constructed the timelines and have not exaggerated anything. MSNBC is the only show I watch in that category. The rest are a waste of my time.

And she's kept at it as new info was revealed, however always giving credit to the local reporters who were the real heroes. She regularly interviewed them as primary sources throughout her coverage, giving them national coverage as well as the credit.

That's classy.
R&

corruption story. She single-handedly turned a red state blue.

And she's not finished.

Here in the forests of Michigan where the only internet is dial-up or cell phone, I do the 10 Mbyte audio every night she's on. Usually posted by 11:00PM. The video challenges my download limit.

Listening is nearly as good and the production values are still there.

I love Rachel. She's tops at NBC.

And you are correct, she's just getting started.

I have great internet and have followed Rachel since she started turning up as a guest on Olberman's show. Radio reception, however, is poor here, not too many stations and I never was able to listen to Air America, so I never heard her then.

They cry "wolf" almost continuously. It works. I know many people that think that our party is about to implode under the weight of scandal.

There are facts, and then there are opinions about the relative weight and implications of facts. While both MSNBC and Faux may have their own angle on the latter, the fundamental difference is that on Faux, the basic facts just don't seem to matter. And the facts really do do matter on the rest of the networks most of the time.

This is why it is a disservice to include Faux in a discussion of news networks. The minimum requirement for being in that club ought to be that the foundation for any story or discussion be fact-based.

I love Rachel and the rest of 'em

But they appeared to have been effectively neutered on covering anything related to the interests of their corporate masters at Comcast.

Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen word one on either the Death of Net Neutrality or the Comcast Monopoly that is being put together.

Were this not involving their own bread and butter, it is the kind of story they'd be going with big time.

Even CNN had an extended interview with a critic of the merger. And Shepard Smith on Fox did one of the best takedowns on the Net Neutrality story

I mean it. They listen to their audience when warranted, and this is warranted.

Don't get me wrong..I admire most of what they do, but this illustrates what happens when the companies who own everything also own the news outlets

work with and it reflects what a media in a real democracy might be doing. but with talk radio the stink tanks can create their own reality. the right wing talk radio monopoly is the only medium organ that can do the groundwork unchallenged repetition needed to sell the alternate reality.

it's really not fox that is the problem dragging the GOP and the country off the cliff- it's 1200 stink tank coordinated radio stations reaching 50 million a week.

and shamefully many of the loudest of them are endorsed by state funded universities that broadcast their sports on them for licensing fees that are much less than those same stations cost them in ALEC initiated attacks on public education. 170 of limbaugh's 600 for 70+ universities and probably between 30-40% of all RW radio stations.

https://sites.google.com/site/universitiesforrushlimbaugh/

fox woud be laughable if it didn't have a practically invisible big brother known as talk radio beating liberals and democracy all day with a 2x4.

The GW Bridge is a distraction from real news at this point.

Not necessarily, new information keeps surfacing every day and we need to know about everybody involved, it's called investigative journalism!

...such as FACT-BASED stories about corruption regarding potential presidential candidates. The way this guy operates now will be a reflection of how he'll operate should he win.

I consider "over-coverage" to be about things that have been proven to be based on BS - like that Fox Favorite, "Bengazi". Or a million other things they try to put over Obama's head.

It seems like it's almost entirely what they talk about anymore.

...I'll give this to them: they practice actual journalism, whereas Fox is truly nothing more than a Republican megaphone.

This is why the Christie scandal has the legs it deserves.

You got that right.

There's a lot of shit happening in the transfer of money and power between the plutocrats and the nominal representatives of the voting populace (your congress-crittes).

Throw the populace a big fat hambone to knaw on while the 'crats and 'sters rape the rights and savings of the x-middle-class.

They have a diverse group of hosts and guests. Their prime time hosts are smart, LGBT and immigrant friendly. Weekends w/ Steve K and MHP are top notch. Rev. Al is #1 in ratings with African American's. They're pretty inclusive except for MJoe.

I know Glenn G and Jeremy S whine about MSNBC - but I don't care what they think on many things.

1. They are a corporate-owned entity, and will only be as "progressive" as their owners (Comcast) allow them to be;
2. As seen by the recent Martin Bashir debacle and the (in my opinion) unnecessary tearful apology to the family of the MittWit by MHP, they don't have the spine that is necessary to be a truly effective progressive network - because they aren't led by progressives;
3. Look into Phil Griffin, MSNBC's head. He's not a progressive by any stretch - he's a businessman, first and foremost, and it's his job to know which side his bread is buttered on.
4. They are a commercial, profit-seeking enterprise. By law, profit is their prime directive - not news, not political activism.
5. To me, part of being a progressive is to criticize corrupt power structures. The problem is, when you criticize the government by itself, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. "Government" in the US, now, is nothing more than a subsidiary of Corporate America and the Banks - and in my opinion, MSNBC doesn't nearly do enough criticism of the latter (save for Rachel Maddow's brilliant take-downs of the Brothers Koch). Try this on for size - do you honestly think that if Comcast or any of her business interests were involved in major scandals, that MSNBC would be breaking those stories?
6. I could go on, but this deserves its own thread.


My definition of true "progressive" electronic media is found on the outside of the mainstream - Democracy Now, RT, Pacifica Radio and some of the lefty podcasts (Sam Seder, Thom Hartmann, etc.).

I'm not saying don't watch MSNBC. Just bring your salt shaker with you, and know what it is you're watching.