Does Rachel Maddow lay off MSNBC sponsors?

From Jake at OpEd News:

A look at the effect MSNBC advertiser dollars may or may not have on programs like The Rachel Maddow Show. With big industries ready to spend unlimited cash on issue ads, buy off politicians, plant fake news and junk science, the public awareness of GMO foods and hydrofracking seems to be going nowhere. We ask if a potent progressive broadcaster like Rachel Maddow can be muzzled by corporate overlords, drunk with ad cash.

Does Rachel Maddow Go Easy on MSNBC Sponsors?
Did Rachel Maddow just open a new door in her reporting? This past Wednesday, a Rachel Maddow segment exposed the well-funded campaign to prevent GMO food labeling during Washington state’s election day referendum, an effort that narrowly won despite what was earlier measured at two-to-one support in favor of labeling genetically modified food.Monsanto, Coke, Pepsi, Kraft, DuPont and various retail associations poured $22 million – all from out-of-state coffers – into the campaign against Referendum 522, dwarfing the $6 million raised by food labeling advocates. This is basically a repeat of the same cash avalanche that killed GMO transparency in California last year. But what’s different for this close watcher of Maddow is the fact that she has rarely weighed in on the GMO foods debate before this…

3 thoughts on “Does Rachel Maddow lay off MSNBC sponsors?”

  1. And she’s one of the good guys….

    Keith Olbermann’s not allowed to talk about politics at all, anywhere under the terms of his last contract. Weird that the most outspoken liberals end up gagged.

  2. Progressives have it tough. Maddow does good work. If she didn’t fulfill the requirements her station sets for her, she would be off the air and accomplishing nothing. That’s why progressives need a real Progressive Media Empire that would spread the truth further and wider than the lies, distortions, and propaganda are being spread.

    People believe that places like MSNBC are progressive media. That’s laughable. They are so lame at promoting progressive ideals and policies that, if they are gagging their progressive progressive employees in order to get more advertiser dollars, this would not be surprising at all.

    The gagging of progressives on supposedly “liberal media” is just one more thing that corporate money can afford easily to buy.

  3. Julie, not enough are talking about the conflict that exists between the hard-hitting progressive fact-reporting and the executives that censors or compromise broadcasts to appease sponsors and powerful friends in government.

    Maddow seems an admirable fighter for truth and justice, making some of the strongest call-outs on TV of those in power. But she’s got to be fighting battles behind the scenes we can’t begin to imagine, specifically on the fronts mentioned in the article – GMO, fracking, Walmart, NBC’s ties to defense contractors, lobbyists, etc.

    We covered a perfect example of this when we pondered the story behind the “Hubris” special that aired on the 10 year anniversary of the Iraq War WMD lie campaign:

    …this may have been the as-yet most mainstream report accusing Dick Cheney and others of war crimes and treason. So I believe Maddow is heroically pushing the boundaries of what’s reportable on network TV.

    If I was her, I would do exactly what she’s doing, fighting the good fight, reporting on as much as the bastards upstairs will allow, and if they don’t, finding another pro-social justice topic instead to report. Then, I’d be drinking heavily on Friday nights to clear my conscious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.