Political Analysis of the Rachael Maddow Show
Aired On 1/13/2009 on MSNBC at 9 pm ET
Firstly, and before I comment on the political perspective of Maddow’s show, I would like to comment on the show itself. As a spokesperson and news anchor Rachael Maddow is good, professional, and maintains a vagrant respectability, whilst attempting at levity. No, she is not extraordinary, she is not fascinating, and she does not strike a chord with my personality. She is not necessarily boring, but she is mundane. I can watch her show without feeling offended, but I also do not feel that she is capable of inciting or even changing my emotions or opinions. She reminds me of a well written technical manual; she tells you information that may or may not be relevant, her tone is unobtrusive, she is not particularly emotional herself, and she maintains a professional and structured tone that does not affect the presentation of information. Her show is the kind I would have on in the background while doing homework. Needless to say, I wouldn’t watch her show because it lacks entertainment of any sort. Her inflections do not emphasize critical information, thus I would have to pay particular attention to the content in order to comprehend what she was saying. Furthermore, her attempts at humor are mild failures at best and if the levity were taken out I don’t think I would even notice. I feel like I am watching her, but not her show. It seems like she is not the one in control, rather, she is merely a tool of her writers. She isn’t bad, she just isn’t anything unique, special, or even remotely interesting.
The moderate pace of speech combined with the lack of emotional expression lead me to believe the show’s intended audience would be classified as 45 and older, more toward the older stretch, and slightly more female than male, though I cannot explain why I feel that way. I just think she communicates more effectively to a female audience because she is female. Then again, she isn’t really very feminine, which is why I would think the demographic would be split 49:51 male to female. I would also be inclined to say that the audience is predominantly Caucasian, but also very much Asian-American as the leading minority. I can explain my reasoning’s for this assumption, but they are complex and albeit potentially offensive, so I will not disclose them unless permitted and/or invited to.
Politically, Maddow herself seems almost perfectly neutral; most likely because she seems to show no personal emotion toward either end of the political spectrum. The show itself however, in part due to MSNBC itself, and more so because of the viewpoints of the writers, seems overwhelmingly biased toward the Democratic Party and/or its ideals. I had to be certain of this, so I watch segments of several of her shows and the result was conclusive. This bias is only apparent in the nature of the content itself. It is completely blatant and requires no analysis of more complex ideals. Usually bias is more difficult to declare because it is only apparent through the individuals tone, inflections, gestures, or micro-comments. In her most recent show, she spent 58 seconds talking about anything not related to the Republican party, and while she did make negative comments toward the republican party, she also made equally positive ones, and almost never spoke of the opposing party. This is true of all of the shows I watched. The final definitive evidence regarding the political orientation of the Rachael Maddow show comes from the following statement: “The inauguration of President Barrack Obama is now 6 days and 15 hours away…ish”. The only other time she even mentions the democrats is in this statement; “…Secretary of State Nominee Hilary Clinton, the biggest political celebrity in America whose name is not Obama…”, which is also clearly defending Republican superiority with mild sarcasm.
- Info
No comments:
Post a Comment