E-6s and below got mostly Army Commendation Medals. This, of course, created resentment among two groups - 1. Junior enlisteds who saw the BSM as a medal only for higher ranks and 2. combat veterans (ie. those outside the wire) who resented REMFs and Fobbits getting BSMs for doing desk jobs.
This went on for a few years until they decided to allow MSMs and AAMs to be awarded for in theater service. This helped the problem of the Bronze Star debacle by giving commanders a wider range of options in giving awards. So far so good. But then, it created the problem of who deserves an MSM. Some commanders decided to award MSMs to lower enlisteds because the awards of ARCMs and AAMs were so frequent they had lost their meaning. This, of course, created resentment for those who had to wait 10, 20 or more years to get an MSM - which is the source of your question.
I personally feel the MSM should only be awarded to outstanding E-6s, W-3s or O-3s or higher ranks. It should be kept exclusive if it is to be a prestigious award. As to the BSM - it should only be awarded for combat valor and not for meritorious service in a combat zone - as is the case with 98 percent of the BSM awards.
Has the MSM been cheapend? Probably, but the problem stems from a lack of consistent guidelines as to who should receive and for what.
Full disclosure - I received a BSM for a tour in Iraq where I had an office job. (To be honest, I worked by butt off.) I also received a retirement MSM after almost 36 years of service in the reserve components. I feel I earned both of them but would have also been very happy to get an MSM instead of the BSM if it were an option at the time.

I retired as a E6 but I have two MSM’s

During my time, I only saw it awarded to those members who were retiring, having served honorably.

The challenge is that it is the commander's program. In the Army I've seen different standards from one organization to the other. Sometimes too loose, and in others too tight.

If the Army within its subordinate commands they do things differently, I see an uphill battle to standarize across services

I get it, some folks fall through the cracks.

In my view what maters is, "are we rewarding those who should?"

Back in the day if you were enlisted, an MSM might come when you retired. An AFCM might come after a three year assignment and you were top notch excellent. This was before the Achivement
Metals that seem to be Dime a dozen now.

It seems that in a military where PC was made priority over combat readiness, all awards have been cheapened and given without merit.