MSNBC Reportedly Expected to Tap Joy Reid to Fill Chris Matthews' Spot

[babylonsister]

I'd miss her on weekends. I wonder who would fill those time slots?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/msnbc-reportedly-expected-to-tap-joy-reid-to-fill-chris-matthews-spot?ref=home

MSNBC Reportedly Expected to Tap Joy Reid to Fill Chris Matthews’ Spot
PM JOY
Justin Baragona, Contributing Editor
Updated Jun. 24, 2020 9:04PM ET /
Published Jun. 24, 2020 8:57PM ET

The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday night that MSNBC is expected to name weekend host and political analyst Joy Reid to fill the 7 p.m. weeknight slot that was vacated by veteran anchor Chris Matthews’ sudden departure earlier this year.

Reid, who currently hosts weekend morning program AM Joy, has regularly served as a guest host for primetime stars Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes. She also has been one of the primary fill-in hosts at 7 p.m. since Matthews abruptly retired in March following a series of controversies over inflammatory on-air remarks and accusations of sexual harassment.

According to the Journal, talks over Reid’s “appointment are still ongoing and an agreement isn’t a certainty.” Reid, once a Daily Beast columnist, came under fire in 2018 when homophobic posts from her old blog resurfaced. The MSNBC host initially said she was the victim of hacking before that claim fell apart under scrutiny. While eventually apologizing for hurtful and inappropriate tweets and posts, saying her views have evolved, Reid has remained silent on the unsubstantiated hacking claims. MSNBC declined to comment for this story.

[pamdb]

1. Chris matthews

I miss Chris Matthews

My husband misses Chris Matthews

Not a big fan of Joy Reid

Especially during election cycle, almost every night we say to each other, I wish he hadn’t resig. I wish Chris was back.

[oasis]

5. His abrupt departure didn't sit right with me. Chris may be working

on a book about his MSNBC experience. If so, his book tour promotion would be quite interesting.

[Paladin]

36. I not a big Joy Reid fan, either.

But I sure as hell don't miss Chris Matthews.

[janterry]

2. I don't watch her

I was unsatisfied by how she explained her behavior in the past.

[RDANGELO]

3. Well, it will put a person of color in their nighttime lineup.

Her blatant favoritism of Hillary in the 2016 election turned me off, but I can get over it.

[themaguffin]

12. Well then, you have Chris Hayes and Rachel, given their blatant favoritism...

[USALiberal]

15. LOL, ok! nt

[themaguffin]

17. I wasn't responding to you USALiberal.

[SharonClark]

18. She didn't kiss Sanders' ass so there's that.

[madaboutharry]

4. I don't watch her.

I don’t like to hold grudges, but I can’t get past the homophobia scandal. “My account was hacked” is what Anthony Weiner claimed when he got busted. I don’t actually believe her views evolved. So does she now admit she was homophobic? As Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

[Celerity]

8. and she still clings to the 'I was hacked' lie

this DU post in almost real time from February 2007 makes it obvious that there was no hack

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x48020



It is a same day post within a few hours of her blog post. This is also one of the posts that Reid said was "fake", that it came from a hack.

Look at the dates of her blog entry and then when the DUer posted it on DU. Same day, and their post was at 2:18 PM





the timestamp from Reid's post

posted by jreid at 11:08 am






the archive matches the DU post exactly

https://archive.is/pMYl8

https://archive.is/pMYl8/image

[R B Garr]

11. That was a long time ago and she was fairly new to the business, as I recall.

It might have been a bit of a Shock Jock type of newbie persona rather than deeply held beliefs, so I give her the benefit of the doubt.

I didn't like some of her coverage of the latest primary, as I thought the piling on of Joe being a white man completely clouded the reality that he was the VP of a very popular first black President. Now that the voting was so decisive, it's hard to deny that obvious benefit for Joe. edit: lately her panels have been excellent and have been very interesting coverage.

[ariadne0614]

24. I agree with you about her impressive panel discussions.

It took a while, but now Joy has my solid support. She’s formidable, and has the potential to grow MSNBC’s audience at a critical time.

[Celerity]

28. the lying about it was not a long time ago, the lying is what makes her a very poor, poor choice

[R B Garr]

35. As I recall about that, as well, that was a response to the

Bernie people trying to get her fired because they didn’t like her coverage of Bernie. They just amplified that as an excuse to go after her. But she can’t say that directly because they just get worse. We all saw that in action.

[Celerity]

38. Bernie and all that drama have nothing to do with her lying, and the main reason some look past that

is simply because she often had a go at the Bernie Bro types, even if only indirectly

being anti-Bernie doesn't excuse lying

her credibility is shot with me

and I am so not a Sanders fangirl

it is a really poor signal MSNBC is sending in regards to journo integrity

[R B Garr]

39. The Bernie people were snooping around her background

like they did to others to supposedly discredit them and get them fired. It has everything to do with that, as that is who started the war on her. It has everything to do with her defense of their attacks, so in that regard, I could easily believe she was hacked.

I wish I could say more, but those tactics with enemy lists were well known.

She was a hero for me at the time by giving it right back to them.

[Celerity]

40. heroes don't have to blatantly lie, I don't get sucked into the Bernie angst, it is not germane

to the act of lying.

Reid could have just said she made a mistake, she no longer holds the views, and moved on. She chose to double down and lie, even when exposed it was a lie.

The world doesn't revolve around Sanders, whether pro or against.

[R B Garr]

41. She beat them at their own game.

That was brilliant. It could have easily been something that was hacked, especially during that time. It was literally over a decade before and maybe she didn’t remember it exactly to comment on it.

Just recently here, that same tactic was used. Completely distort something and then expect the person to defend themselves against the distortions. That kind of underhandedness deserves the same in return. I applaud her.

[Celerity]

42. not buying your framing and your excuse-making for a journo flat-out lying, sorry

If I wanted to toss honesty in the bin all for the sake of an agenda or to win points I would not be a Democrat.

I will never applaud lying.

[R B Garr]

43. And I'm not buying your framing, either. Her reasoning was easy to understand,

and considering people were out to destroy her career simply for having the audacity to report information on ONE politician in the world, quite simply -- screw that. She was a shock jock in her early career -- so what. It's not a pattern with her and it appears to be isolated to that one time when she was threatened by a mob. Good for her for beating them at their own underhanded game.

BTW, I found her hacking explanation to be quite plausible. I wouldn't have put it past them to manipulate anything to prevent coverage they didn't like on Sanders. I bet her producers found that to be true, as well, as they obviously found enough to be true to keep her on.

[Celerity]

44. lol, then I suppose DU itself was hacked back in 2007 when Reid was a local South FL Blogger

and her homophobic posts went all the way back to at least 2005. They go far belong a simple one off and show a real, sustained homophobic stance over and over. You are trying to muddy the water by turning it into a Bernie-centric argument and also are employing an embrace of dishonesty all because it apparently suits your preferred agenda and your pre-existing biases. I do not roll like that when it comes to journalistic integrity. Reid will always be suspect in my book as she still holds fast to untruth.

You saying you still believe that she was hacked or that it is 'quite plausible' despite overwhelming evidence that she clearly was not tells far more about you than me. The Internet Archive said they were not hacked and the DU February 6th, 2007 post is the dagger in the heart of the lies. There is absolutely nothing complicated about any of it.


this DU post in almost real time from February 2007 makes it obvious that there was no hack

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x48020



It is a same day post within a few hours of her blog post. This is also one of the posts that Reid said was "fake", that it came from a hack.

Look at the dates of her blog entry and then when the DUer posted it on DU. Same day, and their post was at 2:18 PM





the timestamp from Reid's post

posted by jreid at 11:08 am






the archive matches the DU post exactly

https://archive.is/pMYl8

https://archive.is/pMYl8/image

[R B Garr]

45. Sorry, but your LexisNexis type posts are a bit overwrought for me to wade through.

I've used LexisNexis before, and it really is terrific, isn't it? Unfortunately, I phone type and can't participate in the spam exchange.

You are going back to 2007?? A SuperBowl Snickers Ad?? Everyone talks about Superbowl ads, Good Lord. I've seen this before, except for the 2007 DU posts. Maybe you can tell us what you know about DU from 13 years ago, hmm.

I thought you didn't pay attention to the Bernie-centric posts.

You can go through the primaries forum from 2016 to find plenty of posts that back up exactly what I was saying. And even with your super-duper search engine, that's all you can come up with...the same very limited amount of supposed "gotcha" material.

I was talking about the one-time thing being the Bernie people trying to get her fired. Not about anything she ever said, LOL. Your material is the same as what I've seen before.

This fits exactly what I said: a Shock Jock blogger and she is guilty of talking about a SNICKERS AD. A Superbowl Snickers ad.

[Celerity]

46. It goes far beyond just a snickers advert comment, there are a shedload of homophobic posts

that show a clear pattern of homophobic intent. Your attempts at diminution of that are duly noted.

I am done here. Go find a Sanders supporter to have a kick-about with. I have no love for a myriad number (non DU) of them, as I was a huge Buttigieg supporter and the dirty tricks and smears from OUTSIDE of DU by many of them directed at Pete were beyond the pale and outrageous.

But, again, and for the last time, that is not germane to this.

I am talking about basic truth versus lying and journalistic integrity and you are trying to drag it off into the weeds to try and settle some ideological score that I truly could not care less about. I do not care what Democratic party ideological segment a talking head is a supporter of, as long as they are fundamentally honest. Honesty and transparency are foundational to the effective functioning of a democracy, in which the press most assuredly plays a large role.

Have a nice evening.

Cheers

[R B Garr]

47. They appear to be all during a time when she was a newbie Shock Jock. You, yourself, have to

use an expensive search engine to even dig them up. You went back 13 years on DU, what's that about.

Speaking of dragging things off in the weeds, I don't see why one black journalist has to be railroaded out of a job because some Bernie supporters took the time to dig these old posts up just because she had the nerve to report information on him. That's what this is about and why that part of it can't be omitted. It all fits a time period that doesn't look to be repeated. And, please, a silly SNICKERS AD??

All that you have is a limited time frame from your way-back machine. I stick by my assessments of her. If someone was coming for me like was done to her, I wouldn't back down, either. Her producers backed her up, so I took that as a tacit acknowledgment that she was being hunted to appease one politician. Screw that.

You have a nice evening, too. Thank you, cheers.

[DeminPennswoods]

19. Don't think she's homophobic, just a blogger

trying to be snarky back in 2007.

[Celerity]

29. that is not my main problem, it was the lying, and still clinging to the lies about it

she could have easily owned up to it and it all would have blown over

her credibility is near zero with me because of the lies and gaslighting attempts

[judeling]

6. I really hope not

That she has emerged as the choice shows just how weak a bench NBC has.

[OnDoutside]

7. She'll do ok, she doesn't take RW crap too well. It could have been Kornacki or Kasee Hunt.

[USALiberal]

16. I like Hunt. nt

[OnDoutside]

23. That's one of us then !

[bluedigger]

9. meh

Bring back Melissa Harris-Perry!

[themaguffin]

13. Yes!

[SharonClark]

14. Couldn't stand Harris-Perry.

Couldn’t stand Matthews’ constant sexism and blathering about himself and his buddies.

This would be a good move.

[bluedigger]

20. I guess you win!

This time!

[ariadne0614]

25. I miss Melissa H-P! n/t

[LexVegas]

30. ...

[bluedigger]

49. Well, I can't argue with whatever that signifies.

[Sunsky]

10. Excellent choice

I've watched the 7 pm slot every time she is the host. I do not watch Steve Kornacki.
Many have been petitioning for her to get that slot. She's very knowledgeable and won't let her guests get away with bs propaganda. We need anchors like Joy in the era of alternative facts.
I'm ecstatic that MSNBC is on the verge of giving the sister a prime time slot. Is she perfect? No. But who is? Nobody. She has made mistakes but is currently using her platform to champion the cause of equality for all. She is not the enemy, we need to know our enemies. Some won't be happy but such is life.

[StarfishSaver]

21. Thank you

I'm a little tired of the sanctimony. People make mistakes. Some learn from them, as she clearly has. Some go even further and use what they learned from those mistakes to take the message to an even higher level. She's done that, too

I think it's time to let it go, although, unfortunately, some people won't. Apparently some mistakes can never be recovered from, no matter what people do. Fortunately, most people aren't that judgmental.

[ariadne0614]

27. +1 n/t

[melman]

37. "no matter what people do"

How about admitting all the posts were hers and there was never a hacker? That would be nice. Why hasn't she done it?

[Green Line]

22. I agree

I watch the 7 pm slot when she's hosting, she comes prepared unlike a lot of the other hosts.

[ariadne0614]

26. +1 n/t

[Celerity]

31. Maya Wiley would be FAR better, she deserves her own show, she is superb

[ariadne0614]

32. Maya is truly awesome, but does she aspire to mere high-octane punditry?

I’d rather see her appointed to a major position in the Biden administration.

[Celerity]

33. this is a fair point, but if not, would far rather her than Reid

I am a stickler for credibility, and do not trust people who brazenly lie. It is really bad form for her to be rewarded for lying. I almost never turn off MSNBC hosts, not even Chuck Toad (well sometimes, but not every-time, although I never go out of my way to watch him), but I will deffo not watch Reid.

[StarfishSaver]

34. Exactly

Maya is a highly respected lawyer, scholar and writer. I doubt being a TV host would appeal to her in the least, nor is it the best use of her skills.

[DeminPennswoods]

48. Love her

She'd be great as a replacement for Melber, imho.