Chris Matthews' Bias Against Women Spurs Protest Campaign

Media Matters has begun a campaign against MSNBC's Chris Matthews over his years of blatant bias against women on Hardball.

The action alert quotes Big Tent Democrat of TalkLeft as calling for his removal from coverage of the presidential race.

While, like Big Tent, I have criticized Chris Matthews for his sexist comments about Hillary Clinton, I'm more of a "change the channel" person.

If more people would watch the competition, his ratings would plummet. MSNBC would conclude pretty quickly it had a Chris Matthews problem and he'd be gone. Conversely, all the attention calling for his ouster is likely to raise his profile and gain him more viewers, even if they're only tuning in to hear his latest misogynistic rant. If his ratings go up, MSNBC is going to be thanking its lucky stars, not considering taking action against him.


It's all about ratings. So while I appreciate the sentiment behind the Remove Matthews movement, TalkLeft is not joining it.

But, neither will I watch Chris Matthews. Which is too bad, because I do like watching the smart and articulate Rachel Maddow and I think highly of David Shuster's reporting. At least I can catch them on Countdown.

< Federal Appeals Court Dismisses Released Detainees' Lawsuit | Judis On The Wilder Effect: Kohut Is Irresponsible >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    If only (none / 0) (#1)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 11:56:56 PM EST
    there were better competition.  I hope at the very least he is more careful.  He has mentioned there are complaints about him.  

    I can't believe he pinched her cheeks, she patted his cheek back, but she should have slapped him.  

    I agree with you, Jeralyn, but (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 12:16:58 AM EST
    must disclose I don't watch much TV.  

    chris matthews has been doing this for years, (none / 0) (#3)
    by cpinva on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:48:06 AM EST
    msnbc is well cognizant of it, it's made a conscious decistion to do, well...............nothing. this is the house that jack welch built, stocked with the good boys & girls that jack welch hired.

    i've watched mr. matthews once or twice, i wasn't impressed. even when he's not on a sexist rant, he's neither informative, or even particularly funny. he's just an oaf. my cats have hacked up hairballs, with more substance than mr. matthews has ever displayed.

    i agree with jeralyn, better to have him continue making an ass of himself, to an ever dwindling audience, than to demand (ala don imus), his outright removal by msnbc.

    I'm Torn (none / 0) (#4)
    by BDB on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:10:59 AM EST
    I agree that I don't want to do anything to help Matthews' ratings.

    OTOH, Matthews so often is portrayed as a democrat or liberal - based on his Congressional work in the Mesozoic era - that tarnishing that image has some appeal to me.  Sure, the blogs all talk about how terrible he is, but that hasn't kept him from being taken seriously.  Also, it might - might - reign him in.  I honestly am not sure that he wants to be known as a sexist jerk.  Sure, he already is, but I think he bristles at it.  Unlike Limbaugh and others, Matthews is under the delusion that he is a real journalist and commentator.  

    So, I don't know what the right answer is.  But silence certainly hasn't improved the situation.  He's more noxious than ever.

    And he was one of the first ones to push the Bradley effect for NH, which essentially calls half of all Democratic voters racists.  I  know there's been some debate over whether there was a Bradley effect, but this analysis by John Judis seems to do a good job refuting it.  (Note:  As Judis points out, just because there was no Bradley effect, doesn't mean there weren't voters who voted against Obama because he is black, I'm sure there were.  The Bradley effect only goes to the issue of whether folks lied to pollsters about their willingness to vote for Obama.)

    Chris Matthews is an insult to journalisim. (none / 0) (#5)
    by Devin79 on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:53:46 AM EST
    It is truly amazing the hatred Chris Matthews appears to have for Hillary Clinton. Media Matters has discected everything this fat, over-stuffed fat ass has said about her, and it is disgracefull.

    Chris Matthews is a coward, a poor father, and a disgrace to America and to journalisim. Whne Hillary wins the nomination adn then the presidency...Matthews will look like the fool he is.

    Don't watch Hardball AND explain to MSNBC why. (none / 0) (#6)
    by aztrias on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 06:15:39 AM EST
    Don't watch Matthews AND write to MSNBC to explain why.  

    If we don't watch news programs and keep silent, CEO's would incorrectly conclude America's not interested in politics.

    There are two ways networks can fill 30-60 Mins. a day, either hire a lot of writers/journalists to produce content or wind up a freak like Matthews and put him on TV.  

    Chris Matthews (none / 0) (#7)
    by LCaution on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 04:50:08 PM EST
    If the filth coming out of Chris's mouth were racist rather than sexist, he would have been kicked off the air years ago.  

    But sexism is OK.  Women, especially women in the business & political worlds, are just supposed to "get used to it", or "take it" or are told that if they "can't take the heat, they should get out of the kitchen" (often, unfortunately, by other women in the media).

    Although he goes rabid over Hillary, I have seen him tell a woman he was "interviewing" (in quotes because a Matthews interview is an oxymoron; it's always 99% monologue) to come closer to the camera.  She, reasonably, thought there might be something wrong with the feed.  But he just wanted her closer because she was so beautiful.

    And, although I don't remember the exact phrase, he made a comment about Obama's wife that was tasteless in the extreme - and he wants Obama to win!