And now we know the REAL reason MSNBC hired Rachel Maddow

Shortly after MSNBC announced last week -- which suddenly seems like last year -- that it had given Rachel Maddow her own show beginning Sept. 8, replacing "Verdict with Dan Abrams," Maddow and I had an amusing conversation to discuss the initial over-reaction to the announcement. But before I could post the interview (it's below), all hell broke loose.

For reasons known only to them, MSNBC's leading personalities chose the biggest media clustershag of the year to go after each other on live TV. Even if you've watched all the clips before, "The Daily Show's" treatment last night is worth at least a couple of watches. Jon Stewart's writers get extra points for assigning "Muppet Show" characters to each MSNBC personality:

While in the long run it's just as well that Olbermann and Matthews aren't permanently paired like Huntley-Brinkley -- "It's like watching a high school news team in action or something," observed Travis Fox -- for now I can't imagine MSNBC chief Phil Griffin is completely unhappy to see all this on-air sniping. He told Politico yesterday that that's what you get when you "hire smart people who are passionate about their love of politics and love of news."

That's true, Phil. But you just hired a very smart and passionate person who also plays nice and doesn't even yell at Pat Buchanan. And who happens to be a female.

And now, all of that analysis about Maddow's hiring seems even dumber than it did last week. The idea that one woman will cause the cable news world to cross the tipping point into one of intractable, hopeless and regrettable partisanship was knocked down by the always-incisive Glenn Greenwald .

And now we know there's something much worse than partisanship on TV -- one-upsmanship on TV. Which is why I'm sure the folks at MSNBC can't wait until Maddow is running her own show. Despite her super-smart credentials (Stanford, Oxford), she doesn't give off a smarter-than-thou vibe at all. She's easy on the eyes and the ears. She is, in short, the perfect antidote to MSNBC's testosterone imbalance.

Anyway, here's my talk with Maddow, which doesn't reflect the dustups in Denver. She discusses what the format of "The Rachel Maddow Show" on MSNBC will be like and has an amusing take on those stories written about her hiring:

Rachel Maddow - interviewed 8-22-2008 (MP3)

Highlights of our talk:

• Rachel thanks me for getting her a TV show.
• Rachel says you can be funny and confrontational without being mean or cruel.
• Rachel will work hard to get the "Countdown" crowd to keep watching.
• That said, Rachel will choose stories that reflect her interests, as fans of her radio show already know. SHe predicts a "high story count" to her show. She will talk to one guest at a time.

Disclaimer: I am currently trying to take as much credit as possible for the rise of Rachel Maddow. I wrote the first profile of her in a non-LGBT publication, and I made this podcast with her, then I used this followup to talk about demographics and MSNBC and why Maddow could help the news channel get even younger.

Comments

[Rael]

Olbermann is the worst. I wish Maddow was replacing him.

[Annie]

I am very excited about Rachel's show, have enjoyed Chris Matthews even when he insulted the seniors a few years back but look forward to the new approach. Don't kid yourself , she can be a pretty tough kitty when necessary. We all "feel the pain" for Pat when he sets off on his grandiose diatribes. Good luck. And thanks to the MSNBC team for the great coverage, I am looking forward to the coming evening at Mile High.

[devorahleah]

I still think it's the lack of Tim Russert that is the problem. I wasn't a big fan of his, but he was the Top Dog and all of the other egos fell into line behind him. With him gone, all of the egos are busy jockeying for position, sniping at each other (Brian Williams has several times sniped at Keith, sniped at David Gregory, etc), and generally acting like kids in the sandbox. Who knew Russert had such a calming effect on everyone?

Oh and it's not just about Keith, although he makes a convenient punching bag for those that dislike him. It's about HUGE egos, poor planning from MSNBC (whose bright idea was it to be outside, where you can get interrupted by loud train whistles?), and assorted correspondents who have no idea who is in charge.

[Cliff]

I hope she's smart enough to include Pat Buchannan on her show as a regular. Even though they sometimes clash, their debates are often stimulating and thought-provoking. Their dialog is a step above Hannity and Colmes, and more honest too.

[Ed Burke]

As most liberal commentators have to be, Rachel Maddow is extremely savvy, smart, and truthful. Compare that to the consistent Lying, Race Baiting, Fact Creation over at the Sean Hannity, Rush Windbaugh, Bill O'Liely rightwingnut center for propaganda. The rubes will never watch mMaddow, she's just too truthful, and courteous. MSNBC has made a Very Smart Decision to hire her full time. I predict she will have top ratings for her show.

[Nancy]

It's important that we have a lesbian voice on MSNBC. Rachel is an activist for us and we applaud her for her determination in getting our message out.

[john donovan]

Rachel is quick and that is what is required to stand toe to toe with guys like Buchanan who will dominate the exchange if allowed. I'm not perhaps the typical Maddow fan, 53 year old, white, blue collar male,, military veteran, however I've been extremely impressed with Rachel's knack for making her point intelligently and at the same time forcefully without being over the top. I've told my wife several times over the past few months that she needed her own show, count me in as a charter viewer.

[Ed Dravecky]

Unless the "Boston Globe" is secretly part of the LGBT press, wasn't the first mainstream profile of her written by Eric Goldscheider and published on February 24, 2005? There's a freely viewable copy up at his website and you can verify it by running "Fridays at noon, when she completed another week's political battles" (complete with quotation marks) through Google News.

(Sorry about that, Chief.)

[Radio Rachel is a different kettle of fish, though I suppose I should have made the distinction then before claiming it now.--AB]

[Salim]

I think Raychel Maddow is bold and smart. I wish her good luck for her show.

[Joe Coffee]

I've become one of the Countdown hold-over's & find Rachel's show refreshing. Intelligent (of course), good natured, void of campaign hacks as guests, etc., etc. I appreciate her effort to end the hour on an "up" note, but the pop culture segment could use a tweak. And I sense a blush of modesty when she essentially introduces herself when mentioning the name of the show. Should the network decide to maintain consistency with the rest of the line-up (Countdown, Hardball), may I suggest....Nutcracker!

[Carol Happaney]

I find the most offensive MSNBC show is Morning Joe. It anchor team depicts a college student and a nagging mother. The show may be decent without either of the pair. Mika should stick to reporting the news and Joe should grow up.

[Kathlee]

I am a big Olbermann fan, so I have enjoyed getting to know the bright and lovely Rachel. I am delighted she has gotten her own show. However, her set needs dressing!!! The stark, bare background doesn not look futuristic, it looks like MSNBC didn't trust she would be on long enough to bother furnishing her with a set. Where are the sexy graphics, the stylish art, the avant-garde furnishings this woman deserves?