Callin’ it as you see it: still taboo:
Angered by an MSNBC correspondent’s demeaning comment about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s daughter, aides to her presidential campaign said Friday that she might pull out of a debate planned by the cable network this month in Cleveland.
Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director, cast as “beneath contempt” an on-air comment Thursday by MSNBC’s David Shuster, who said Chelsea Clinton is “sort of being pimped out” as she intensifies her campaigning for her mother.
NBC News announced Friday afternoon that Shuster had been suspended indefinitely over the remark, which a release called “irresponsible and inappropriate.”
Well damn, the way she’s reacting makes it seem like she doesn’t understand what that remark means. Those kind of terms are rather common now — “media whore”, using “pimpish” as a synonym of cool, to customization of an item being described as “pimping” it (I distinctly recall seeing once at a bookstore while walking past the magazine rack a cover reference to “pimp your stroller” on a magazine for expectant & new mothers. Seriously.) — so it’s not like he was saying they’re having Chelsea have sex with strangers for money. They asked her to offer herself up on the campaign trail on her mother’s behalf, she accepted, where’s the offense in the description?
Sure, Hillary is probably thinking of this as an example of bias or something, like if they’ll say this about her then she can’t get a “fair” shot. Hilarious, since prior to the actual voting the mainstream media spin was that she was The Inevitable. Another thing she leaves out of her irrational stab at victimhood:
Shuster apologized Friday morning on MSNBC for the term he applied to Chelsea. He issued a second apology on the MSNBC show “Tucker,” where he had uttered his comment while acting as guest host.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign staff has been critical of what it considers a hostile attitude toward her in MSNBC’s coverage, and the Shuster incident brought matters to a head. […]
Last month, another MSNBC talk show host, Chris Matthews, apologized after suggesting Clinton owed her political success to her husband’s philandering. “The reason she may be a front-runner [in the presidential race] is her husband messed around,” Matthews said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” (emphasis mine)
At the time David Shuster made the comment that Hillary is so angry about, he was acting as guest host on “Tucker”. That show is not meant to be a straight-up news show, focusing more on analysis and discussion. Tucker Carlson is not expected to be unbiased, so whoever fills in for him is also not expected to be either, since otherwise the entire point of the show changes — this would be the reason why when over on CNN Lou Dobbs goes off on vacation to have the stick reinstalled up his ass, one of the random morning anchors doesn’t take it over. Chris Matthews likes to occupy a grey area where he sometimes poses as a mere journalist, but his main duty to MSNBC is “Hardball”, a show where he discusses topics with guests & shares his own opinion. So, if she sees their comments as failing their alleged duty to be neutral, detached observers, the only reasonable reply would be “well no duh, Hillary. You want a cookie?”
My personal view is that neutrality is a fairy tale. Everyone has their opinions, no matter how mundane or sloppily thought out, and unless all you report is the weather, you’re going to have some sort of built-in spin to it. Acknowledging the bias makes it a lot easier to filter out and judge for yourself, whereas pretending none exists just writes it deeper into the story. Besides, no one in politics actually wants an honest portrayal of themselves, they want as much glowing praise as possible, Hillary’s definition of neutrality would probably look like ass-kissing to Obama, and vice versa. Realize you’re expecting the sky to rain candy and shut up.