About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

MSNBC cleaves to Clinton neckline coverage controversy

July 31, 2007 8:38 pm ET

36 Comments

From 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET on July 30, MSNBC devoted a total of 23 minutes and 42 seconds to segments discussing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) "cleavage." MSNBC broadcast separate segments on this topic during the hours of 9 a.m., 10 a.m., 11 a.m., 1 p.m., 2 p.m., and 3 p.m. ET, skipping only the noon and 4 p.m. hours. During the same period, CNN devoted 3 minutes and 54 seconds to coverage of Clinton's cleavage, while Fox News devoted none.

As Media Matters for America documented, in a July 20 Washington Post Style section article headlined "Hillary Clinton's Tentative Dip Into New Neckline Territory," staff writer and Pulitzer Prize winner Robin Givhan wrote that "[t]here was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton." Givhan further asserted that Clinton's look was "unnerving" and claimed: "The last time Clinton wore anything that was remotely sexy in a public setting surely must have been more than a decade ago." Givhan added, "[I]t was more like catching a man with his fly unzipped. Just look away!" Following Givhan's article, several media outlets also picked up on the story. For instance, on the July 29 edition of NBC's Meet the Press, during an exchange with Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson and NBC chief foreign correspondent Andrea Mitchell, CNBC chief Washington correspondent John Harwood declared his intent to "defend" Givhan's article. Harwood asserted: "When you look at the calculation that goes into everything that Hillary Clinton does, for her to argue that she was not aware of what she was communicating by her dress is like Barry Bonds saying he thought he was rubbing down with flaxseed oil."

Media Matters reviewed each hour from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET July 30 on MSNBC, Fox News, and CNN and documented the coverage devoted to Clinton's cleavage. Only news segments were analyzed; previews and teasers were not included in this review. Each segment specifically referred to Clinton's outfit and how much cleavage it showed during her July 18 speech on the Senate floor.

  • During the 9 a.m. ET hour, MSNBC host Amy Robach interviewed Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times to discuss the story. Robach introduced the story by saying "some critics are now saying that Senator Hillary Clinton may be trying to cash in on her cleavage," referring to a fundraising letter sent by the Clinton campaign calling Givhan's article "grossly inappropriate." While showing a graphic of Clinton's outfit, Robach asserted, in reference to Clinton's cleavage: "I don't even see much there. ... [T]hat looks like a shadow." Sweet said that she "want[ed] to invoke what Andrea Mitchell said yesterday [on Meet the Press]: Sometimes a blouse is just a blouse."
  • During the 10 a.m. ET hour, Washington Post "Reliable Source" columnist Amy Argetsinger claimed that Givhan "was actually very complimentary of the clavicle display." Argetsinger added, "She said that it shows that Hillary Clinton is more comfortable in her own skin." Host Mika Brzezinski asserted: "I feel like women who are sort of in high-profile positions can't win. You know? It's not like she's strutting around in a bikini. It was just a blouse. It was a blouse." Media Matters previously documented this exchange.
  • During the 11 a.m. ET hour, while discussing the story with washingtonpost.com staff writer Chris Cillizza, Robach compared Clinton's cleavage to that of Britain's home secretary, Jacqui Smith. During the segment, a split-screen image of Clinton's cleavage and Smith's cleavage was shown, and the two women were compared. During the segment, Harwood's Meet the Press comments were also replayed. Cillizza responded to Harwood's comment: "Do I think Hillary Clinton did this on purpose? Gosh, I may not be cynical enough, but I don't think so." Robach agreed: "I don't think so either, but again, who knows?" Media Matters also documented this exchange.
  • During the 1 p.m. ET hour, introducing an interview with Cillizza, host Tamron Hall noted that "[l]ast week on the Senate floor, Clinton wore a low-cut blouse that showed a little bit of cleavage if you look closely there." Hall asked Cillizza if Clinton's attire was "a wardrobe malfunction or has the senator capitalized on a hit there." Cillizza responded that "politics is like a celebrity culture: who's wearing what and how they're wearing it" and mentioned photos of Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) in a swimsuit and former Sen. John Edwards' (D-NC) "haircut." Hall again played Harwood's comments and Cillizza again disagreed with Harwood.
  • During the 2 p.m. ET hour, while prefacing an interview with washingtonpost.com staff writer Mary Ann Akers drawing attention to Clinton's appearance on the Senate floor, host Contessa Brewer specifically noted the "neckline" of Clinton's outfit, asserting: "Well, fair or not, the formidable female front-runner is getting a whole lot of attention for her appearance while she campaigns for the job of president -- specifically, the neckline on this outfit. The senator's cleavage visible, ever so slightly as she spoke on the Senate floor." Like Robach during the 9 a.m. ET hour, Brewer then said: "It was just the tiniest little shadow. What's the big deal?" Brewer concluded the segment by asserting: "Cleavage, cleavage, even the tiniest bit gets you headlines."
  • During the 3 p.m. ET hour, while introducing an interview with Roll Call reporter Emily Heil, host Chris Jansing asked: "[H]ave we crossed into the political version of the surreal when we start talking about cleavage?" Heil asserted: "We're not actually talking about Hillary Clinton's cleavage" but that "that's what people are finding so -- to use a crude pun -- so titillating about it."

MSNBC Beginning of segment End of segment
Total time
9 a.m. ET
12 minutes 57 seconds
16 minutes 52 seconds
3 minutes 55 seconds
10 a.m. ET
20 minutes 19 seconds
24 minutes 40 seconds
4 minutes 21 seconds
11 a.m. ET
13 minutes 4 seconds
17 minutes 45 seconds
4 minutes 41 seconds
12 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGE
NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE
1 p.m. ET
8 minutes 34 seconds
12 minutes 31 seconds
3 minutes 57 seconds
2 p.m. ET 30 minutes 14 seconds
32 minutes 57 seconds
2 minutes 43 seconds
3 p.m. ET
10 minutes 43 seconds
14 minutes 31 seconds
3 minutes 48 seconds
4 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE
TOTAL: 23 minutes 42 seconds


CNNBeginning of segment End of segment
Total time
9 a.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
10 a.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
11 a.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
12 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGE
NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE
1 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
2 p.m. ET NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
3 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
4 p.m. ET
50 minutes 10 seconds
54 minutes 4 seconds3 minutes 54 seconds
TOTAL: 3 minutes 54 seconds


Fox News
Beginning of segment End of segment
Total time
9 a.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
10 a.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
11 a.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
12 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGE
NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE
1 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
2 p.m. ET NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
3 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGENO COVERAGENO COVERAGE
4 p.m. ET
NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE NO COVERAGE
TOTAL: NO COVERAGE
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by oscar the grouch (July 31, 2007 9:01 pm ET)
         

      Hillary has "no coverage' on FOX, video at 10!!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Genghiz (July 31, 2007 9:04 pm ET)
           

        These statistics are so revealing. FNC covered the cleavage controversy for 0:0 seconds exactly. Compare that with CNN or MSNBC! These statistics lead credence to the popular belief (outside of the  liberal blogosphere) that a Democrat debate on Fox would have been fair and balanced indeed.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by open_mind (July 31, 2007 10:49 pm ET)
             

          Considering what passes for logic in the conservative blogosphere, I wouldn't doubt for a second what you say is true.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (August 01, 2007 8:42 am ET)
               

            We see what passes for right-wing "logic" in everything Genghiz posts....

            And it ain't much.

            Report Abuse
        • Author by ultrasanktpauli (August 01, 2007 5:28 am ET)
             

          certainly if fox had covered this there would always be the danger that the coverage could have been 'lopsided', perhaps leading to a sag in hillary's polling numbers. certainly the coverage would not have been 'uplifting' and it's guaranteed none of it would be perky.

          the real danger? all of this being left Uncovered. if it were uncovered then there would be cause for concern. and at the end of the day? fox news would nothing but lift and seperate the two sides. causing more friction than would be comfortable. stimulating yes, comfortable? no. most certainly not.

          IMHO THIS really gets to the mother's milk of the whole issue.

          man. i better go get a drink or something.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by skye12 (August 01, 2007 8:10 am ET)
           

        First the supposedly liberal media wonders if she's "feminine" enough (with help from Elizabeth Edwards, someone who should have known better), then she shows some cleavage and everyone flips out!!! I find the whole thing idiotic.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by jeter2 (July 31, 2007 9:54 pm ET)
         

      Well what is the world coming to when FOX doesn't buy into this silliness, but MSNBC & CNN do?

      I don't know what's more surreal...journalists/hosts talking about this, or this site for spending their time documenting every word of it.

      Pity the employees of MMFA forced to sit in front of the TV watching MSNBC from 9am -5pm keeping track of the plunging neckline story. Bet they went through a lot of aspirin ;-)

      So this is News, 2007 style. Hillary's cleavage & what it might mean.

      How pathetic....

      Off-topic, but I think interesting:

      Tonight on Hardball Melanie Morgan said [I'll paraphrase here] 'Bill Clinton is still dating', host Mike Barnacle just ignored her remark. I think that was smart. MMFA would likely see this as Barnacle not challenging her. But sometimes you give a statement like that credence by simply scrutinizing its veracity.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by bruce1ace (July 31, 2007 9:59 pm ET)
         

      I demand a full boycott of MSNBC and I demand that Olbermann name his own network "worst person in the world" for devoting the most time to this story.

      FOX news has better looking babes, they don't need to cover this anymore.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jeter2 (July 31, 2007 10:44 pm ET)
           

        I demand that Olbermann name his own network "worst person in the world" for devoting the most time to this story.

        Hahahaha...good one Bruce.

        Maybe when hell freezes over?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by JLyons (August 01, 2007 9:49 am ET)
             

          Olberman never is critical of his own network, only Fox Noise.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by pete592 (August 01, 2007 10:13 am ET)
               

            Oh Really?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by pete592 (August 01, 2007 10:20 am ET)
                 

              Seriously?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by CaseySpring (August 01, 2007 11:07 am ET)
                   

                I am missing something, what does Wendy Vitter have to do with MSNBC? Does she work for MSNBC?

                Report Abuse
                • Author by clams casino (August 01, 2007 11:38 am ET)
                     

                  Olbermann was apologizing for something that his guest host said about Vitter.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by CaseySpring (August 01, 2007 11:43 am ET)
                       

                    That does not mean he was being critical of MSNBC. He let Imus spew the most vile racist hate for 10 years and never said a word, he allows Pat Buchanan to spew racist bigotry and remains quiet. Not to mention Tweety and Carlson.

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by pete592 (August 01, 2007 12:41 pm ET)
                         

                      Uh, yes it does mean he was being critical of MSNBC, since his show appears on MSNBC.  Call his criticism selective, I won't argue with you.

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by CaseySpring (August 01, 2007 12:57 pm ET)
                           

                        Deal, he has select moral outrage. Kind of like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.

                        Report Abuse
                    • Author by spooky3 (August 01, 2007 5:21 pm ET)
                         

                      Not true. I would direct your to ESPN's Dan Patrick show (I would provide a link but they require that you pay a fee to hear the show) in April (?), in which Olbermann described in great detail his efforts to get MSNBC management to take actions with regard to Imus and his employees, and why KO chose those actions over alternatives. Portions of his comments were transcribed at DemocraticUnderground.com, so you're welcome to search there for those comments.

                      Report Abuse
            • Author by CaseySpring (August 01, 2007 11:06 am ET)
                 

              Did he attack Rita Cosby on the air?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by pete592 (August 01, 2007 12:38 pm ET)
                   

                The standard set by the assertion was "criticize" not "criticize on the air".

                Report Abuse
                • Author by CaseySpring (August 01, 2007 12:58 pm ET)
                     

                  He attacked Rita Cosbys brainpower , not anything that was said politically. This was more of a personal attack. 

                  Report Abuse
      • Author by open_mind (July 31, 2007 10:56 pm ET)
           

        Good observations.  Perhaps Fox would rather display their own 20-something hottie cleavage instead of frightening away the viagra demographic with images of Hilary Clinton's mature bustline.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (August 01, 2007 10:07 am ET)
             

          They're too preoccupied with telling us how shrill and masculine Hillary is to stop and worry about her cleavage.

          OK, cheap shots aside, this is one instance where I'll give Fixed Noise some credit for not flogging a dead horse. 

          Report Abuse
    • Author by DorisRussell (July 31, 2007 10:03 pm ET)
         

      Why the obsession with what Senator Clinton wore or looked like? The media wants to play right into the hands of the repugs.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ufleirx (July 31, 2007 11:55 pm ET)
         

      I do not like them but you have to give Fox credit. On this lowest common denominator they did not bite.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by buyavowel (August 01, 2007 5:51 am ET)
         

      Fox is probably planning a prime-time special.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by tex (August 01, 2007 8:34 am ET)
         

      This was obviously a "water cooler" decision for the networks ... we can only speculate that the newly-subpoenaed Karl Rove is busy elsewhere and has not given the directive from on high. Or perhaps Karl IS a boob, but not considered an expert on same.

      There is confusion as to whether this "cleavage controversy" is harmful or actually HELPFUL to Hillary. The Rightwing Mainstream Media is, of course, dedicated to only HARMING Hillary, so the decision on whether to run with this "story" has to be somebody's call.

      At MSNBC, the watercooler nod was given by Chris Matthews, who quipped, "You may be able to land a 747 on Mitt Romney's shoulders, but you couldn't lose a decent-sized Cheeto in THAT cleavage!" Ah-HA! The story could be milked as HARMFUL to Hillary, and MSNBC packed the schedule.

      At FOX, the watercooler decider is Bill O'Reilly. When Hillary's cleavage was brought up, BillO's response was to gaze up at the ceiling tiles, and he started to vibrate and sweat. He then embraced the water jug and started to caress it as if with a loofa. He had to be shaken back into his version of reality. Stammering, he said, "Is this a lingerie situation, or what?" So, at FOX, the "cleavage" story was marked as one with too much prurient interest and a possible BOON to Hillary's popularity, and so the "story" was spiked.

      Look for the upcoming John Stossel special "How The News Is Made." 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by tommy (August 01, 2007 11:47 am ET)
           

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

        So, at MSNBC is was harmful to Hillary, thus ran with.......and at Fox, it was not harmful and shelved?

        That is one of the most hysterical theories you have ever come up with Tex!!  And there have been some doozies......

        Report Abuse
    • Author by dexteritas0071418 (August 01, 2007 10:48 am ET)
         

      At FOX, the watercooler decider is Bill O'Reilly. When Hillary's cleavage was brought up, BillO's response was to gaze up at the ceiling tiles, and he started to vibrate and sweat. He then embraced the water jug and started to caress it as if with a loofa. He had to be shaken back into his version of reality. Stammering, he said, "Is this a lingerie situation, or what?"

      Remind me to never take you seriously again.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by tex (August 01, 2007 6:31 pm ET)
           

        DEXTERITA:

        Never take me seriously, if you ever did.

        If you are a rightwinger, this should be no hardship, because REALITY has eluded the rightwing for decades, and DELUSION is your standard condition.

        So, take NOTHING seriously. You are required to utter "ho hum" at things like elected officials breaking the law, the death count from Iraq, the lies that led to this war, and basically every corrupt thing that comes from Rightwing "leadership".

        So, nobody expects you to take ANYTHING seriously. And a sense of humor? Fergiddaboudit! 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (August 01, 2007 4:20 pm ET)
         

      Fox is still trying to get to the bottom of the Vince Foster suicide.

      They'll get around to this story in the middle of President Hillary Clinton's second term.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by temphandle lightness89bullseye (August 01, 2007 10:35 pm ET)
         

      Perhaps this msnbc mishapp is the fault of the fledgling young director of programing Dan Abrams.

      Report Abuse
The Fox Effect
Media Matters Connect

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.