Showing posts with label Keith Olbermann. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Keith Olbermann. Show all posts
Thursday, March 10, 2011
An attack on America's working class - Rachel Maddow remarks on the increasing power and influence of the extremely wealthy in America, from the damage they've done to the economy to their efforts to tear down the government, and calls out Democrats to stand with their base to defend American workers.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
The end is nigh! Rachel Maddow shows non-Fox News watchers how the right is being taught to believe that current international events are part of the lead-up to the end of the world and that President Obama is the literal anti-Christ.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Keith Olbermann Heads to Al Gore's Current TV | Fancast News
Image via WikipediaKeith Olbermann Heads to Al Gore's Current TV | Fancast NewsKeith Olbermann is set to join Current TV, the cable channel founded by former Vice President Al Gore.
Olbermann, who’s been out of the public eye since his abrupt departure from MSNBC last month, announced Tuesday that he’s headed to Current, where he’ll host a new talk show starting in late spring. He’ll have the newly created title of “chief news officer” for Current and will also have an “equity stake” in the cable channel, according to Entertainment Weekly.
Current was launched in 2005 by Gore and business partner Joel Hyatt. The channel, available in 60 million homes, is best-known as a repository of viewer-generated content –- video produced mainly by the young people who comprise the channel’s target audience. Hiring Olbermann represents the first time the channel has reached out to sign a nationally known TV personality for a nightly talk show. The move indicates a shift in Current’s programming strategy.
“In Current Media, Al Gore and Joel Hyatt have created the model truth-seeking entity,” Olbermann enthused in a telephone news conference late Tuesday morning. He declined to criticize MSNBC or any of his other former employers, but he did say that “Current is not only the leading independent network, it’s the only one.”
Reports of the former MSNBC host’s next career move began to circulate Monday evening, in advance of Tuesday’s news conference.
A story in the New York Times speculated that Olbermann’s deal with Current had been in the works for a while and may have precipitated his sudden break with MSNBC last month.
Saturday, February 05, 2011
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Olbermann's MSNBC Exit Was Weeks in the Making - NYTimes.com
Image via WikipediaOlbermann's MSNBC Exit Was Weeks in the Making - NYTimes.comOn Thursday, NBC’s news division staged an elaborate presentation for advertisers, seeking to sell commercial time in NBC’s news programs over the next year. All the members of MSNBC’s prime-time lineup spoke at the lunch with one exception: Keith Olbermann, the network’s biggest star.
For the last several weeks, Mr. Olbermann and the network have been in negotiations to end his successful run on MSNBC, according to executives involved in the talks who requested anonymity because the talks were confidential. The deal was completed on Friday, and Mr. Olbermann made the announcement on his final “Countdown” hours later.
Friday’s separation agreement between MSNBC and Mr. Olbermann includes restrictions on when he can next lead a television show and when he can give interviews about the decision to end his association with the news channel.
The executives involved in the discussions confirmed that the deal carries limitations for Mr. Olbermann in terms of when he can next work on television, though he will be able to take a job in radio or on any forum on the Internet. The deal also prohibits the host from commenting publicly on the deal, the executives confirmed.
Mr. Olbermann did not respond to requests for comment Friday or Saturday. None of the executives who discussed the deal would reveal the exact length of the restrictions.
The decision was completed one year to the day from the last time NBC decided to end a relationship with an on-air star: Conan O’Brien. Mr. O’Brien agreed in the deal not to start up a new television show for nine months, and not to grant interviews for five months. The executives involved in the discussions with Mr. Olbermann said his agreement was not dissimilar to Mr. O’Brien’s.
Many of Mr. Olbermann’s fans responded to the decision by accusing Comcast, the incoming owner of NBC Universal, of forcing him out for political reasons. Several of Comcast’s top executives have been financial supporters of Republicans; Mr. Olbermann is largely credited with establishing MSNBC’s liberal voice.
Comcast issued an official statement Friday denying any involvement in the decision, saying it had no operational control of the company yet, and adding: “We pledged from the day the deal was announced that we would not interfere with NBC Universal’s news operations. We have not and we will not.”
But the company is still drawing criticism for the move. Marvin Ammori, a law professor at the University of Nebraska, said in an e-mail Friday, “Keith Olbermann’s announcement tonight, the very same week that the government blessed the Comcast-NBC merger, raises serious concern for anyone who cares about free speech. Comcast proved expert in shaking down the government to approve its merger. Comcast’s shakedown of NBC has just begun.” Professor Ammori is a former adviser to the nonprofit group Free Press, which opposed the Comcast-NBC deal.
Months before Comcast was expected to gain control of NBC Universal, Comcast officials were worried about the perception that they might interfere with MSNBC for political reasons.
One executive, who asked not to be identified because Comcast had instructed employees not to speak about the situation, said the company dreaded the prospect of being blamed if Mr. Olbermann were to quit soon after the takeover.
Mr. Olbermann had butted heads with his superiors long before the Comcast deal, including Phil Griffin, the top MSNBC executive. According to several senior network executives, NBC’s management had been close to firing Mr. Olbermann before, most recently in November after he revealed that he had made donations to several Democratic candidates in 2010 — one of them, coincidentally, was Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who has been the subject of many of his recent shows after being shot in an assassination attempt.
Mr. Griffin said the donations had violated NBC News standards. Mr. Olbermann was suspended.
Brian Stelter contributed reporting.
Keith Olbermann Leaving MSNBC: Will They Consider a Black Replacement? - BV on Money
Image via WikipediaKeith Olbermann Leaving MSNBC: Will They Consider a Black Replacement? - BV on MoneyBy Dr. Boyce Watkins
Apparently, eight years has been enough for both MSNBC and Keith Olbermann. The network announced Friday that this is the end of Olbermann's tenure with the network and that he is moving on immediately:
"MSNBC and Keith Olbermann have ended their contract," according to a statement issued by the network. "The last broadcast of 'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' will be this evening. MSNBC thanks Keith for his integral role in MSNBC's success and we wish him well in his future endeavors."
Olbermann addressed his departure from the network on air, starting off with a story about his time with ESPN many years ago:
"In the mundane world of television goodbyes, reality is laughably uncooperative. As God as my witness, in the commercial break just before the emotional moment, the producer got into my earpiece and he said, 'um, can you cut it down to 15 seconds so we get in this tennis result from Stuttgart.' So I'm grateful I have a little more time to sign off here. Regardless, this is the last edition of Countdown."
Olbermann's time spent hosting "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" helped MSNBC achieve record ratings for the network. He was also typically in the middle of signature feuds with his Fox News nemesis, Bill O'Reilly. In fact, this rivalry helped to elevate the careers of both hosts, and both were also bolstered by the surprisingly strong presidential candidacy of Barack Obama. While increasingly volatile rhetoric of the Right Wing and the populist backlash against the Obama presidency has not been good for the nation, it has certainly been good for MSNBC and Fox. There is always the question of whether networks benefit from the division or accelerate the division, but either way, the divide in media has certainly changed the way the American public thinks about its politics.
Olbermann was in the middle of controversy most recently when Politico unearthed donations Olbermann had made to three Democrats running for office. One of them was U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who is in the hospital recovering from a recent assassination attempt. Olbermann apologized to his viewers, but only half-heartedly. In what probably irked NBC executives, he mentioned that his contract contained no such clause stating that he had to let the network know before making political contributions.
"It's not in my contract that NBC had rules about getting permission for making political donations, even though any rule like that in any company is probably not legal," said Olbermann, as he expressed frustration with NBC management.
"When a website contacted NBC about one of the donations, I immediately volunteered that there were in fact three of them; and contrary to much of the subsequent reporting, I immediately volunteered to explain all this, on-air and off, in the fashion MSNBC desired," Olbermann said in a statement.
NBC's decision to let go of Keith Olbermann is nothing short of shocking. If Olbermann decided that it was time to go or became incredibly stubborn during the negotiations, then this move might make sense. But Olbermann is the reason that MSNBC has become a juggernaut in cable news, for he has come to define an era in which media has undergone significant transformation. In fact, I dare say that MSNBC is not the same without Keith Olbermann.
I would argue that 20 years ago, Keith Olbermann could never have been a true news anchor. Before the age of the Internet and increasing fragmentation of news media, most networks were hosted by people like Walter Cronkite, who worked to give news from a direct and unbiased perspective. Today, news media has become a political pep rally, where viewers simply tune in to the network that gives them the information they want to hear the way they want to hear it. Iin fact, it has become a form of entertainment.
Keith Olbermann was never as much a news man as he was a comedian. His ability to provide news and analysis in a fluid style of communication that kept us laughing was one of the things that I actually loved the most. While I am not a fan of the liberal/conservative divide of news media, it was nice to see someone intelligently counter Bill O'Reilly with a degree of talent that O'Reilly could never match. So, although Keith was highly unconventional, I loved his show when I had a chance to watch it. I also appreciated Keith's defense of me when Bill O'Reilly spent an entire week attacking me on his show.
Now that Olbermann has moved on, it will be interesting to see if MSNBC considers bringing in a person of color to replace him. Rev. Al Sharpton makes note that all of the three major cable news networks are "all white, all night," and don't give any serious consideration to branding African American news hosts for their night time shows. MSNBC, the network that relies on African American viewership to support it's left-leaning analysis, should be the network to take the lead and offer a position to a talented African American host. I'm sure the National Association of Black Journalists can point them to scores of black folks who are talented enough to replace Keith Olbermann. If people like Elliot Spitzer, Marv Albert, Don Imus and Dr. Laura can get opportunities even after embarrassing themselves in public, one would hope that a talented African American with a spotless record might also get a chance. But then again, we do live in America, where a study stated that a black man with a clean record is less likely to get a job than a white guy with a criminal record. These stats seem to apply to news media as well, but I hope MSNBC has the courage to break us out of this form of modern-day apartheid.
Dr. Boyce Watkins is the founder of the Your Black World Coalition and a Scholarship in Action Resident of the Institute for Black Public Policy. To have Dr. Boyce commentary delivered to your email, please click here.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Keith Olbermann Ends Contract With MSNBC
Image by afagen via FlickrKeith Olbermann Ends Contract With MSNBCKeith Olbermann and MSNBC have ended their contract, according to a statement from MSNBC. The last episode of "Countdown" will air this evening, Friday, January 21.
Lawrence O'Donnell's show will be moved to 8 PM; while "The Ed Show" with Ed Schultz will air at 10 PM.
MSNBC's statement reads as follows:
MSNBC and Keith Olbermann have ended their contract. The last broadcast of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" will be this evening. MSNBC thanks Keith for his integral role in MSNBC's success and we wish him well in his future endeavors.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Opinion: Tucson and Palin's red herring - Jonathan Riehl - POLITICO.com
Opinion: Tucson and Palin's red herring - Jonathan Riehl - POLITICO.com
n the horrific aftermath of the Tucson killings, much of the national debate has been focused on political rhetoric, and whether the pronouncements of certain former governors of Alaska — and graphics on her website — somehow caused this tragedy.
The Palin apologists have seized on this as a red herring. This deceptive argument is being executed brilliantly across the airwaves and Internet by the right.
Now, the classic red herring is not a lie. It is, in fact, true. But not relevant. A way to re-frame the argument. And hope no one notices. The right is exceedingly good at doing this.
Thus we now have a national conversation, and a media feeding frenzy, about whether man charged with the murders was “motivated” by the language of “relock and reload,” by crosshairs over congressional districts.
But this does not matter. What matters is the fact we are having this conversation.
Because what really matters is that the goal posts have moved. Sarah Palin’s disgraceful language and symbols and website graphics are being waved off as irrelevant to the political discourse. When, in fact, they are the political discourse.
Not all rhetoric is verbal. Those cross-hairs sent a message as clearly as any State of the Union Address. So too, the deafening silence from Twitter and Facebook and the other social media outlets, where the former governor allows herself to be heard by the nation. As my former boss, Frank Luntz, taught me: If you want to keep the topic off the table, just keep it out of the conversation.
Mission accomplished.
I am hopeful that my many conservative friends, who are in the profession of rhetoric and in politics, understand I am not just adding one more voice to the Keith Olbermann editorial rant about this horrible situation.
What we are witnessing is not just the partisan, political man-handling of a tragedy — but an outright propagandistic tactic to avoid answering questions, which are of direct relevance to the national political discourse and our broader culture.
What the right is now doing is clearly manipulative. Its continuing rhetorical strategy is the essence of the telltale red herring.
We should not be discussing the motivations of a deranged murderer in Tucson. We should be discussing why we are now having the discussion that we are.
Why we are in the place we are, rhetorically, as a nation.
After all, how do we know when things have gone too far? When there is real political danger manifested in what people say — not just what they do?
Or, more important, have our goalposts have moved so far that we all feel it is wrong to “connect the dots” in a culture that allows tea party talk of gun-toting insurrection, as though it is just part of the multicultural melee, without impact.
It does have an impact. As that lefty President George W. Bush was fond of saying, it “sets the tone.”
Conservatives should be first in line to say this. Leading figures on the right, including Bill Bennett and Robert Bork gained mass followings by proclaiming that the liberal left was “coarsening our culture” and “degrading the discourse” in our society.
No, Palin did not pull the trigger in Tucson. But has the conversation been coarsened? You betcha.
She has won — in a perverse rhetorical way. The red herring worked.
Jonathan Riehl is a communications consultant, who has worked for congressional campaigns and nonprofit advocacy organizations.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Climate of Hate - NYTimes.com
Climate of Hate - NYTimes.com
By PAUL KRUGMAN
When you heard the terrible news from Arizona, were you completely surprised? Or were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen?
Put me in the latter category. I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ever since the final stages of the 2008campaign. I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again. The Department of Homeland Security reached the same conclusion: in April 2009 an internal report warned that right-wing extremism was on the rise, with a growing potential for violence.
Conservatives denounced that report. But there has, in fact, been a rising tide of threats and vandalism aimed at elected officials, including both Judge John Roll, who was killed Saturday, and Representative Gabrielle Giffords. One of these days, someone was bound to take it to the next level. And now someone has.
It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.
Last spring Politico.com reported on a surge in threats against members of Congress, which were already up by 300 percent. A number of the people making those threats had a history of mental illness — but something about the current state of America has been causing far more disturbed people than before to act out their illness by threatening, or actually engaging in, political violence.
And there’s not much question what has changed. As Clarence Dupnik, the sheriff responsible for dealing with the Arizona shootings, put it, it’s “the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business.” The vast majority of those who listen to that toxic rhetoric stop short of actual violence, but some, inevitably, cross that line.
It’s important to be clear here about the nature of our sickness. It’s not a general lack of “civility,” the favorite term of pundits who want to wish away fundamental policy disagreements. Politeness may be a virtue, but there’s a big difference between bad manners and calls, explicit or implicit, for violence; insults aren’t the same as incitement.
The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary.
And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.
Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.
And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.
Of course, the likes of Mr. Beck and Mr. O’Reilly are responding to popular demand. Citizens of other democracies may marvel at the American psyche, at the way efforts by mildly liberal presidents to expand health coverage are met with cries of tyranny and talk of armed resistance. Still, that’s what happens whenever a Democrat occupies the White House, and there’s a market for anyone willing to stoke that anger.
But even if hate is what many want to hear, that doesn’t excuse those who pander to that desire. They should be shunned by all decent people.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t been happening: the purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the G.O.P. establishment. As David Frum, the former Bush speechwriter, has put it, “Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us and now we’re discovering we work for Fox.”
So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before?
If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Friday, November 12, 2010
Tucker Carlson Sent Emails Posing As Keith Olbermann
Image via WikipediaTucker Carlson Sent Emails Posing As Keith OlbermannConservative pundit and Daily Caller editor Tucker Carlson perpetrated a hoax last weekend by posing as Keith Olbermann in a series of emails to a Philadelphia columnist.
On Tuesday afternoon, a set of emails surfaced on the Philadelphia news site Phawker. Phawker said that the emails showed the "100% for real" correspondence between Olbermann and Philadelphia Daily News columnist Stu Bykofsky over the weekend. In the emails, "Olbermann" talks about his boss, MSNBC President Phil Griffin, in hyperbolic, insulting terms.
In one email, "Olbermann" says that Griffin is "not my boss (thank god), nor is he intellectually qualified to be...I'll be anchoring on election night 2012, long after Phil Griffin has moved on to a job for which he's actually qualified, perhaps on QVC."
In another, "Olbermann" writes that "I could have Phil Griffin fired tomorrow if I felt like it, trust me. And if he keeps yapping about me in public, I may. For the moment, however, keeping Phil around is like having a drunk chimp in the office -- more amusing than threatening."
The incendiary emails seemed too good to be true -- and they were. They were sent from keith@keitholbermann.com. That's an address that is not owned by Olbermann, but by Carlson. In July, Carlson announced that he had purchased the domain name KeithOlbermann.com, and told Politico that people could email him at Keith@KeithOlbermann.com -- the same address that the emails to Bykofsky came from.
On Tuesday night, Yahoo's Michael Calderone reached Carlson by phone. Carlson confirmed that he had, in fact, sent the emails posing as Olbermann.
"Could you resist?" Carlson said. "It was just too funny. The flesh is weak."
Monday, November 08, 2010
Glenn Greenwald and Lawrence O'Donnell debate Nov. 5: MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell & Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald debate over who really caused the Democrats' downfall. The discussion continued after Morning Joe ended -- but we kept the cameras rolling.
This is a rare moment of honest political debate between Glenn Greenwald and Lawrence O'Donnell. You do not want to miss this.
John H. Armwood
Keith Olbermann To RETURN Tuesday, Phil Griffin Announces
Image via WikipediaKeith Olbermann To RETURN Tuesday, Phil Griffin AnnouncesKeith Olbermann will return to the air on Tuesday after being suspended without pay for two shows (this past Friday and the upcoming episode on Monday).
The host of MSNBC's "Countdown" was given an indefinite suspension last week after his boss, network president Phil Griffin, discovered that Olbermann had made political contributions without seeking prior approval, as per NBC News policy.
A network spokesman released the following via email:
STATEMENT REGARDING KEITH OLBERMANN - SUNDAY, NOV. 7
From Phil Griffin, President of MSNBC:
After several days of deliberation and discussion, I have determined that suspending Keith through and including Monday night's program is an appropriate punishment for his violation of our policy. We look forward to having him back on the air Tuesday night.
Earlier on Sunday, Olbermann broke his silence via Twitter, telling his followers "Greetings From Exile!" and thanking people for their support.
Over the past few days, a number of public figures have rallied behind Olbermann, who gave a total of $7,200 to three Democrats running for federal office. Even reporters and conservative pundits defended the MSNBC host. CNN's Eliot Spitzer called the punishment "ridiculous." Another MSNBC host, Rachel Maddow, immediately called for his reinstatement and used the opportunity to illustrate that her network is "not a political operation" like Fox News.
News Corp., which owns Fox News, has made multiple million-dollar donations to conservative groups, and progressive watchdog Media Matters has identified more than 30 instances of Fox News employees or personalities supporting Republican causes.
Olbermann defended his actions on Friday, noting that "I did not privately or publicly encourage anyone else to donate to these campaigns nor to any others in this election or any previous ones, nor have I previously donated to any political campaign at any level."
As reported earlier on HuffPost:
Olbermann donated the maximum legal amount of $2,400 each to Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, and to Kentucky Senate contender Jack Conway. All three were in tight races with their Republican counterparts. The MSNBC host made the donations on Oct. 28, the same day that Grijalva made an appearance on "Countdown."
Another MSNBC host, Joe Scarborough, made several thousand dollars in political contributions during the 2006 election -- prior to a change in company policy, which currently reads:
Anyone working for NBC News who takes part in civic or other outside activities may find that these activities jeopardize his or her standing as an impartial journalist because they may create the appearance of a conflict of interest. Such activities may include participation in or contributions to political campaigns or groups that espouse controversial positions. You should report any such potential conflicts in advance to, and obtain prior approval of, the President of NBC News or his designee.
MORE FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS:
Liberal groups had taken on Olbermann's suspension as a cause. An online petition calling for his reinstatement, run by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, had exceeded 300,000 signatures Sunday, and Michael Moore had tweeted his support. The committee's Adam Green said Griffin was repeatedly e-mailed updates on the petition drives.
"Progressives proved that when one of our own are targeted, we will have their backs," he said.
Left unanswered is the question of why Olbermann would do something he undoubtedly knew would be provocative, or whether he was trying to make a statement against NBC's policy. He did not immediately return an e-mail message seeking comment Sunday.
The incident raised questions about how long-standing rules designed to preserve the appearance of objectivity for news organizations fit at a time that cable news networks, most prominently Fox News Channel and MSNBC, have increased their popularity through prime-time programs that dispense with any notion of impartiality.
"What we've seen in the last five years is the rise of these personalities that eclipse the journalism that these organizations do," said Kelly McBride, ethics group leader at the Poynter Institute journalism think tank.
Many mainstream news organizations take these rules dead seriously. National Public Radio subjected itself to some teasing this fall when it issued a memo forbidding its personnel from attending comic Jon Stewart's rally in Washington last month, but NPR didn't want reporters seen at an event that some people could interpret as political, unless the reporters were covering it.
Olbermann's fans note that he's made no secret of his support for Democrats on his prime-time "Countdown" show. So why should he be suspended for putting his money where his mouth is?
His prime-time MSNBC colleague, Rachel Maddow, said on her show Friday night that Olbermann should be reinstated. Her bosses were told she'd be saying that before going on the air, however.
McBride said she wouldn't be surprised if some news organizations drop these rules in the next few years, or at least carve out exceptions for certain personalities. Fox News seems to have effectively done this. Prime-time host Sean Hannity made a $5,000 donation to Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann's PAC this summer; Fox says he's a conservative talk show host, not a journalist. Part-time commentators the network has hired like Karl Rove and Sarah Palin continue their political work while drawing pay from Fox.
"It's getting harder and harder to draw the lines in general," McBride said. "The public doesn't spend a lot of time differentiating between commentators and journalists."
Yet the principle of journalistic independence is more important now than ever, said Bob Steele, director of the Prindle Institute for Ethics at DePauw University in Indiana.
Prime-time opinion hosts are journalists as well as commentators, Steele said. They host news programs, make decisions on what stories to emphasize, what guests to bring on, and what questions are asked, he said.
"There's a huge difference between having a belief and becoming an activist," he said, "and when you contribute to a campaign with your money or your energy, you're an activist."
Donations to some Democratic candidates by a commentator who clearly supports Democrats may seem simple. But why these candidates in these states and not others? What if these candidates get involved in primaries?
In other words, it can get messy.
Saturday, November 06, 2010
Keith Olbermann move highlights MSNBC's identity crisis - Keach Hagey - POLITICO.com
Image via WikipediaKeith Olbermann move highlights MSNBC's identity crisis - Keach Hagey - POLITICO.comKeith Olbermann’s suspension over three donations to Democrats prompted an outcry from across the blogosphere Friday as writers from the liberal Daily Kos to the conservative Weekly Standard criticized the move.
They agreed about one thing: It didn’t seem fair that MSNBC had so quickly and severely punished its flagship personality over something that seemed quite in line with what he did on the air five days a week: support liberal candidates and causes.
Olbermann’s decision to give embattled Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva six appearances in about six months was worth thousands of dollars in media exposure, for instance. How is that different, these bloggers ask, than Olbermann’s $2,400 check to Grijalva, cut five days before the election?
The debate throws into sharp relief the difficult balancing act that MSNBC has been trying to pull off with its new identity. On one hand, the network has aggressively moved to court progressives with its new branding campaign “Lean Forward” and eyebrow-raising decisions like assigning an all-liberal panel to cover the midterm election results Tuesday.
But on the other, it remains tightly bound to its straight-news network sibling NBC, with which it shares both talent and management, and for which its liberal identity is a cause of concern.
This tension was particularly visible last month when MSNBC launched its new slogan and branding campaign. Even amidst a grand roll-out of the new theme, MSNBC President Phil Griffin was reluctant to own the cable network’s ideological turf.
“I don’t think we are overtly left,” he told POLITICO at the time. “We have a progressive sensibility, but that embraces a lot.” He said that viewers were smart enough to understand that opinionated hosts like Rachel Maddow are playing a different role than straight news journalists like David Gregory.
Two days later, an internal memo was leaked to The New York Times showing that the new tagline had worried the leadership at msnbc.com, a separate company, which considered itself an “impartial news product” and was worried about “misalignment” of the brand.
On Friday, Griffin said he suspended Olbermann over the three donations, first reported by POLITICO, while being “mindful of NBC News policy and standards.” Those standards require that staff report “potential conflicts” that might threaten their status as an “impartial journalist” to their boss before doing them.
But bloggers almost immediately began poking holes in this case. No one — not Olbermann, not MSNBC — pretends the ex-ESPN anchor is an “impartial journalist.” Not only that, MSNBC had seemed to bend this rule before, saying MSNBC’s opinionated talent had been exempted from NBC standards to attend Jon Stewart’s rally, a liberal love fest.
And several people seized upon donations by MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, who recently became a POLITICO columnist, as evidence that MSNBC was using a double standard in dealing with the former Republican congressman. (MNSBC has since said that Scarborough’s 2006 campaign donations were cleared by his boss beforehand, which is allowed under the rules, and Scarborough’s co-host said a more recent contribution was actually by his wife.)
Greg Sargent, blogging at The Washington Post, began parsing the ethics policy, arguing that since Olbermann never purported to be an “impartial journalist,” he hardly risked being subject to “potential conflicts.”
Howard Kurtz, who went against the current in supporting MSNBC’s decision, argued that the core problems were transparency and hypocrisy, since Olbermann had Grijalva on his show the day of the donation without disclosing it, and had been a harsh critic of Fox News’s parent company’s big donations to Republican-leaning groups.
Maddow addressed the matter on her show on MSNBC show Friday night, arguing that Olbermann’s suspension was not a result of brand confusion but rather embodied the essence of the MSNBC brand. After highlighting the political contributions of Fox hosts like Sean Hannity, who donated to Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann’s political action committee and then interviewed her a few weeks later without disclosing the donation, Maddow said this is what made MSNBC different from Fox.
“They can do that because there's no rule against that at Fox,” Maddow said. “Their network is run as a political operation. Ours isn't. Yeah, Keith's a liberal, and so am I. But we're not a political operation — Fox is. We're a news operation. The rules around here are part of how you know that.”
Fox News has consistently denied being a partisan network, saying that the views of its primetime hosts are akin to the opinion pages of a newspaper and its dayside programming is unbiased straight news.
As the news of Olbermann’s suspension sunk in, media critics saw a variety of motives at play — everything from corporate nervousness over the network’s new liberal tilt to longstanding tension between Olbermann and Griffin, the temperamental star and the boss who had to deal with him.
Some saw in MSNBC’s latest move corporate fears about appearing too liberal, which were being exacerbated by NBC Universal’s pending takeover by Comcast.
Michael Wolff wrote at Adweek that the pending merger — which, if it is approved, will coincide with the stepping down of NBC Universal president and chief executive Jeff Zucker — is the true reason for the power shift behind Olbermann’s suspension.
“The background to everything is that is happening at NBC is the transition to Comcast ownership,” he wrote.
Friday, November 05, 2010
Keith Olbermann suspended after donating to Democrats - Simmi Aujla - POLITICO.com
Image via WikipediaKeith Olbermann suspended after donating to Democrats - Simmi Aujla - POLITICO.comMSNBC host Keith Olbermann has been suspended indefinitely without pay after POLITICO reported that he made three campaign contributions to Democratic candidates.
MSNBC President Phil Griffin said in a statement Friday: “I became aware of Keith's political contributions late last night. Mindful of NBC News policy and standards, I have suspended him indefinitely without pay."
Olbermann made campaign contributions to two Arizona members of Congress and failed Kentucky Senate candidate Jack Conway ahead of Tuesday’s election.
Olbermann, who acknowledged the contributions in a statement to POLITICO, made the maximum legal donations of $2,400 apiece to Conway and to Arizona Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords. He donated to the Arizona pair on Oct. 28 — the same day that Grijalva appeared as a guest on Olbermann’s “Countdown” show.
NBC has a rule against employees contributing to political campaigns, and a wide range of news organizations prohibit political contributions — considering it a breach of journalistic independence to contribute to the candidates they cover.
The network originally announced that Chris Hayes, the Washington editor for The Nation, was going to fill in for Olbermann. But the network announced late Friday that Hayes would not be the substitute host, after Hayes’ previous donations to two Democratic candidates in 2008 and 2009 came to light.
Hayes said on Twitter that his decision not to fill in for Olbermann tonight had nothing to do with his donations – which he notes were made before he became and MSNBC contributor, but because he “did feel comfortable doing it given the circumstances.”
MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts is filling in tonight.
Olbermann is one of MSNBC’s most recognizable faces, and has emerged as one of the country’s most prominent liberal commentators. A former ESPN star, Olbermann’s “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” started in 2003 as a traditional news show but evolved into a left-leaning opinion program – and in some ways, led the network into its new identity as the cable-news voice of the left and an attempt to be a counterweight to Fox News.
In his statement to POLITICO, Olbermann said he wasn’t using his influence to solicit any donations for the candidates.
“I did not privately or publicly encourage anyone else to donate to these campaigns, nor to any others in this election or any previous ones, nor have I previously donated to any political campaign at any level,” Olbermann said.
Inside MSNBC, employees were shocked at the news of Olbermann’s suspension. Despite a reputation for a prickly personality off-air, Olbermann was given wide berth inside the network because of his stature – and his ratings.
Insiders were stunned that Griffin moved so swiftly to yank one of the network’s true stars off the air, and some suspected that the recent tensions with NBC News, which has grown increasingly uneasy with its sister network’s more ideological stance, contributed to the swift decision. Some have even speculated that Comcast’s coming merger with NBC Universal has heightened sensitivities about MSNBC’s ideological profile.
MSNBC has branded Olbermann as a prominent face in its new “Lean Forward” marketing campaign. He tripled MSNBC’s ratings at 8 p.m. In the past two years, MSNBC’s more opinionated hosts have helped propel it past CNN in prime time, and even lately during the daytime, too.
Despite MSNBC’s embrace of a more opinionated format, NBC News has a policy against its employees making political contributions – and it appears that Olbermann ran afoul of that policy, even by contributing to candidates he gave a platform on his show, like Grijalva.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Rachel Maddow: Bill O'Reilly A 'Race-Baiting F**k,' CNN Wanted Olbermann: NYMag
Rachel Maddow: Bill O'Reilly A 'Race-Baiting F**k,' CNN Wanted Olbermann: NYMag
Rachel Maddow called Bill O'Reilly a "race-baiting f*ck," CNN tried to hire Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews wanted Phil Donahue out of MSNBC.
Those are but three of the juicy revelations in Gabriel Sherman's must-read New York magazine cover story this week about CNN and MSNBC, appropriately titled, "Chasing Fox."
The cable news business is notoriously competitive, as Sherman captures in his feud-heavy, 6,000-word-plus article. Below, just a sampling of some of the feuds unveiled in the piece -- read the full article at NYMag.com for more.
Rachel Maddow vs. Bill O'Reilly
After O'Reilly called Maddow an "NBC News loon," Maddow said she wanted to respond by wearing a loon suit. "Sorry, you really hurt my feelings," she said referencing O'Reilly. "I am a loon. I'm on the Canadian dollar bill. It's awful...but you, however, are also a race-baiting f**k."
Saturday, September 04, 2010
Glenn Beck Admits Lying: 'I Thought It Would Be A Little Easier' (VIDEO)
Image via WikipediaGlenn Beck Admits Lying: 'I Thought It Would Be A Little Easier' (VIDEO)After being called on a white lie he told during his Restoring Honor rally, Glenn Beck admitted Thursday that he stretched the truth because he "thought it would be a little easier."
Beck had claimed that he held George Washington's handwritten first Inaugural Address in his hands at the National Archives, but a spokeswoman at the institution said he did no such thing. Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz and others called him out for the fabrication.
______________________________
What makes this any different from any other time Glen Beck speaks? He could have said I saw the document.
John H. Armwood
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)