On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 4:44 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don’t disagree with what you say here for the most part. There are > meaningful differences in credibility and substance of the news analysis > offered by people like Hannity and Reid, on the one hand, and Maddow on the > other, but even the best of these are not news providers, and I get my news > from other sources. >
I believe the intent behind the opinions offered by FoxNews personalities vastly differs from the intent behind the opinions of MSNBC personalities, and I would find myself agreeing with MSNBC personalities much more than FoxNews, but if you were to look at rundowns or outlines of their respective shows, structurally they are nearly identical. And structurally, they are not formatted as news-centered programs. If they were, there would be room for debate, but there would be no disagreement about what constitutes a fact. > But that has nothing to do with Reid’s problems this week, or her > performance this morning. The argument was not that the alleged homophobic > statements were inappropriate for a journalist, rather that they were > inappropriate for any on air personality, and more specifically, > inappropriate for a Liberal ( or Progressive). Conservatives cared about > this so they could make a hypocrisy critique. Reid was not fighting for her > journalistic credentials, she was fighting for her Liberal credentials. > That’s an intersecting take on the situation. I’ve seen data (I know 538.com compiled numbers back when I could still stomach visiting the site) that African Americans in general were slower to accept/recognize the LGBT community than Americans from other racial backgrounds. When Reid’s blog post scandal started gaining traction a few weeks ago (last month?), I suppose that (rightly or wrongly) is partly what I attributed it to. It still made her uncomfortable back then. I’ve done battle online with homophobes before (I still have a Grammy-nominated stalker/troll who insists I was part of a global conspiracy against her financed by a combination of “professional homosexuals” and Google). Reid’s blog posts are inappropriate by today’s standard, and I’d have found them rude ten years ago, but they lack the venom of the homophobes I’ve encountered. She paints a picture of gays being not normal, which I’m sure is hurtful to gays, but she falls short of saying they were evil or should be kicked out or anything like that. Her posts seem to be in keeping with the Drudge or Perez Hilton level of “infotainment” gossip of that era. The “humor” (those are sarcastic air quotes) she seems to be attempting to mine has more to do with the hypocrisy of outspoken anti-gay celebrities and politicians who were allegedly gay. Other posts make mention of her opposition to gay marriage and her contention that most people find it gross to see two men kissing. This is akin to showing old video of then First Lady Hillary Clinton saying the same thing. The Democratic Party giving gay people mainstream recognition (i.e. equating gay civil rights with the civil rights of ethnic minorities) really only started as the Clintons were leaving the White House. I suspect many if not most progressives in 2008 would not have blinked at what Reid wrote, or thought twice about them. That’s not me defending or excusing them, but gay equality is still a radical concept for many even now, a decade after these blog posts were written. If Reid’s liberal credentials are the issue based on her words a decade ago, then so are Mrs. Clinton’s. > On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:20 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I suspect the show was also a pantomime of journalism. Joy Reid was one >> of the liberals I blocked on social media this year. I agreed with her more >> than I disagreed with her, but she wasn’t contributing substance to news, >> just her opinions. And her opinions contributed to the negativity on social >> media and offered nothing constructive. >> >> Look, obviously every human being has his or her own opinions and biases, >> but the problem is that we now live in an era where supposed newscasts are >> slanted towards the opinions and biases of the hosts. It isn’t “Here’s >> what’s happening today...” it is, “Here’s what I think about what’s >> happening today...” It would be like a national newspaper only printing an >> op-ed section. >> >> I’m not saying journalists can’t hold strong opinions, but journalists >> today base their respective careers not on reporting the news, but on their >> perspective on the news. People don’t watch Maddow or Hannity to be >> informed; they watch to hear the host’s snarky take on the events of the >> day. And personally I have no problem with that, but I have a problem with >> calling that journalism or a newscast. And I have a problem with those >> types of shows televised on what purports to be a news network. If FoxNews >> was called FoxOpinion I would literally not care about what the hosts say >> or believe. If MSNBC didn’t claim to report the news, then Rachel and Joy >> could bloviate until the cows came home. But the news networks and their >> journalist hosts make their programming about the hosts, and that just >> opens them up to the sorts of scandals like this one about prior opinions >> not fitting their current narrative. >> >> So we have Joy Reid having to apologize for opinions she never should >> have made public if she was a true journalist. And we have Hannity exposed >> as a client of Cohen having to backpeddle from his opinions about Cohen >> that he never should have uttered if he was a true journalist. I know there >> are people on this list who dislike when the claim is made that MSNBC and >> FoxNews are two sides of the same coin, but in terms of the sort of content >> they produce and the emphasis on opinion over fact, it is heads and tails. >> >> There is a way to cover breaking news in a nonpartisan way without it >> being boring. There is a way to cover breaking news using experts and >> firsthand witnesses as opposed to pundits and talking points spokespeople. >> There is a way to debate ideas and opinions within the framework of >> reporting the news. And there is a time and place for news anchors and >> reporters to express their own opinions. But it takes more effort and more >> money and requires a different skillset that those holding the jobs now do >> not possess. >> >> Joy Reid should not be on MSNBC, not because she posted stupid opinions >> on her blog a decade ago, and not because her opinions have changed now, >> but because the focus of Joy Reid’s show is Joy Reid, and that should not >> be the focus of any news broadcast on a news network. The fact we know >> Reid’s opinions have evolved in ten years proves she is a decent human >> being, but it also proves she is a piss-poor journalist. >> >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 2:41 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> I watched her show this morning, and it made me uncomfortable. It was a >>> pantomime of honesty. She said her expert could not prove she was hacked, >>> but the truth is she initially claimed her expert had proven she was >>> hacked, and other experts poked holes in that conclusion (she did not >>> acknowledge or address this). She invited a bunch of LGBT advocates on the >>> panel to challenge and grill her, but none did, and were clearly all chosen >>> because they were on her side (it is not hard to find LGBT advocates who >>> have not been on her side, so that was not random). Nobody even pushed a >>> little bit on the wired “I can’t believe I wrote that “ position she landed >>> on. >>> >>> even fucking Howie Kurtz, who we were just discussing recently, had the >>> dood sense to have an independent host take over his show when the subject >>> was his own poor handling of an LGBT related issue. Reid would have been >>> much better served to get someone from the community who writes for The >>> Daily Beast (where Reid writes too, and which has been pretty suspicious of >>> her story) and get a medium- well scorching. The pity is it would have >>> been relatively easy for her to just say something like: >>> >>> “I don’t remember writing these horrible things, but I can’t say I >>> didn’t, and that’s the problem. Whether I wrote them or not they are >>> consistent with the my beliefs and attitudes at the time. A decade ago I >>> was a liberal artist who grew up in a conservative African -American church >>> and family, and I was homophobic. I have changed a lot in those ten years, >>> and have seen that my vies about LGBT people then were as reprehensible as >>> those of the worst racists towards Black people. I was too slow to learn, >>> and I continue to need to learn more, but I am committed to doing whatever >>> I can every day for the rest of my life to fight for justice for all.” >>> >>> If she said something like that the issue melts away for all but the Fox >>> News crowd. >>> >>> >>> https://www.thedailybeast.com/joy-reid-apologizes-for-homophobic-posts-she-doesnt-remember-writing?ref=scroll >>> >>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 9:31 AM Steve Timko <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> MSNBC's Joy Reid apologizes for 'hurtful' comments >>>> >>>> By MARK KENNEDY >>>> AP Entertainment Writer >>>> NEW YORK (AP) - MSNBC's Joy Reid, under fire for homophobic language in >>>> old blog posts, has apologized for any past comments that belittled or >>>> mocked the LGBTQ community and says she hasn't been able to verify her >>>> claim that her account was hacked. >>>> Reid opened her weekend show "AM Joy" on Saturday by acknowledging has >>>> said "dumb" and "hurtful" things in the past. "The person I am now is not >>>> the person I was then," she said. >>>> She's unable to explain blog posts from a decade ago that mocked gay >>>> people and individuals who were allegedly gay. >>>> Reid has denied posting them altogether but says a security expert who >>>> looked into whether she had been a hacking victim found no proof. She says >>>> he "had no idea where they came from." >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Steve Timko <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Joy Reid said she was hacked. Outrage from the LGBT community. >>>>> LINK >>>>> <https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/25/joy-reid-anti-gay-posts-550213> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- >> Kevin M. (RPCV) >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
