Joy Reid Opens Up About Pay Disparities at MSNBC: “The Curse of Competency”

When veteran journalist and television host Joy Reid took the stage at the Martha’s Vineyard African American Film Festival’s C-Suite Soirée on August 7, the atmosphere in the room was warm, celebratory, and buzzing with anticipation. Reid, known for her sharp political insight and engaging presence on screen, had been invited to sit down for a candid conversation with longtime friend and strategist Jotaka Eaddy. What unfolded during that conversation, however, shed light on an issue that continues to stir debate across industries: the persistent gap in compensation between employees who do the same work, particularly when gender and race intersect.

Reid, 56, did not shy away from addressing her recent career transition—the cancellation of The ReidOut earlier this year—and the lessons she had drawn from her journey through the fast-paced world of cable news. But it was her revelations about salary inequality at MSNBC that captured the audience’s attention most.

“I worked in a business where I was paid a tenth of the salary of people who did literally my same job,” Reid said. “We knew any man doing what I was doing would make more—and be able to negotiate more—even with lower ratings.”

The statement drew murmurs from the crowd. Her words underscored a reality that many in the media industry, particularly women and people of color, have long spoken about: the struggle for equal pay and recognition, even when performance metrics suggest they are outpacing their peers.

A Stark Contrast in Compensation

In her remarks, Reid pointed to the dramatic difference between her annual salary and that of other prominent MSNBC hosts. While she earned a reported $3 million per year, Rachel Maddow—the network’s highest-profile anchor—was said to make around $30 million annually. Reid was quick to clarify that her issue was not with Maddow, but rather with the larger structural disparities within the industry.

The disparity becomes even more glaring when comparing her to some male colleagues, she noted. According to Reid, she often delivered stronger ratings than certain male anchors yet was still compensated at a fraction of their pay. “The curse of competency means you’re the best at what you do, so everyone calls you,” she explained. “You do more hours, more overtime, more research—but you’re not paid for it.”

Her comments resonated with attendees, many of whom were executives and professionals themselves, familiar with the dynamics of workplace inequity.

The Broader Landscape of Pay Inequality

Reid’s account fits within a larger pattern observed across the media industry and beyond. Multiple studies have shown that women, and particularly women of color, often receive lower salaries than men in equivalent roles. In journalism, where visibility, ratings, and public engagement can be quantified, these disparities are even more striking.

For years, organizations and advocacy groups have pointed out that the wage gap is not simply a reflection of merit or audience performance. Instead, it is shaped by longstanding systemic practices—negotiation processes, corporate priorities, and cultural perceptions about who is considered a “star” worth investing in.

Cable news, with its high-pressure schedules and emphasis on ratings, has often magnified these issues. The “star system” rewards a handful of marquee personalities with enormous contracts, while others performing comparable roles remain underpaid. Reid’s experience illustrates the tension between competence and recognition: excelling in one’s craft does not always translate into fair compensation.

The Cancellation of The ReidOut

Reid’s reflections also come in the wake of personal transition. Earlier this year, MSNBC announced the end of The ReidOut, which Reid had hosted since 2020. The program, which aired in the 7 p.m. slot, quickly became a fixture for audiences seeking sharp political commentary and analysis during a tumultuous political era.

Though the cancellation marked the close of an important chapter in her career, Reid has emphasized that it also offered her a chance to speak openly about what she experienced behind the scenes. Without the daily grind of hosting, she now has the freedom to reflect on both the successes and frustrations of her time at the network.

“I was proud of what we built,” she said. “But when you step back, you realize how much harder you had to work just to keep pace—and how different the rewards were depending on who you were.”

“The Curse of Competency”

One of the most memorable phrases from Reid’s remarks was her description of what she called “the curse of competency.” The idea, she explained, is that being highly skilled and reliable often results in more work, but not necessarily more recognition or reward.

“In television, if you’re competent, people lean on you,” she noted. “You get asked to cover more, you fill in when others are unavailable, you prepare longer, you dig deeper into research. And yet, the paycheck doesn’t reflect that extra weight.”

For professionals across industries, this observation hit home. It is a phenomenon that transcends broadcasting: employees who consistently deliver high-quality results often find themselves burdened with additional tasks, while those perceived as more “indispensable” are rewarded with higher salaries, larger teams, and greater negotiating power.

Industry Reactions

Reid’s comments are likely to fuel ongoing conversations about fairness in media compensation. While some executives argue that contracts reflect “market value”—a combination of brand recognition, audience loyalty, and bargaining power—critics counter that these explanations often mask deeper inequities.

In recent years, several high-profile disputes over pay have surfaced across television news. From anchors at major networks to correspondents in local markets, women and minority journalists have spoken up about being underpaid compared to male peers. These stories, while difficult to share publicly, have added momentum to calls for transparency in contract negotiations and clearer pathways toward equitable compensation.

Beyond Numbers: The Value of Representation

Reid’s presence on MSNBC was not only about ratings. As one of the most visible Black women in cable news, her role carried symbolic weight. Viewers often turned to her show for perspectives not commonly represented in mainstream media.

Her willingness to tackle subjects related to race, democracy, and social justice helped broaden the scope of political coverage. For many, her contributions went beyond audience metrics; they represented an essential step toward inclusivity in an industry still working to diversify its leadership and storytelling.

This makes the discussion of her compensation even more poignant. The value of representation, many argue, should be acknowledged not just symbolically but also materially—in contracts and salaries that reflect the impact of diverse voices.

Looking Ahead

Despite the challenges she faced, Reid remains a respected figure in political commentary. Her career spans decades, from early reporting to her tenure at MSNBC, where she became a household name. As she looks ahead, questions remain about what her next chapter will be.

Will she return to television in another capacity? Will she pivot to writing, speaking, or producing? Reid has not publicly committed to a new platform, but her influence in shaping conversations around politics and culture is unlikely to fade.

Whatever path she takes, her candid remarks about compensation may have a lasting impact. By speaking openly, she has invited both industry insiders and the public to reconsider how value is measured in media—and whose voices are rewarded for their work.

The Bigger Picture

At its core, Reid’s story is about more than one contract or one career. It is about how industries assign worth, how disparities persist even in highly visible professions, and how those disparities reflect broader patterns in society.

The Martha’s Vineyard audience responded to her words with nods, applause, and reflection. For many, the takeaway was not only admiration for Reid’s resilience but also recognition of the systemic change still needed.

As conversations about pay equity continue, Reid’s testimony may serve as both a cautionary tale and a rallying cry. “I gave everything to the work,” she said. “And I know I wasn’t alone. But we have to keep asking: why is competency punished instead of rewarded?”

Conclusion

Joy Reid’s career at MSNBC was marked by sharp analysis, consistent ratings, and an undeniable presence in American political discourse. Yet, as her candid remarks revealed, those achievements were accompanied by deep inequities in pay. Her story highlights the paradox of being both visible and undervalued, celebrated on screen yet compensated at a fraction of peers performing similar roles.

In raising her voice, Reid has done more than recount her personal experience; she has spotlighted a systemic issue that affects countless professionals. Whether her future unfolds on television, in writing, or elsewhere, her message remains clear: true equity requires more than praise—it demands fair recognition of work, impact, and contribution.