Category Archives: MSNBC

Melissa Harris-Perry Responds To Criticism On Hayes: What Is It About My Ad That Would ‘Distress People So Much?’

Mediaite

MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry sat down with her colleague Chris Hayes tonight on All In to respond to the controversy over her promo for the network, in which she says that children should be the responsibility of communities. Harris-Perry found it particularly interesting that of all the hours and hours of content aired on MSNBC, this in particular would “distress people so much.”

RELATED: Mark Levin Rants Against ‘Blithering Idiot’ Harris-Perry For Her MSNBC Ad ‘Straight Out Of Communist Manifesto’

Hayes opened the segment saying that the only reason this has been getting a lot of play on Fox News is due to a dearth of big news. He admitted this blew up “for reasons I genuinely don’t understand,” and ran just a portion of the huge coverage Fox News has given to the controversy, leading Hayes to call Harris-Perry’s ad “the most successful promo in the history of MSNBC.”

Harris-Perry admitted “it’s not fun” to go through this, but accepted it as “the nature of public life” to get such heavy criticism. But she found it more interesting that this particular ad, of all things, is getting such play in the conservative media sphere.

“Why this? Like this, of the various spots that all of us have done, they many hours of television I’ve produced on the show, what is it about this that raises the ire?… [I'm] trying to figure out what it is about those statements that distress people so much.”

Mediaite took note of the ad early on, with a highly critical column by Garrett Quinn, followed by a mix of continued criticism and also support, especially this column by Matt Wilstein defending Harris-Perry

Harris-Perry will be addressing the controversy more in full on her MSNBC show tomorrow morning.

Watch the video courtesy of MSNBC.

1 Comment

Filed under Melissa Harris-Perry, MSNBC, MSNBC Hosts

There Is Nothing Controversial About Melissa Harris-Perry’s MSNBC Promo

You may have heard that the right-wing hysteria machine is at screaming level over an MSNBC thirty second promo.  I cannot believe the reaction she’s receiving from the paranoid right.

If you get a chance check out the comments on Mediaite.  Here’s just one example:

Esteban Rey  Ima Winnah • 31 minutes ago

I thought white conservative southerners used to like it when black women raised their kids for them.

Ima Winnah  Esteban Rey • 15 minutes ago

Mammy obviously doesn’t know her role.

(D-Ed. note:) Ms. Perry is a Professor of Political Science at Tulane University.

Mediaite

Everything that Melissa Harris-Perry says in her latest “Lean Forward” promo for MSNBC is completely reasonable. And no, that last sentence was not sarcastic.

Since the “controversial” promo first appeared this past weekend, conservatives have been apoplectic over its content. Glenn Beck called the ad “almost a parody.” Fox News’ Eric Bolling said she “declared war on the American fabric.” And, Sarah Palin was so angry she had to invent a completely new word: “unflippingbelievable.”

Those three and others across the internet and on TV are utterly outraged that Harris-Perry would suggest that America should take a more “collective” approach to child-rearing. They can’t believe she dared to tell them that their children, don’t just “belong” to them, but also are part of a larger community. It’s those two words–”collective” and “belong”–that are at the root of conservatives’ outrage, and also their major misunderstanding.

Starting with “collective,” Harris-Perry says “We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children.” As Bob Beckel pointed out on The Five today, that word is often associated with socialism. As in, everyone works together for the collective good and shares the wealth. That’s fundamentally not what Harris-Perry is talking about here. As Beckel said, it may not have been the best choice of words for her to use, but she is simply using the word “collective” to describe the way members of a community help each other, while clearly maintaining their own, capitalistic identities.

The issue with the second word, “belong,” I believe hinges on two distinct definitions that often get conflated and confused. Someone or something can “belong” to another person in terms of being their property. Or they can “belong” to an organization in terms of being a member. This issue arose during the Democratic National Convention last September when another promotional video featured the phrase “the government is the only thing we all belong to.”

Mitt Romney‘s campaign attempted to turn that innocuous line into the second coming of “you didn’t build that” by proudly declaring in response “We don’t belong to government, the government belongs to us.” Just as Romney seemed to miss the fact that the word “belong” can have two meanings, critics of Harris-Perry do not realize that while a child can be the “property” of their parents, they are a “member” of the community. These are two very different notions that Harris-Perry to tying together using the word “belong” for rhetorical effect.

Obviously, there is something about Harris-Perry and the words that came out of her mouth that have conservatives enraged. But when you break it down, all she was saying is that by attending school every day, and living in the world, children are members of a larger community than just their nuclear families. In no way is she suggesting that the government owns your children and should have the right to take them away or make any other major decisions about how they are raised.

On her MSNBC blog today, Harris-Perry “doubled-down” on her comments, writing, “One thing is for sure: I have no intention of apologizing for saying that our children, all of our children, are part of more than our households, they are part of our communities and deserve to have the care, attention, resources, respect and opportunities of those communities.” When she puts it like that, it doesn’t sound so crazy, does it?

Current TV shows the commercial (partially) and analyzes the right-wing “shock and anger” response:

6 Comments

Filed under GOP Whine, Melissa Harris-Perry, MSNBC

Phil Donahue on His 2003 Firing from MSNBC, When Liberal Network Couldn’t Tolerate Antiwar Voices

Democracy Now

In 2003, the legendary television host Phil Donahue was fired from his prime-time MSNBC talk show during the run-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The problem was not Donahue’s ratings, but rather his views: An internal MSNBC memo warned Donahue was a “difficult public face for NBC in a time of war,” providing “a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.” Donahue joins us to look back on his firing 10 years later. “They were terrified of the antiwar voice,” Donahue says.

 

1 Comment

Filed under MSNBC, Phil Donahue

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes to replace Ed Schultz

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes

Personally, I’m quite pleased with MSNBC’s programming decision…

Politico

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes has been tapped to replace outgoing host Ed Schultz in the 8 p.m. weeknight slot, according to network sources.

In just a year and a half, Hayes has generated a cult following as host of the weekend program “Up with Chris Hayes,” which takes a progressive policy wonk’s approach to the news. He will now host a show directly ahead of his mentor Rachel Maddow, MSNBC’s marquee name, and, at age 34, will be the youngest primetime host in cable news television.

The move, first reported by Brian Stelter of the New York Times, was confirmed by sources for POLITICO. MSNBC is expected to make a formal announcement later today, and would not reply to a request for comment.

Schultz announced on Wednesday night hat he would be ending his weeknight program and moving to a two-hour slot on Saturday and Sunday evenings. Schultz, a talk radio personality, has served as an MSNBC primetime host since 2009, and became best-known as an advocate for unions, labor and the middle class. His new show will air on weekend nights from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. — a relative no-man’s land for cable news programming.

Like former MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan, Schultz suggested that the move was his choice and that he wanted “to get out with the people and tell their stories.” Sources at MSNBC told POLITICO that Schultz was more likely pushed out to make way for new — and younger — talent. By tapping Hayes, MSNBC is continuing its push to bring cable news to a younger demographic.

Hayes has long been seen as a primetime host-in-waiting at MSNBC, given his rapid success, though in Nov. 2012 he told POLITICO he’d be “reluctant” to give up the freedom and autonomy that comes with hosting a two-hour weekend show.

Hayes’ replacement on Saturday and Sunday mornings has yet to be named. Sources had long speculated that Ezra Klein might get Schultz’s primetime spot, so it is conceivable that he could take over on weekend mornings.

UPDATE (10:00 a.m.): And now it’s official.

1 Comment

Filed under Ed Schultz, MSNBC

House Intel Chair on White House drone policy: “There is oversight”

I saw this very insightful report on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell yesterday.  Yet somehow, because it removes the sensationalism and hysteria found in most recent news reports, the information given in to Ms. Mitchell is grossly under reported.

Justice Departments Memo Describing Legal Case for Drone Strikes on Americans

Mike Rogers Interview on Andrea Mitchell: Video

TPM Livewire

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday that “there is oversight” on the Obama administration’s drone strikes against U.S. citizens who are believed to be senior al-Qaeda leaders.

“I review all of the air strikes that we use under this title of the law,” he told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. Rogers added that Americans who decide to join al-Qaeda become enemies of the U.S. “If you have someone who has joined this organization, and they may not be engaged in plot a today, but part of an organization plotting to kill Americans, and so they’ve joined the enemy. So you don’t just kill the enemy when they’re at the gate.”

Rogers insisted there is not a long list of Americans on any “kill list.” “I can candidly tell you that,” he said.

4 Comments

Filed under Drone Strikes, MSNBC, Sen. Mike Rogers

MSNBC: Senator Kerry’s most important Senate appearance was in 1971

MSNBC – The Last Word

The next chapter in Sen. John Kerry’s story began Thursday during his confirmation hearings for his nomination to be Secretary of State. MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell took a look back at John Kerry’s place in history when he testified on Capitol Hill before a panel nearly 40 years ago as a Vietnam War veteran and protester.

In his opening statement on Thursday, Kerry reminded himself of his own journey that began in 1971 when he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971 and spoke about his  experience in war and as the leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

“Nearly 42 years ago, Chairman Fulbright first gave me the opportunity to testify before this committee during a difficult and divided time for our country,” Kerry said. “Today I can’t help but recognize that the world itself then was in many ways simpler, divided as it was along bi-polar, Cold War antagonism. Today’s world is more complicated than anything we have experienced.”

Speaking to the complex challenges the country is now facing, Kerry remained humble about the first time he set foot on Capitol Hill. “I’ll tell you, Mr. Chairman, when I first came to Washington to testify it was as a member of group who came to have their voices heard. That is what this place is all about.” Kerry was a former navy lieutenant in Vietnam, was wounded three times and awarded the silver star for heroism.

His well-received testimony received a standing ovation from peace demonstrators in the gallery; his speech also resonated with President Richard Nixon who ended the draft a year later.

O’Donnell praised Kerry as the ultimate war hero, saving countless of lives with his powerful testimony against the war.

“More than 2,000 Americans were killed in Vietnam after John Kerry’s testimony. That number was going to be higher, much higher. 5,000? 10,000? We’ll never know, but it was going to be higher if John Kerry hadn’t become the most “extremely effective” war protester in American history. The only war protester who the war President, Richard Nixon, thought was, in his words, ‘extremely effective.’”

O’Donnell thanked Kerry for his most valuable contribution to the country and the world.

There are men who are alive today in this country thanks to John Kerry. I have brothers who I believe are alive today, thanks to John Kerry. Some of you have brothers, fathers, uncles, who are alive today because of John Kerry. John Kerry didn’t play it safe when he testified against the war. He personally attacked by name President Johnson’s Defense Secretary–along with the other Democrats in the Johnson Administration who were the architects of that war… the so-called best and the brightest who failed the country and the world so miserably. On April 22, 1971, at the age of 27, John Kerry assured his position in American history, and that position is war hero…the most valuable kind of war hero, the hero who helps end the war.”

2 Comments

Filed under MSNBC, Sen. John F. Kerry

Rise of the Left: Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnnell Beat Fox for an Entire Week

Apparently some of the more sane viewers of Fox News realize that they are indeed a Conservative Entertainment Complex

PoliticusUSA

Changing demographics aren’t just winning elections, they are also reshaping cable news. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell beat their Fox News competition every day last week in the key 25-54 demo.

According to TVNewser, “For the week of November 12-16, Maddow’s 9 p.m. program averaged 480,000 A25-54 viewers, while “Hannity” had 439,000. In the 10 p.m. timeslot, “The Last Word” averaged 396,000 viewers in the demo, and “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” had 362,000.” Thanks to Bill O’Reilly, Fox News edged MSNBC in total prime time 25-54, 454,000-420,000. Partially due to the fact that they are available in more homes, Fox News still dominates in total viewers, but the fact that younger viewers are powering MSNBC is a definite threat to the Fox News empire.

Fox News has the oldest audience in television.  The average Fox News viewer is 65 years old.  In 2010 the average MSNBC viewer was 59, but they are the top cable news network with both African Americans and younger viewers.

One of the trends that has not been discussed is the fact that the audience fueling MSNBC’s rise shares many characteristics in common with the coalition that turned out to the polls to reelect Barack Obama.   A new report from the Pew Center Project for Excellence in Journalism found that MSNBC and Fox News tilted their coverage in opposite directions during the final week of the presidential campaign, “In the final week of the campaign, both Fox News and MSNBC became even more extreme in how they differed from the rest of the press in coverage of the two candidates. On Fox News, the amount of negative coverage of Obama increased-from 47% in the first four weeks of October to 56% the final week. Meanwhile, positive discussion of Romney grew, from 34% of segments to 42%. On MSNBC, the positive coverage of Obama increased from 33% during most of October to 51% during the last week, while Romney’s negative coverage increased from 57% to 68%.”

It isn’t a coincidence that as MSNBC’s ratings have increased in direct relationship to their positive coverage of Obama. Fox News viewers will be comforted by the fact that they still lead by a large margin in total viewership, but MSNBC is gaining on them. The aging of the population will continue to benefit Fox News in the short term, but the demographic shift that tilted the 2012 election to the Democrats is also impacting cable news.

MSNBC is building a coalition that can win a demo today, and could challenge Fox News for cable news supremacy tomorrow. MSNBC is on the rise. If the 2012 election does translate into a leftward shift, Fox News’ days of ratings supremacy may be numbered.

2 Comments

Filed under MSNBC

Romney’s 47% Fiasco Fuels MSNBC Ratings Rout For Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow

I watch Rachel Maddow every day.  In fact I wouldn’t miss her show for all the tea in China!  So this is great news.  Rachel is not a gossip mongerer nor does she embellish the news to fit her or her company’s agenda.   She’s a natural born teacher of sorts and explains the news that she reports clearly and concisely.

This is no surprise when we all know if the news about Romney doesn’t fit their agenda, Fox News will embellish it or not report it at all.  People want facts, not propaganda.

The Daily Kos

Just like when the party conventions concluded and the DNC’s superior production boosted the audience for MSNBC’s primetime programming, the release of the crippling video of Mitt Romney dismissing half the nation as moochers  is having a positive effect on MSNBC as well.

On Monday, Rachel Maddow crushed Sean Hannity scoring 32% more viewers in the key advertiser demo of adults 25-54. Also, Chris Matthews’ Hardball beat Shepard Smith and Lawrence O’Donnell topped Greta Van Susteren.

Last night (Tuesday), Rachel again rolled over Hannity by an even larger margin (37%).  And O’Donnell continued his dominance of Van Susteren.  On both nights MSNBC took the total primetime time period from Fox News. These wins are significant in that they don’t occur very often.  What’s more, they are routing Fox’s perennial winners without any special programming along the lines of a convention or debate.  This is strictly news driven.

However, even more noteworthy is that Maddow’s demo numbers on Tuesday were the highest in all of the cable news primetime schedule.  She even bested Bill O’Reilly by 3% despite the fact that O’Reilly’s guest was Jon Stewart who ought to have drawn in the younger viewers that ordinarily shun O’Reilly. With his devoted older-skewing viewers, plus the kids from Stewart’s heavily promoted guest appearance, O’Reilly should have run away with the night.

Maddow’s decisive victory suggests that there is something brewing in the cable news game. Viewers are responding to the editorial content of MSNBC and its most dynamic presenters. It’s still way too soon to make definitive statements or projections, but the gathering trends are promising.

Now all MSNBC has to do is capitalize on the new attention they are receiving and bring in new talent. Ed Schultz, who has not been contributing to this upswing, may be due for a makeover or a co-host. And there’s no need to repeat Hardball in the early evening when a new show could could broaden the audience. My long-shot pick: I’d give former Rep. Anthony Weiner a shot. If Eliot Spitzer can get a show on Current, Weiner should have a second chance too. He’s smart, experienced, and entertaining. And the publicity would help bring in a curious audience.

3 Comments

Filed under MSNBC, Rachel Maddow

Why MSNBC Dumped Pat Buchanan: His 10 Most Outrageous Statements

Think Progress

Yesterday, Pat Buchanan announced that his tenure as a commentator at MSNBC was finally over, ending months of speculation about his absence from his once-frequent perch aside morning anchors Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski.

Calls for Buchanan’s firing by groups like Color of ChangeCredo, and Media Matters had been loud and growing, following years of controversial, offensive and outright bigoted statements made by Buchanan without apology or remorse. Here is a look back at 10 of the most offensive and outrageous statements made by Pat Buchanan:

1. Wanted to close the borders to protect white dominance. As he wrote in his 2006 book State of Emergency: “If we do not get control of our borders, by 2050 Americans of European descent will be a minority in the nation their ancestors created and built.”

2. Blamed lower test scores on minorities. In his most recent book Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?, he blames minorities for dragging down the country’s test scores. “[T]he decline in academic test scores here at home and in international competition is likely to continue, as more and more of the children taking those tests will be African-American and Hispanic.

3. Claimed Jerry Sandusky’s atrocities are because of “Homosexual marriage.”Buchanan appeared on a right-wing radio show on November 15 to make some convoluted comparisons: “Let’s take this Penn State thing…these horrors, there’s an organization that marches in the gay pride parade in New York called—used to—called the North American Man Boy Love Association, which advocated voluntary sex along the lines of exactly what was going on at Penn State. Many of our political icons have marched in that parade right behind that NAMBLA float […] This is now, homosexual marriage is now the civil rights cause of the decade.”

4. Said the Jewish population in the United States dropped in the 90s because Jews aborted all their babies. Buchanan explains that the decline in the American Jewish population during the 1990s (a decline that a Brandeis studysays never occurred), “is a result of the collective decision of Jews themselves. From Betty Friedan to Gloria Steinem in the 1970s to Ruth Bader Ginsburg today, Jewish women have led the battle for abortion rights. The community followed.”

5. Asserted Anders Breivik, who murdered 77 people including 69 teens in Norway, “may have been right.” Buchanan called Breivik a coward, evil, and cold-blooded, and then proceeded to defend his twisted rationale for the killings: “As for a climactic conflict between a once-Christian West and an Islamic world that is growing in numbers and advancing inexorably into Europe for the third time in 14 centuries, on this one, Breivik may be right.”

6. Claimed that all great nations punish the gays. In a Human Events column, Buchanan attacked California’s 9th Circuit Judge Vaughn Walker after his ruling of Proposition 8 as unconstitutional as a “judicial tyrant,” before going on to explain that “through history, all the great religions have condemned homosexuality and all the great nations have proscribed or punished it. None ever placed homosexual liaisons on the same plane as traditional marriage, which is the bedrock institution of any healthy society.

7. Penned “The Affirmative Action Nobel.” That’s the title of Buchanan’s October 13, 2009 column on Townhall.com in which he claims that President Obama’s Nobel Prize was simply the result of affirmative action. And the column only got worse from there: “They have reinforced the impression that Obama is someone who is forever being given prizes — Ivy League scholarships, law review editorships, prime-time speaking slots at national conventions — he did not earn.”

8. Argued that Poland and the United Kingdom had it coming in World War II.Buchanan seems to suggest in a 2009 column that World War II—and all the atrocities that accompanied it—was really the fault of Poland and Britain, for refusing to engage in diplomacy with Germany. “Why did Warsaw not negotiate with Berlin, which was hinting at an offer of compensatory territory in Slovakia? Because the Poles had a war guarantee from Britain that, should Germany attack, Britainand her empire would come to Poland’s rescue.”

9. Dabbled in Holocaust denial. Pat Buchanan danced alarmingly close to denying key facts of the Holocaust. In a 1990 column for the New York Post, he defended convicted Nazi war criminal Ivan Demjanjuk (whom he latercompared to Jesus Christ) against charges from Holocaust survivors that he was guilty of murder by accusing the survivors of misremembering all of it: “This so-called ‘Holocaust Survivor Syndrome’ involves ‘group fantasies of martyrdom and heroics.’ Reportedly, half of the 20,000 survivor testimonies in Yad Vashem memorial in Jerusalem are considered ‘unreliable,’ not to be used in trials[…]The problem is: Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody.”

10. Argued Hitler was an individual of “great courage.” That’s just one of the quotes that the Anti-Defamation League attributes to Buchanan in theircompendium of offensive remarks from Buchanan over the years. In 1977, he qualified his labeling of Hitler as racist and anti-semitic by adding that “he was also an individual of great courage, a soldier’s soldier in the Great War, a leader steeped in the history of Europe, who possessed oratorical powers that could awe even those who despised him[…]His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path.”

With views like this, Buchanan would probably be a nice, cozy fit for Fox News.

2 Comments

Filed under MSNBC, Pat Buchanan

Andrea Mitchell To Komen Chief: I’m Expressing ‘Anger’ Of Many People (VIDEO)

The Huffington Post

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell had some tough words for Susan G. Komen chief Nancy Brinker about the growing firestorm over Planned Parenthood.

Mitchell and Brinker were discussing the controversy that has erupted around Susan G. Komen’s recent decision to end its funding to Planned Parenthood. The funding supported Planned Parenthood’s ability to provide breast cancer screenings for its patients.

Shortly after the interview started, Mitchell disclosed her connection to breast cancer and the Susan G. Komen Foundation. “Let me just put out there first of all, I have have been identified, an outspoken supporter and participant in the races over the years long before I, myself, ended up being diagnosed with breast cancer.” Mitchell announced that she was diagnosed with breast cancer in September 2011.

Mitchell added that she and Brinker have known each other a long time through Brinker’s role at the foundation and her time as a diplomat at the State Department. “But I come to you today, you know, expressing the anger of a lot of people,” Mitchell said. “Channeling through them, you see it on Twitter, you see it everywhere.”

2 Comments

Filed under MSNBC, Susan G. Komen Foundation