Rachel Maddow appreciation thread...

[rainlillie]

I'm so thankful that we have someone like Rachel on our side. She's awesome in every way. My daughter is in college now and she has been watching Rachel since she was nine... Rachel is one of her role models. Thank goodness she didn't fall for those fake documents; because we can't afford to have such a valuable warrior removed from the battlefield.

[Gothmog]

1. I really love and appreciate Rachel Maddow

[lamp_shade]

2. Nobody (repeat... nobody) explains things the way Rachel does. I love her. I trust her.

Kick this.

[skylucy]

3. ...

[OceanChick]

4. She's on a whole different level

When I can handle watching any news, I only watch her. I learn and get inspired and somehow feel less hopeless. Fight on, Rachel!

[SusanaMontana41]

5. What Rachel did was even MORE impressive

given that Comey said his actions toward Clinton a week before the election were based on fake documents.

[Duppers]

8. +100

[cilla4progress]

27. I'm sorry?

Hadn't heard this...or not recalling. Give me a prompt?

[SusanaMontana41]

34. Sure!

[link:https://www.democracynow.org/2017/5/25/headlines/washpost_comey_views_on_clinton_may_have_been_swayed_by_fake_russian_document|

[cilla4progress]

36. Thanks!

I never heard this...!

[SusanaMontana41]

38. Anytime, cilla4progress!

[Wounded Bear]

6. Another one?

Just kidding, Rachel is great.

[flibbitygiblets]

7. Love Rachel! Now if we can only find out WHO is shopping fake news!

Hmmm, who do you suppose would gain from that?

[leftieNanner]

28. My guess

is that it's either Bannon pointing a finger at Kushner or the other way around. This was a very clumsy and ham-handed thing. "Cut and Paste" isn't supposed to include scissors and scotch tape! These idiots in the White House are such amateurs. Heaven help us if they ever figure out how it's done!

Rachel keeps me sane.

[mercuryblues]

44. My guess is they have a short list.

of who sent it. This is the phase of the investigation where some info is revealed and watch the reactions. She mentioned the meta data on the doc. The one that was sent to her, would also have the meta data of the printer it went through.

[leftieNanner]

46. Very good info

Thanks. And won't it be delicious when this comes out. Soon, I hope.

[Squinch]

47. If she finds out who it is and it turns to be someone attached to Trump in any way, that will be

a real bombshell.

[Ilsa]

9. She's fantastic. She presents the facts. Doesn't get

pissy about them or with people she interviews. Never judgmental. She's the example of GREAT investigative reporting IMO.

[oasis]

10. Rachel's the best ever at what she does. Terrific research crew.

[FakeNoose]

12. Yes her crew deserves a round of applause

As SMART as she is, Rachel also knows she can't be everywhere so she relies on her really great STAFF.
And they have done so well on many levels.

They've made their show (and it really belongs to all of them) the #1 show of Cable news.

[irisblue]

11. .

And if she were not already involved, I would be asking her out.

[Cryptoad]

13. I luv Rachel!!!!

[Vinca]

14. It's the one show a day I never miss.

[Corvo Bianco]

15. I really like Rachel too

Last edited Fri Jul 7, 2017, 02:53 PM - Edit history (1)

But that whole fake document story was 100% bombast. Typos? Spacing problems? So you got an obviously fake tip, as all news agencies do (a fundamental part of the job is knowing what's real), and you spent a whole show telling us you did your job. And the praise keeps raining down.

Like I said I really like Rachel and I'm so glad she has the reach she does, because she seems to care about the truth. But all the adoration for this non-story story has me scared next time she'll do a full segment on how well she parallel parks and you'll all go gaga.

***EDIT: It is a real story. An important story. My complains ABOUT the story in post 41. Sorry everyone. Much love for Rachel.

[Corvo Bianco]

16. I realize this is an appreciation thread so maybe not the best place for my little gripe, sorry guys

But I do appreciate you Rachel!

[padah513]

21. Wow

She said that someone is trying to muddy the water on the entire Russian investigation by planting false info not just by sending it to her but to other news organizations and you think it's a non-story? Look what happened to those reporters at CNN. Trump's been talking about that ever since. If you don't care for Rachael that's cool, but this is an appreciation thread. You could always start your own and gripe.

[Towlie]

40. You responded to "I do appreciate you Rachel!" with "If you don't care for Rachel that's cool..."

Sorry to hear about your reading comprehension impairment.

[Corvo Bianco]

42. Haha thanks Towelie. I know I am striking a nerve and I don't intend to.

Post 41 is my follow-up. Shouldn't have referred to it as a "non-story".

[Hekate]

19. The entire point was that it was NOT "an obviously fake tip". Two CNN reporters got tripped up...

...and lost their jobs, quite recently. Dan Rather's broadcast career was dead and buried -- and no one in the news media would talk about Dubya's inglorious career in the TANG ever again. That's what's at risk if a journalist takes the bait: that the facts of the Trump/Russia story will not be told and the truth will not be believed.

Someone just tried to assassinate Rachel Maddow's credibility and career. She managed to dodge the bullet by being prepared, skeptical, and a damn good detective.

The documents were skillfully forged. That means there is a skillful forger, not some rank amateur. She's letting us know that there really is fake news out there, and that if you get ensnared, the stories that need to be told will be discredited. She's laying out a warning for her fellow journalists: be very careful.

Do you still think this is a non-story?

[padah513]

22. +1

You beat me to it. I got slow fingers.

[Corvo Bianco]

41. I appreciate the heads up to us and other outlets, we need to be aware.

I shouldn't have called it a non-story. It's crucial for the media and its audience to know fakers are out there and for all journalists to be on the highest alert. I think that the story also served its purpose--we're reminded of the lengths to which the administration's allies will go to make us question the truth. The segment was a great reminder that previously trusted media outlets and figures have been victims of these tactics in the past, and the environment today is prime for the same methods to have serious ramifications on the perceived integrity of Russian collusion reporting.

But the way this story was delivered struck me (and maybe only me!) as 50% misleading titillation.

I don't believe (I certainly hope not at least) that MSNBC was close to running with the forged NSA document. Cut and paste shadow lines... I work as a peon in the mortgage industry and I spot that regularly but I don't feel like I've done anything fancy for noticing someone did a cut and paste job. It's not Sherlock Holmes work.

So that's the source of my irritation--the apparent legitimacy of the document was (hopefully) contrived for a sexy story. If they WERE going to run with it I'm nervous, not encouraged. I don't believe that is the case, though. Surely MSNBC has a sophisticated system in place to verify documents, and this one would have been shot down very quickly. When I spot exaggerations/untruths being used for the sake of sensationalizing a story it mitigates my willingness to buy in.

For me the bug comes down to compromising reporting standards for the sake of hype. I find the use of wholly fabricated material to be ethically questionable (drumming up intrigue for five minutes using the fake content of a fake document is in poor taste--that's what gives fake news its legs). And I don't believe the forgery was actually convincing (if they were convinced, considering the the glaring giveaways, we should be scared not celebrating), but selling the document as convincing was necessary for intrigue.

If intrigue comes about naturally, by all means, I want to see it every day. Twenty minutes is a long time to hold primetime viewers for a history lesson and Rachel is the best at it, thank God she's part of our current Trump-Russia universe. But this intrigue, to me, was inauthentic. The document contains spelling and spacing errors, and if we can see the copy-paste shadows on the television, it wasn't skillfully forged. I like hard takes and I like pizazz but I don't appreciate false narratives.

If viewers are never critical of Rachel or Lawrence or Joy or any of our favorites, we become sponges and they become less accountable. In hopes that MSNBC is not run by incompetent folk, I must interpret the "skillfully forged" claim as a fabrication, not created maliciously but in order to pique and hold our interest. I'm critical of that and I'm glad. I'm glad she did the story, I'm just not thrilled with what I perceive as inauthentic intrigue.

[mercuryblues]

50. I don't think

RM hyped this up for her viewers so much as she hyped it up for the document sender. Her teasers were Bombshell to the investigation and specifically mentioning sendittoracheal as the source. Now imagine whoever sent that tuned in to view what they think is her journalistic demise only to find out she and her team researched it and found out it was a fake. She conned the conner.

[rzemanfl]

51. Exactly. She was hoping to trigger a premature gloat from the source (who probably was at G20

and asleep by then). I bet they had people monitoring the usual suspects.

[Corvo Bianco]

53. She did a pre-show tease of sendittorachel?

If so that is way cool to picture the chump getting owned on his couch 😄

[annabanana]

25. double check her timeline. . . . not a casual doc dump

[bettyellen]

29. You missed the part where it had to be some insider at the Intercept or the government itself that

Did it? It's pretty significant news.

[heaven05]

17. she is a positive media

force along with some others...Joy Reid, Lawrence O' Donnell immediately come to mind.

[byronius]

18. Best of the best.

[Hekate]

20. When she's good, she's very very good. Rachel must have been a helluva doctoral student...

Research, analysis, patience.

[onecent]

23. I watch her show every week nite, or tape it....I am glad she is on our side also!!!!

[Caliman73]

24. She is the best argument for intelligence, education, and critical thinking skills

I have to admit that I sometimes have gotten a bit annoyed when she "intros" her stories and it goes on for a long time, but she is simply one of the best commentators on information in the journalism industry today. She really has no rival in the area of explaining a situation, following it up, having integrity about getting the most accurate information possible out there, and generally following the rules of good journalism.

[MiddleClass]

31. Those intros encapsulate information to vast swath of voters

From the low information, to the wing nuts like us, that's why they're so long

[Caliman73]

33. True

I tend to be inpatient. Once I have captured the track of the story, I am usually saying, "Okay, what's next?" When she explains it from another perspective, I start to get irritated because I have already gotten the gist and want to move on to new substance. I suppose that would also be annoying to people who are not up to speed, or who take a little longer to process information.

[MiddleClass]

54. The reason I was able to explain it, I am the exact same way

Why is she over explaining the intro, why is she sidestepping and over explaining, come on, get to it.

When I analyze my impatience, I got an epiphany, not many lives and breathes this crap,

and if I knew nothing, after listing to a 20 minute comment, that statement would be false,

it's funny how that works, as a computer geek that became software engineer, Java programmer, web developer, network specialist, system analyst, A++ certified, I get knots in my stomach watching somebody do something on the computer, and trying to figure it out. I'm like just do this that the other thing, this change this in the registry, restart, done

[Caliman73]

55. The curse of knowledge ... ha ha.

[MiddleClass]

57. When I went to college. They asked me what discipline in computers

I said yes.

They didn't understand, I worked in the industry for 20 years, I wanted to be boss.

An addiction I tell you, cars, and then computers.

[MiddleClass]

26. Thank you Rachel,

Thank God Keith Olbermann had you on as a guest, back in 04 – 05 on the changeover from Air America

we have been blessed since, great team you have there.

[Samantha]

72. He was the one who really gave her her first break in broadcasting

I remember that show and the way she was dressed. She was dirt poor, but her intelligence certainly outshown everything else about her. None of the other participants gave her any encouragement; personally, I think they were afraid of her, knowing they could not compete.

Sam

[Snotcicles]

30. .

[AgadorSparticus]

32. she is brilliant! Love her!!!

[Towlie]

35. Here's my favorite quote from the Rolling Stone article:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/rachel-maddow-the-rolling-stone-interview-w487750#

----------------------------------------
... says her senior producer Laura Conaway, who has worked for Maddow since 2009. "The thing about this show is it starts with digesting an enormous amount of information every day, and then basically throwing it all out and saying, 'OK, that's what everybody already knows.'
----------------------------------------

And that's what I really love about TRMS — you can get a rundown of current events from any of the daytime and early evening MSNBC shows, or CNN, or the Washington Post, or NY Times, or other reliable sources on the Internet. But when Rachel comes on you can look forward to new information and analysis instead of just a repeat of what you already know.

[Paladin]

37. Big Rachel fan, here. (nt)

[MFM008]

39. Always appreciate

Her!

[hwmnbn]

43. K&R

[Justice]

45. Stellar every night.

[Betty88]

48. everyone should see her report from last night

It must of hit a cord first thing on my facebook this morning was some lame FAKE NEWS thing. The stupid is making me mad. And disappointed in some friends that are repubs. I have a friend, a truly good woman would do anything to help you, smart etc. but she still defends him, sad.

[Bradshaw3]

49. To anyone who thinks this story isn't important

I would suggest reading Bush Family Secrets.
The Bush family going back decades perfected techniques such as reverse psychology and planting false stories to try and manipulate and discredit the media. I was glad she brought up Dan Rather and that whole episode with Bush 43s military history. The book makes a good case that this was a deliberately planted false story, done explicitly to discredit reporters who were looking into the story - which, actually, had a lot of there there. But no one followed up after that in Sept. of 2004 and we know what happened in November.

These techniques can be very effective and have important consequences.

[Hieronymus]

52. Rachel deserves a Pulitzer for her investigations.

[Honeycombe8]

56. +1. nt

[Resist160]

58. I have been a fan of Rachel since her AARdays

Yes I am that old. I remember Rachel Maddow when she was Air America Radio. I have been in love with her ever since. And yes my husband of 43 years understands how I feel about her. LOL! My newest motto about Rachel, "I love her more today than yesterday." I can't believe she is going there with this investigation. She and her staff are unbelievable! Sometimes I am scared for Rachel and her staff.
But who ever under estimated her with the fake document? This lady and her staff do their homework. But someone out there did under estimate her and got bet at their won game. They thought she would run with that story like she did with Trump's taxes. Surprise! Surprise! she didn't. But this is coming directly from the White House. It has their finger prints all over it.
Thanks for letting me vent. Twitter only has 147 characters.

[DesertRat]

62. Welcome to DU!

[Rhiannon12866]

73. I first knew Rachel from her AAR days, as well.

I remember her first host appearance on MSNBC when she subbed for Keith Olbermann. She was nervous in the beginning, but then found her stride. We were watching together here on DU and cheering her on, LOL.

Welcome to DU, Resist160! It's great to have you with us!

[mucifer]

76. I remember her saying on the radio something like "They would never hire someone who

looks like me to host a national news show." She proved herself wrong.

[Rhiannon12866]

78. She really has warmed to being on TV, she really is just the best

She's smart and informed and explains even the most complicated issue so anyone can understand it. David Letterman used to call her "the smartest person in the world," LOL. She's come a long way since that first night when you could tell she was nervous. She's now #1 - and well deserved!

[Catmusicfan]

59. She is the Neil degrasse Tyson of news... explains everything and doesn't make you feel stupid.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

60. K n R for Rachel n/t

[defacto7]

63. She has a brain like a steel trap!

She's brilliant! I highly admire her courage.

[mdbl]

77. Couldn't have said it better!

[turbinetree]

64. I watched that segment and she saved a lot of journalist butts from that point forward

and her team will find out if the sexual predators team is behind this crap------------or whom and what is behind this crap..................
my bet, he's in the white house and he or she is the fake news


As Maddow says: "Watch this Space"

I always do Rachel, "I trust You" , and you deserve the Pulitzer

[onecaliberal]

65. :

[pnwest]

66. I trust her. I trust she has fully, completely and utterly vetted her information, I trust she tells

it as is sans embellishment, I love the way she can delve into a very confusing issue or topic or event, and crystalize the important points. I beleive she is as honest as the day is long. And only very occasionallly do I whisper at the TV, "ok, we get the wind-up, get to the point"...LOL. She is a national treasure.

[orangecrush]

67. K&R

[Daddyleg]

68. Love Rachel

What would we do without her

[BrooklynTech]

69. No Appreciation Here

It is my understanding that Ms. Maddow is doing excellent journalistic work, and I applaud her for her efforts.

But I will never forget her lack of journalistic integrity during the primaries, and I haven't tuned in to MSNBC since last Fall and I never will again.

[WinkyDink]

70. Always a learning moment. (P.S. Look to the Kremlin.)

[Upthevibe]

71. I also listened to her during Air America! She was wonderful then....

She is amazing!

[xeodtech]

74. Rachel is great but

just imagine how much better she could be if she wasn't hamstrung by her corporate billionaire masters...

[VOX]

75. Imagine where Democrats would be without her!

Last year, America was cyber-attacked by Russia, still a hostile power (and a known human-rights violator). It's a new kind of warfare, and it's incredibly effective. Look at what it gave us: #45, a right-wing SCOTUS, a nationalistic/nihilistic "government"; an erasure of most of President Obama's contributions, healthcare nightmares... absolute chaos.

RACHEL is one the few journalist who's steadily keeping up with and documenting the unfolding Russian-influence-hacking story. I know of no other prime-time, major-network individual doing such elaborate, detailed work on the most important story since possibly the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.

[Laf.La.Dem.]

79. Love Rachel!

[FailureToCommunicate]

80. She and her team are great...and we REALLY need great these days.

[flamingdem]

81. Thank the gods for Rachel

during these troubling times.