Rachel Maddow

So, Rachel Maddow has been named one of the debate moderators for one of the upcoming Democratic Presidential Debates, and Sean Hannity has gotten himself into a snit over it, according to an article published on TheHill.com:

The conservative commentator questioned how the “real reporters feel, if there are any left, being passed over for the job” for Maddow.

The problem is, Sean Hannity is acting as if what Rachel Maddow does on her show is anything like what Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, or Tucker Carlson do on their shows which appear on Fox News. Please allow me to point out the differences:

What Fox News political commentators do on their television programs:

The politically oriented shows which are currently featured on Fox News, hosted by people like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Laura Ingraham, have two purposes: 1) make Republicans look good and 2) make Democrats look bad. These Fox News luminaries do not care how many lying and misleading statements they must engage in to achieve their purposes. Fox News actually found out awhile back that the more their hosts lie, as long as the lies portray Democrats in a poor light or Republicans in a good light, the better their ratings get. Thus, they have no inclination whatsoever to make any attempt to be accurate. Being a Fox News political commentator requires just one thing: for the person to have no ethical center whatsoever.

What Rachel Maddow practices on her television programs:

Rachel Maddow’s show is essentially a primer in investigative journalism. Her staff researches every story thoroughly, to the point that they discover all kinds of interesting historical tidbits along the way, many of which she shares with her viewers. Rachel is obsessed with getting things as accurate as possible, which is why when a big story breaks in a newspaper, her first thought is often to have the journalist appear on her show so that she can ask questions about the story straight from the source. Ms. Maddow regularly has on a presidential historian on her show so that she can have an accurate historical perspective on events. In addition, Rachel and her staff spend more time reading court transcripts than just about anyone in America, and she often reads the transcripts on her show while posting the text on the screen, just to make sure it is accurate.

Rachel Maddow frequently has former U.S. Attorneys on her show just to make sure that she has interpreted laws correctly. Before introducing a given attorney, she frequently sums up her legal interpretation of events, and then immediately brings on the attorney in order to verify that what she is saying is true. I have never, in my entire life, seen anyone make such an effort to make sure that what they are saying is accurate.

It is true that Rachel Maddow often asks lots of questions, and she frequently comes to conclusions based on the research her staff has done. However, she always presents the evidence to her viewers first, so as not to bias anyone, and both her questions and her conclusions are stunningly obvious. Quite simply, they are the questions that many people would ask, and they are the conclusions that many people would draw. based on the evidence she has presented.

Conclusion:

Quite simply, comparing the political commentary shows on Fox News to Rachel Maddow’s show is akin to comparing The National Enquirer on its worst day to The New York Times on its best day. People like Sean Hannity practice political hackery while lying and misleading nonstop, while Rachel Maddow practices investigative journalism, and she does her best to verify every fact presented. The political shows on Fox News are a blight on America, while Rachel Maddow’s show is a national treasure. As far as I can tell, there are only two reasons to ever watch Sean Hannity’s sorry excuse of a show: 1) to keep oneself informed on the current lies the Republican Party is pushing and 2) for journalism students to learn exactly what not to do.

Rachel Maddow’s show is easily the best show on MSNBC, and one of the best political shows in American history. Her show is so good for two reasons: 1) Rachel’s staff researches everything and 2) they are obsessed with accuracy. Sean Hannity, on the other hand, is not fit enough to hold Rachel’s briefcase.