Did MSNBC "Butch Up" the guest host of the Rachel Maddow Show.

The last few days there has been a guest host on the Rachel Maddow Show. It is a beautiful African-American woman, and on the first night she had he hair pulled down and it was long, curly, and lovely. Then the next day they had her pull it back, so it looked like one of those Mullets.

Now no woman in her right mind would choose to wear a hairdo that looks like a mullet, so I think MSNBC made her do it to fit more into the Rachel Maddow viewership and theme.

You may be right, because I know the reporter when she was on MTV.

reply to post by hoghead cheese


I had never seen her before, and I have yet to catch her name, no matter how hard I have tried. All I know is the first day she was gorgeous and I was thinking wow at least these guys on MSNBC did something right finally, and then bam next day she was sporting a mullet, funky clothes, and probably pair of Eastlands or cleats. I never seen a person butched up so fast. I didn't even know it was possible.

[edit on 15-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]

Well I guess I can sort of answer this question. I don't work for the show or watch it but basically what happens is that there is a certain look shows are going for because of their demo. If the talent agrees to a certain look the producers are looking for, then with the consent of the talent, they will do it. However, most times the talent just wants the makeup artist make them look good on camera. What seems to of happened here might be that they let her have the hair the way she wanted it at first. Viewership may have dropped so they decided to change it up. The other scenario is that she likes her hair both ways, and the producer thought she looked good on camera with both styles so they switched it up to keep it "fresh". Bottom line is that the producer usually calls all the shots if the talent isn't a big money making star yet so they most likely had input in the hair style.

reply to post by safetyguy76


Wouldn't this be some sort of sexual discrimination. Don't you think Rachel woud sue if they made her up to look like a straight woman?

[edit on 15-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]

Originally posted by StinkyFeet
reply to post by safetyguy76

 

Wouldn't this be some sort of sexual discrimination. Don't you think Rachel woud sue if they made her up to look like a straight woman?

[edit on 15-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]

You got it wrong lol.

It's ok to discriminate against majority. But it is VERY WRONG if you discriminate against a minority.

^^ Sarcasm Alert

In reality your totally right.

reply to post by muzzleflash


It sucks to be in the majority I guess. I think they made a mistake. I think they would have had way more male viewers if they would have let her be the way she was. I guess they just love losing to FOX.

reply to post by StinkyFeet


I don't think she would. You got to remember she is under contract (not like that means much). Thing is they all want their show to do well and usually do anything for the "good" of the show. If they think putting on a clown wig will help them beat CNN and Fox News in the prime demos then she is going to do that. Rachel can basically do what she wants, her show is doing well. When you have a name and make money, you get artistic say. Fill-ins however have to keep her show going so they have less say. The producers are going to run the show to keep the viewership up. Remember it's all about the ratings and getting ad time to get money. The better the ratings, the more they can charge for an ad and the more sponsors they get. Its just how the game is played.

Now if the producer wanted Rachel to do something she wasn't comfortable with, she still wouldn't sue (I think). I can bet you that the next day the show would have a new producer to make her happy.