Yesterday, FTVLive called out MSNBC for once again using Rachel Maddow in the role of a Journalist, when in fact she is not a Journalist.

MSNBC announced that Maddow will be one of the debate moderators when the Democratic debate is held next month in Georgia.

One FTVLive reader took exception to our story and sent along this email:

Scott, I take offense to your comment about Maddow:

"She is not a Journalist and this would be akin to Fox News having Sean Hannity moderate a Republican debate."

While both are commentators as opposed to "journalists" there is no comparing the two. Maddow is a researcher who synthesizes materials from a variety of sources and well-respected guests to aid viewers in exposing the deep political rot in both parties and helping viewers connect the dots in otherwise very complicated stories.

Hannity, on the other hand, is a hack, muckraker, and mouthpiece for Trump (though some would say he's the puppet master and Trump is the puppet). He is not concerned with facts or presenting the investigative work of others.

His thing is swaying opinion by spouting lies and half-truths. That said, both are capable of asking prepared questions. The question is whether they will dig deeper when candidates dodge the questions --like Warren equivocating on how she expects to pay for all her plans or folks spouting generic talking points drilled into their heads by their handlers.

Personally I'd like to see Stephen Colbert host a debate all by himself. He's a funny guy but he's also quite capable of asking questions which make his guests very uncomfortable --yet still need to be asked.

I’m not sure this tells us how good Colbert is, or just how bad journalism has gotten? The idea that some think a comic can ask better questions than a seasoned Journalist is a bit disturbing in itself.

Just saying…