MSNBC's Rachel Maddow: 'I wasn't asked about Anderson Cooper'

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow is all about keeping them honest, telling the Guardian that closeted gay anchors should come out. But, hey, that doesn’t mean she's referring to a certain CNN anchor.

In the interview with the publication, which was published Monday, the openly gay anchor is asked if she feels frustration toward “an equally well-known news presenter who is widely assumed to be gay but has never come out?”

“I’m sure other people in the business have considered reasons why they’re doing what they’re doing," she answers, "but I do think that if you’re gay you have a responsibility to come out.”

The interview drew much attention, with blogs suggesting she was referring to Cooper, who has never acknowledged -- or denied -- that he is gay. Maddow responded to the noise in a self-penned blog post Monday evening, stressing that she wasn’t singling anyone out.

“In that interview, I wasn't asked about Anderson Cooper, I didn't say anything about him, he literally was never discussed during the interview at all -- even implicitly,” she wrote. “I don't tend to be shy when I criticize -- you wouldn't have to read between the lines if that's what I was trying to do."

She goes on to list the ethics of “coming out,” in case you were looking for a guideline.

Do you agree that news anchors have a responsibility to be transparent about their sexuality?

-- Yvonne Villarreal
twitter.com/villarrealy

Photo: Getty Images

Comments

[Rick]

I think this entire conversation is so ridiculous. A person sexuality is none of our business. With all the difficulties going on in America and the world, why is this a topic? We are hopelessly last if this is considered news content!!!!

[vegasgirl]

I echo the previous commenter's remarks. I don't care about Cooper's personal life; I don't care about Maddow's (to her credit, she has not allowed her sexuality to define her, but certainly does not hide who she is).
I don't care! If they compoment, honest newscasters, that is all that matters.

[S.K]

I agree with Rick. In what time period did we as a society deem it was a must that we disclose to the world what we do in our private lives. While it is a fact that we have people who are closeted, and live "straight" lifestyles, it is not our individual right or business to "out" them. It is stupid for us to be so concerned with peoples lives who have no direct bearing on our own.

[Ellen]

Really? Does it even matter what anyones sexual preference is? Ah that would be a no. None of our business time to move on!

[Tracy]

I think everyone has the right to privacy, including gay anchors. It has nothing to do with their ability to do their job and if Rachel Maddow was subversively referring to Anderson Cooper, which I suspect she was I totally disagree with her. If she wants to be out and that works for her that's fine but what's right for her may not be right for the next person. After all, it is a free country isn't it Rachel?

[Joel]

"Do you agree that news anchors have a responsibility to be transparent about their sexuality?"

Only to their partner/spouse. The general public has no such claim on them merely because they are famous.

[Dan]

I like that Rachel Maddow is out and proud. Too bad Anderson's unable to make that step for whatever reason. Being out in your private life is fine, but it might make a big difference to someone who is struggling with their sexuality to have another respectable, accomplished person like Anderson Cooper to look up to. Maddow is openly gay and continues to be successful. Anderson has established himself substantially as a reporter and would not likely suffer any negative effects if he were to come out. It's kind of awkward to watch him reporting on matters such as gay bullying or DADT knowing that he seems to be uncomfortable about coming out publicly himself.

[Mano]

I'm sorry what? "...if you’re gay you have a responsibility to come out..."

That is the most asinine statement I have ever heard of. I am not obligated to you nor anyone else about personal matters. If I am a reporter, my responsibility is for the news that I am conveying. Whether or not I sleep with the same sex has absolutely nothing to do with my work.

Don't shove your so called "views" on other people.

[Gemini Musing]

On one hand, I don't care what an anchor's sexual preferences are. If they have a brain in their head, passion for their work, and can deliver content, opinion, and (to a degree) entertainment value to their viewers then they're doing their job and all is well.

On the other hand, I would hope they would use their positions and opportunities and value their sexuality and share, support, champion a more open society (without going too far the other direction and jumping on a soapbox every boradcast)... but I also appreciate and support that it is still a choice. Theirs, not mine.

As for this... "With all of the difficulties going on in America and the world, why is this a topic?"

This *is* one of the primary "difficulties" being dealt with by the world's population. Maybe not the sexuality of specific people, but accepting that sexuality and the acceptance thereof is of paramount concern as we move (we can hope) towards a more accepting and tolerant society as a whole.

It does not belittle the difficulties in the middle east. It does not lessen the importance of the debates on US healthcare, gas prices, terrorism, heart transplants for convicted rapists, sleep-deprived air traffic controllers, or the rising costs of education. It does not change inhibit our ability to still focus on the environment, constitutional rights, changing world governments, or the Bronx Zoo's cobra.

It does not pretend to be the only newsworthy discussion on the internet today. What it does do is focus on a subject that is very important to a large part of our general population.

It doesn't have to be important to you to be important in a broader sense.

[Mike]

The question was if she feels frustration toward “an equally well-known news presenter who is widely assumed to be gay but has never come out?” She doesn't say Anderson, but the question itself implies SOMEONE in the anchor chair is gay.

[Van Harvey]

I agree with Rick. A person's sexual preference is none of our business. i fail to understand why so many people are preoccupied with this question. We have turned the news into entertainment and gossip. It is no wonder that we are so much in the dark about the real powers that rule our lives. The media, especially television, is more concerned with political and entertainment gossip.

[PS in LA]

I think a persons sexuality is no one's business but their own, whether you're a newscaster or anything else. If you want come out, great; if not, great.

[stum]

News anchors should have the same rights as anyone else...unless it would contribute to bias in their reporting. Shouold news anchors have to reveal what political party they support? I'd say no, unless it biased their reporting. People (and news anchors) should have the same right to privacy in their personal lives as you or me. They are doing a job and regardless of their religion, politics, or sexual orientation should disclose whatever THEY feel is appropriate. Ms Madow, like Rosy O'Donnell apparently believes that their sexual orientation is WHO they are...not WHAT they are.

[sara]

Whether someone is gay or not, heterosexual or not, bisexual or not, is no ones business. I am disappointed in Maddow that she gets on this high horse declaring who should be open about their sexuality. Sex and sexuality should be private between two people. Who exactly does Maddow think these gay anchors owe this revelation to? Sounds to me like Maddow doesn't like standing alone. She came out now everyone has to? "Coming out" implies being caught in the act. Homosexuality like being brown, being a working woman, being a single mother, et... will be frowned upon by many no matter what but we have come a long way in accepting many lifestyles. Maddow sets gays back by declaring what homosexuals should and shouldn't be doing. She judges the very people she doesn't want judged. Equality for gays doesn't mean shouting it from the rooftop, it means living life and when someone happens to learn your sexual preference they still treat you with the dignity and respect you deserve.

[Cheryl Paul]

I seem to recall eons ago when Anderson was doing the way too early in the morning news show "Up to the Minute" or whatever it was on CBS (?) he used to intimate that he was gay quite freely.

[Jake]

Geez, whatever happened to an individuals right to privacy?
These kind of one size fits all blanket pronouncements just reek of life-in-a-bubble-elitism.

[MJ]

Look, straight people don't go running around showing off their straightness, nor do they take pride in there natural attractions. They don't have a flag, or a community, or a card identifying who they are. Gay people have seperated themselves away from society by creating their own community instead of being a part of the community of everyone. It is easier to adore Anderson Cooper, should he be gay, as he is, without watching him make a proclamation that he has now seperated himself off into a community that has isolated themselves from everyone who is not gay. People's sexual prefrence should be a sacred thing, not a public announcement. When sacredness is lost, so too is a level of dignity and respect. By all means be you, but keep what is sacred, sacred.

[Alicia Mendoza]

As a straight person I am not required to state that I am straight. Nor do I go around publicly stating that I like boys. Why should it be different for a homosexual? People should reveal what they want to reveal. Whether a news caster is "gay" should not reflect on how he tells the news. I don't care about his personal life; all I expect is clear, concise, and honest reporting.

[laura]

It is none of our d@mn business which side of the fence Anderson frequents...I still like his features and reporting. I am much more likely to hold his rather privileged upbringing againt him than his sexual preference!!!

[Rich05]

I could care less about who is gay or who is not , But what I do care about is that I hate Rachel 's leftist agenda period !