Reporting MSNBC Rachel Maddow

[pdsimdars]

I have been watching Maddow for years and love her smart, thorough analysis of an issue.

Right in the beginning of the primaries, Bernie said that he will achieve his proposals because he will raise voter turnout. There was a article saying the Democratic turnout was low and Republican turnout was high. . .that was right after the first primary state, Iowa. Already trying to discredit him.

Rachel did at least 2 segments on different nights about Bernie's failure to raise turnout.
However, since that time, Bernie has won 3 states where those states said he broke the previous record for turnout. I think they were Kansas, Maine and Michigan.

When this started to happen I emailed Rachel and asked her if she was going to report that Bernie was actually starting to raise turnout. She has not.

With every state he broke the record for turnout, I emailed her asking her if she would correct this error. She has not.

Yesterday evening, she did a piece on voter turnout about how Trump was getting large turnout. I expected that this would be the time she would mention that Bernie has broken 3 records. But again, after saying that Trump had raised turnout for the Republicans, she said that Democratic turnout is still down.

What can be done? I mean, when even honest-to-a-fault Maddow refuses to give Bernie the credit he deserves. . . . that is shocking. Maybe others can try to email her about this . . . . . rachel at msnbc dot com

[Le Taz Hot]

1. Rachel's paycheck is dependent

upon Comcast -- a major contributor to the Clinton campaign. Rachel says, or doesn't say, whatever is ordered by her corporate masters. Emailing her is an exercise in futility.

[Wilms]

10. And her tax accountant has warned her about Sanders. n/t

[SCantiGOP]

42. Want to know why

to quote the OP: "she said that Democratic turnout is still down."?

According to a 3/8/16 analysis by the Pew Research Center Dem voter turnout this year is 11.7% compared to 19.5% in 2008.

The reason for Rachel being a part of the conspiracy to spread this information -- is because it is true and she is a reporter. Sorry, but the facts need to fit your outrage and narrative if you want to be taken seriously.

[Gwhittey]

60. she is a reporter but not a journalist

A journalist would tell it in context, that even tough we had record turn out in xyz states turn out is still low. Context is important.

Having a Headline "Man Eating Chicken found in deep south" Is true but is it Accurate?

[Ferd Berfel]

62. yep - and her paycheck trumps everything else

[musiclawyer]

65. Just turn it off. Really turn off cable news forever

Watch TYT , free speech tv , democracy now.
The faster cable news dies the better America becomes
Watching is the problem not the solution

[Le Taz Hot]

67. I don't watch it.

I finally got cable for the first time in years but only for the elections/debates. Other than that, I don't even turn it on. I get everything online.

[CentralMass]

2. She gets to fat of a paycheck to deviate from the talking points that her employer wants to sell.

[djean111]

3. Maybe the "honest-to-a-fault Maddow" has left the building.

What I have been noticing lately is the attitude that it is okay to lie, to twist, to omit, to misrepresent - if it is in service to getting Hillary elected.

I have never been able to watch Maddow. The drawn-out teaser stuff reminds me of the "Your water may be dangerous! News at 11!" and "Is a killer loose in YOUR neighborhood? We will tell you at 11!" crap. Her mannerisms and her portentousness over what is usually nothing make her unwatchable to me.

[GoneFishin]

29. Yeah. That women has left the building, the parking lot, and the city limits.

[Myrina]

30. Agreed. I stopped watching about 3 years ago.

Her style drove me up the wall. And not in a good way.

[Todays_Illusion]

57. She would make any liberal's head clank, she is libertarian, not liberal.

[dragonfly301]

4. I haven't watched MSNBC in over a year

but from what I'm reading on blogs, it appears that Rachel and Chris Hayes have sold out. You expect that kind of irresponsible slanted journalism from Tweety but it saddens me that Maddow and Hayes are doing it too.

[DefenseLawyer]

5. Olbermann, Schultz and Harris-Perry are unemployed

I think she's seen the writing on the wall and made her career choice.

[tokenlib]

21. Psst!..Ed is on RT doing the prime time news!! n/t

[DefenseLawyer]

23. No longer employed at MSNBC

Would have been a better way to put it. The point is the same.

[Dustlawyer]

41. Don't forget Cenk too!

[CincyDem]

6. I love me a whole lot of some Rachel, but...

...in spite be being one of, if not the top draw in MSNBC's commentator line-up, Rachel is still an employee. I think she's a brilliant student and analyst of political environments including the corporate political environment. I'm sure nobody has told her to bend her coverage one way or another and if they did, I'm sure she would react with integrity.

At the same time, she can easily look at the changes that Comcast has brought to MSNBC. She can easily read what those changes mean for the overall message track at MSNBC. And she can see how her message needs to fit into it.

I've watched her since the day she started at MSNBC and listened to her on Air America before that. I think she's great. At the same time, I think she's laser focused on retaining her voice in the fray...even if it's only 80-90-95% of the voice she might want because of her corporate sponsors.

[Kittycat]

31. I've listened since AA, as well.

A couple years ago, I tuned out of cable news. Life, time, preference in online reading vs opinion news. Recently checking back in to cable for election coverage.

And there was Rachel. I always liked her. Loved her show even. I can remember being so excited, I could barely contain it when she made the leap to cable. But here is where I'm going to disagree with you. While I'm sure that she was astute enough to see the writing on the wall, I think she either fell in line or sold out for either personal or professional gain.

After listening to her lately, she's lost all credibility in my eyes. She, above Schultz, Olbermann, all of them was the most fact based in her approach, imho. She shared her opinion, but presented the facts clearly. That Rachel is gone. All I could think was, Damn. I was one of her cheerleaders. Such a let down. Now she sits on the shelf of ethical has beens with Gov. Dean.

[CincyDem]

58. I agree with you. I probably wasn't clear.

I think she's bending to the corporate will. My point was that I'm not sure someone had to hit her on the head with a baseball bat to bend her but she has bent.

I'm not sure I go as far as calling her an ethical has been but I don't have her on the same pedestal she was on before.

[Kittycat]

63. Yeah

That's hard when we've followed her up the line.

[tularetom]

7. Why bother? She's gone over to the dark side

She's now part of the A-team she gets to rub elbows on a regular basis with Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Chuck Todd, and maybe even Tom Brokaw once in awhile. Pretty heady stuff and she isn't about to say anything to jeopardize that.

You may yearn for a return to the MSNBC of the Keith Olbermann days but that will never happen. It's Comcast all the way now and you know what that means.

[casperthegm]

8. So disappointing

I used to watch CNN but felt there was a bias there, particularly with the inclusion of the super delegates in the overall count. So I switched to MSNBC to give them a try, only to experience what the op has posted. What ever happened to simply reporting the news in a straightforward, unbiased manner? Is there no place to get the actual news any more?

[Skwmom]

9. Ms Selective Outrage only likes facts that support what she is trying to sell. n/t

[MgtPA]

11. White House Press Secretary in a Clinton Administration?

[Skwmom]

35. Well considering a press sec in the B. Clinton administration debated the meaning of genocide when

the mass killing was taking place in Rwanda, I'd say the ability to demonstrate selective outrage and only look at selective facts would be a plus.

[jehop61]

12. Anyone else

who is a progressive, but not in the tank for Bernie, left that Bernie-folks haven't thrown under the bus yet?

[pdsimdars]

17. typical of Hillary supporter (and GOP for that matter).. . avoid the issue and attack the messenger

[DrDan]

28. "issue" - this is an issue? a newshow anchor does not report things the way you would like

and it becomes an "issue"?

[Bubzer]

40. It's a very obvious an issue when bias is clear and pressent.

News is unbiased... anything presented as news with an intact bias, is not news...but propaganda.

[DrDan]

59. this was not something "presented as news with an intact bias", it was something

the OP thought should have been included but wasn't.

no bias. not an issue. just someone trying to make an issue out of literally nothing.

[azurnoir]

13. and this is why in part I don't pay much attention to pundits-everyones on someones payroll

[left-of-center2012]

14. Rachel sold out to the establishment

She gets giddy when talking about Hillary

[Pisces]

15. Numbers don't lie. She showed how many voted in 2008 and 2012 in comparison. We are down. What

more do you want. The Republicans are up.

[pdsimdars]

18. As said in the OP

in 3 states Bernie broke records. . . Yes numbers don't lie and I don't think those states lied about their numbers. Get it? Bernie broke the records in those 3 states, just like he said.

[Lucinda]

66. His number is NH for example were a record, but that was because it was only a two person race

so instead of splitting them between several candidates, as occurred in 08, it was basically split between BS and HRC, and a few to MOM. But the overall numbers this year were lower than in 08. I suspect the same thing applies to the other states you are talking about. Good numbers for a two person race, but not increased turnout.

[beaglelover]

16. Hillary has won more votes so far than Bernie. That is the truth. Plus she has won more pledged

delegates than Bernie. Hillary will be the D nominee in November. That is the truth.

[pdsimdars]

19. Keep believing sweetheart. Keep those dreams alive.

Oh, and get a big stockpile of chocolate to help you through.

[Uglystick]

45. And a huge investment to Kimberly-Clark

[beaglelover]

56. I will darling.

[Impedimentus]

24. "That is the truth." "That is the truth." Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself

Good luck with that one - didn't work for the Flat Earth Society.

[marions ghost]

37. that is the truth that is the truth that is the truth that is the truth

"the truth" of Hillary's inevitability is a bit more in question these days....

donut?

[malthaussen]

44. Mrs Clinton winning is a presumption.

It is not a truth. Conditionals can not be truths.

-- Mal

[ConsiderThis_2016]

52. She has won more votes...

Because of all the red states that voted for her.

[jillan]

20. Change the channel. The msnbc we used to like watching

No longer exists. Try CNN. Even Wolf Blitzer shows Bernie more respect than Maddow.

[SmittynMo]

27. Bingo

Tweety, Rachel, Hayes......

MSNBC is gone forever.

[latebloomer]

22. I've noticed that my lesbian friends are very fond of Hillary

and seem to be blind to her obvious failings, even when pointed out to them. Seems like they see her as a heroine. Could this be the reason for Rachel's support? Though I'm not discounting the sold-out-to-Comcast aspect.

[DrDan]

25. it's a conspiracy . . . obviously a well-planned conspiracy

[onecaliberal]

26. Don't count on someone to say something their paycheck depends on them not saying.

She's a sellout. She's a corporate propaganda spreading mouthpiece.

[noamnety]

32. A private email probably won't do anything.

Public shaming seems to be the only way to get results - IF a person or company is willing to change. Twitter, facebook, blog comments that are read by others might have more effect than a private email.

[Nitram]

33. Throw Maddow under the bus! She's just a shill for Clinton!

Didn't toe the Party line.

[islandmkl]

34. they are ALL ACTORS...and they have parts to play...

sometimes, just like a soap opera, their character gets a change of direction...

you want news?....go to Amy Goodman, among others...but don't look for news journalists on the M$M...

it is just entertainment...a sad excuse for entertainment....

[Loki]

36. Like I said before

I doubt that Edward R Murrow would pass the loyalty test of the BS followers.

[SoapBox]

38. She Shills for Hill.

I will never watch her again...she's a complete BIASED disappointment.

[abelenkpe]

39. MSNBC is owned by Comcast

You're never going to get anything except news that supports their corporate interests. Ditch cable. It's a ripoff anyway. And losing revenue is the only thing corporations understand v

[Dem2]

43. /r/conspiracy

[Duval]

46. It is sad the way MSNBC has changed since Comcast took over.

It used to be our source of good info, but not anymore. It is NOT news, but opinions/propaganda. Someone mentioned Amy Goodman. She's great, as is Thom Hartmann, Larry King and Ed Schultz.

[Nite Owl]

47. Rachel is a total sellout

used to watch her but quit MSNBC after the firings last year. The only time I watched was for the Dem debate they sponsored. She has totally changed, who knows if this is the real Rachel or the other one was the real one. All about the $$$$$$$$$ now.

[erlewyne]

48. Maddow has rode off in the sunset

with MSNBC and the DNC. She used to be my favorite
but I never expect to watch her again ... like MSNBC.
The DNC has to get rid of its DINO's and it has more than
a few.

[ConsiderThis_2016]

49. Comcast / NBC Universal / VOX... vs WAPO ect.

In praise of Lying Brian, her paycheck takes priority over the truth. Money tends to corrupt, remember? Just like Lobbyist Howard Dean and the Dollar.

[Fast Walker 52]

50. I am fucking done with her. Last night she spend a total of 10 seconds, no exaggeration, on Bernie's

Michigan win. The rest was all GOP, all the time. Fucking disgraceful.

[artislife]

51. I haven't had cable for at least 4 years so...

I don't watch any of them except forclips here and there. That being said, I remember early in 2008, she was kind of torn between Obama and Hillary. She said she had a lot of friends who were upset she wasn't coming down on this young upstart to hilary. I think she always liked her and now more than ever, it is her turn in her mind.

So in conclusion, I think she was always very fond of hillary and now she wants her to win.

[leveymg]

53. I'll stick with Amy Goodman from now on.

DemocracyNow! is a proven good thing. MSNBC was always just slick packaging.

Watch the latter, now and then, just to pick up on the latest meme and that they are still just operating with smoke and mirrors. Now just another CNN clone.

[OwlinAZ]

54. It is not just Maddow

It is MSNBC in general. It is not just MSNBC it is the cable news industry.
None of the cable news channels are anything but corporate shills.
Even Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC has lost his nerve and conscience.
Believe it or not, the old channels still give us some real news and I've gone back to watching them.

[madokie]

55. Rachel is in Hillary's corner

In case you hadn't noticed. I'm sure that has something to do with it.

[Duppers]

61. She's dead to me.

In this household, we're now watching cnn.

[houston16revival]

64. THE MSM Media wants one thing

Money

Close elections drive viewer interest and political advertising revenues

They will do anything to keep it close and in the political middle or middle right as we know

[Land Shark]

68. Worse yet, she reported the silver lining, or something like that, in MI was the turnout, best since

George Wallace right after being shot and the sympathy vote that followed. But no mention I heard of Sanders, his win in Michigan, or anything else. She found nothing in that historic upset win by Sanders except the bright spot of turnout.

Don't know that I've ever heard something as one-sided as her coverage. She should reaign, in protest if she is under pressure, or in shame if not. Fox is more "fair and balanced."