I love Keith

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/olbermann-suspended-from-msnbc-for-campaign-donations/?src=mv

ETA: My bad, it was an indefinite suspension - which doesn't really mean much. This sucks.

Edited November 5, 201015 yr by Money

I'm not really a big Olbermann man but I don't know why he was suspended when others who made donations were not.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/11/05/olbermann_suspended/

There really is a double standard going on and it's ridiculous. Bigger issue is why. I don't think Olberman will go quietly considering his show is the most watched on MSNBC nightly.

I love Keith too.

“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.

Keith is not an impartial journalist, does not pretend to be, and nobody who stumbled across Countdown would believe he was, so to apply this rule in this case is ridiculous.

He may not be impartial but he's fair and he has a lot of integrity. He's never hid being a liberal and $2,400 is pretty much chump change. I have always felt if it were not for MSNBC Obama would not have been elected. With their nightly posturings calling out the hypocrisy of Hillary and then the Republicans, he and Mathews single handedly helped him into office.

I respect NBC for having journalistic standards. This is refreshing when contrasted with the stench of FOX and how their hosts not only donate to republicans, but host rallies, host fundraisers, and critique Obama even as they plan their own presidential runs. NBC is holding him to a higher standard than FOX holds Beck and Hannity to, and that's how it should be. NBC is not a cesspool.

I wonder if this has something to do with NBC changing hands.

Edited November 7, 201015 yr by quartermainefan

For all those trying to make excuses for Olberman, I would say that you are comparing apples to oranges. First, FOX News (unlike MSNBC) does not require its on-air personalities to disclose contributions made to candidates; therefore, Hannity and Beck (unlike Olberman) did not violate any rules. (I think that FOX News should require its hosts to disclose contributions, but they currently don't; therefore, Olberman's fans can't point to FOX to justify his improper behavior.) Secondly, while Joe Scarborough did give money to GOP candidates, he sought permission from his bosses before doing so; egotistical Olberman did not seek permission from his bosses, and that (combined with the fact that he did not disclose these donations on the air) is why he was suspended. And finally, for those of you who bring up Larry Kudlow, please note that CNBC (like FOX News) does not have the same rule about requiring its hosts to disclose donations that MSNBC does.

The most important point here is that it is wrong for liberals to justify Olberman's flagrant violation of MSNBC's corporate policy and journalistic standards mererly because they agree with his political beliefs. And I'm no hypocrite on this issue: I have strongly condemned Rush Limbaugh's illegal abuse of prescription pain-killers (and have never made excuses for him just because he is a conservative). Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, Olberman and Limbaugh represent the very worst in political discourse because they are obnoxious blowhards who do nothing but belittle the opposition instead of trying to engage them in serious (but respectful) debate.

Edited November 7, 201015 yr by Max

Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, Olberman and Limbaugh represent the very worst in political discourse because they are obnoxious blowhards who do nothing but belittle the opposition instead of trying to engage them in serious (but respectful) debate.

Not quite.

Olbermann doesn't use his microphone to preach hatred towards immigrants and even worse, demand all drug users go to jail even as he is a drug addict himself. He doesn't portray himself as the champion of law and order even as he pays his mexican maid 20 bucks to slip him some pills. And Olbermann never went on the radio with mock spasms to make fun of someone who had parkinson's disease. That is the stuff the king of all republicans is made of, and no one else.

Oh well, there's always CNN. ;-)

I hate the false equivalency that people draw between MSNBC and FOX. MSNBC is a network with a liberal leaning, FOX is the marketing arm of the Republican Party. Olbermann definitely goes too far sometimes but Limbaugh is a narcissistic sociopath. No compassion, no interest in right and wrong just greed and hypocrisy.

It's pathetic watching MSNBC jump through hoops trying to take some mythical high road just because they want to differentiate themselves from FOX.

I hate the false equivalency that people draw between MSNBC and FOX. MSNBC is a network with a liberal leaning, FOX is the marketing arm of the Republican Party. Olbermann definitely goes too far sometimes but Limbaugh is a narcissistic sociopath. No compassion, no interest in right and wrong just greed and hypocrisy.

I totally agree, and Rachel Maddow did a great job demonstrating the false equivalency the other night when discussing Keith's suspension.

Well, for those of you folks who are claiming that MSNBC is a much more "responsible" organization than FOX News, here's something for you to keep in mind: on election night, MSNBC did not have impartial journalists anchoring its election coverage; rather, the entire night was hosted by Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Matthews. By stark contrast, FOX news had Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly anchor its election night coverage, as opposed to Sean Hannity and Glen Beck.

Note that I'm not stating that FOX News is the "better" or "more responsible" news organization, but what I am saying is that FOX deserves credit for not having its far-right commentators anchor election night coverage, whereas MSNBC did not even try to be objective when they chose to have Olberman and his cronies anchor that network's election coverage. Of course, I suppose my liberal friends find nothing wrong with having Olberman anchor election night coverage (although proper journalistic standars say that job should be done by an impartial journalist); yet I can only imagine their outrage if FOX had Hannity and Beck anchor their coverage.

Well, for those of you folks who are claiming that MSNBC is a much more "responsible" organization than FOX News, here's something for you to keep in mind: on election night, MSNBC did not have impartial journalists anchoring its election coverage; rather, the entire night was hosted by Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Matthews. By stark contrast, FOX news had Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly anchor its election night coverage, as opposed to Sean Hannity and Glen Beck.

Note that I'm not stating that FOX News is the "better" or "more responsible" news organization, but what I am saying is that FOX deserves credit for not having its far-right commentators anchor election night coverage, whereas MSNBC did not even try to be objective when they chose to have Olberman and his cronies anchor that network's election coverage. Of course, I suppose my liberal friends find nothing wrong with having Olberman anchor election night coverage (although proper journalistic standars say that job should be done by an impartial journalist); yet I can only imagine their outrage if FOX had Hannity and Beck anchor their coverage.

Are you saying that Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly are impartial journalists? They aren't. They spout the same talking points and lies just at a lower volume.

Well, his "indefinite" suspension certainly didn't last long. Liberals came out in droves to support him and he'll be back on air tomorrow. I'm thrilled!

Damn. This is so abrupt there had to have been back stage drama. I'll miss you Keith!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/21/keith-olbermann-countdown-over_n_812506.html