Kurtz again offers absurd assessment of Chris Matthews
June 22, 2009 2:47 pm ET by Jamison Foser
If MSNBC is really as liberal as Howard Kurtz says it is, why does Kurtz insist on exaggerating his evidence? Here he is today:
Left wing tilt: Can someone please explain what MSNBC's "Left wing tilt" is? The only show I watch is Morning Joe and I don't see much "liberalism" there. Who but the homebound watch evening cable chatter?
Howard Kurtz: I don't think there's any dispute -- not even MSNBC would dispute -- that Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz are firmly on the left, and Chris Matthews is a former Democratic strategist who recently pondered running for the Senate from Pennsylvania as a Democrat. Those are the hosts on the air on MS from 5 to 11 p.m.
Chris Matthews hasn't been a "Democratic strategist" for roughly 25 years. His flirtation with a Senate run as a Democrat isn't particularly illustrative; at the time he was thinking about running, the incumbent was a Republican. And he reportedly decided not to run because there wasn't anything he wanted to accomplish as a Senator - not exactly a sign of someone someone with strong progressive views or Democratic leanings. He has said he voted for George W. Bush -- again, not something that is typically a sign of strong Democratic leanings or a liberal worldview.
On the other hand, Matthews spent the latter half of the Clinton administration attacking the Clintons and Al Gore, and most of the Bush administration lavishing praise on Bush and attacking and mocking Democrats. And his attitudes about ethnicity and (especially) gender are famously at odds with progressive values. (Not that Matthews is alone among MSNBC personalities when it comes to less-than-progressive attitudes about women.)
Kurtz' use of Matthews as evidence of MSNBC's liberalism undermines his case - and his simplistic and misleading description of Matthews suggests that he knows Matthews is not a good example.
PREVIOUSLY:
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Beck vs Matthews - Beck is much, much more conservative than Matthews is liberal.
Special Report vs Ed Shultz - I would say, after watching Shultz before that he is more liberal than the "straight newscast" is conservative. But, really, not by much when you consider the views of the conservatives on the all star panel vs the "liberals" on that panel.
Sheppard Smith vs Chris Matthews - I don't think either are particularly ideological but since Matthews does air an opinion show I have to say Matthews is more liberal than Smith is conservative.
O'Reilly vs Olbermann - This one is a wash. Though Olbermann tries to be more informative than O'Reilly, they are both, ideologically speaking, on the exact opposite ends.
Maddow vs Hannity - Maddow is much more thoughtful and as liberal as Hannity is conservative but she is not near as dishonest, which I think would prove he is much more ideological on his show than she is on hers.
I would say that the views expressed on MSNBC in primetime are not near as radical in their ideology as Fox's views are. And even if you do not agree with that it would be quite a stretch to say MSNBC is more liberal than Fox is conservative. Before 5PM it is not even close, Fox is an arm of the GOP.
1) "You have blood on your hands."
2) "Cut his (or her) mic."
3) "SHUT UP!"
Yeah, real debate.