Given that Keith Olbermann's show is so aggressively partisan, it does seem silly to discipline him--if barely--for making campaign contributions.
Given that Keith Olbermann's show is so aggressively partisan, it does seem silly to discipline him--if barely--for making campaign contributions.
Yes, Rachel Maddow's comments don't seem very persuasive given how light the punishment turned out to be. What's the takeaway? MSNBC is different, but barely?
Keith Olbermann is a liberal, left-leaning Democrat who hosts a nightly TV show on MSNBC where he lampoons Conservatives and praises Obama yet they suspend him for contributing a few thousand to some Democratic candidates. What a riduculously ironic move by MSNBC. I suppose this move was meant to convince people that they are not what Fox News is to the right. Gimme a break.
MSNBC is not exactly putting on a clinic in crisis management. First it indefinitely suspended an unabashedly partisan host--not a reporter or traditional news anchor--for making campaign contributions. Then the punishment turned out to be two whole days?
Yes, journalists have opinions. But they are supposed to check them at the door when they go to work. Their reporting should be determined by the facts they find out, not by what they believe. ButI don't see how those rules apply to Keith Olbermann, who hosts a partisan program that has morphed into MSNBC's business plan.
Well, it sort of stood by them. The punishment sounded severe, but turned out to be barely a slap on the proverbial wrist.
Thanks for taking our questions, Rem. Let me begin by saying I'm a big fan of Mr. Olbermann and MSNBC. However, I don't approve of his donating thousands of dollars to political campaigns any more than I do when Fox's on-air personalities do (quite often, apparently), and I think a suspension was entirely appropriate. Which brings me to my question: Do you think the incident will have any lasting effect on MSNBC's image? Or are the relatively few viewers who are even paying attention more likely to think, "They all do it"?
If Olbermann was a network news anchor, this would be a huge deal. But first Fox and now MSNBC have become very different entities, ones that heavily emphasize partisan opinion as opposed to traditional straight-down-the-middle reporting.
Good catch. My bad. He is a liberal host. I think MSNBC makes a mistake by having him anchor election night coverage.
He certainly hasn't apologized so far. My take is that Keith Olbermann isn't an apologizing kind of guy.
News organizations have always had rules barring journalists from engaging in political activity.
Can you note some of the larger contributions by Republican, right-leaning TV hosts?
The most significant one is the $2 million Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., which owns Fox, gave to the Republican cause.
You're right: We ARE drowning in a deluge of partisan opinion. I found Election Night viewing extremely frustrating. All I wanted was results, and most channels were dominated by the partisan back-and-forth.
I'm sure both Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams are uncomfortable with the direction taken by MSNBC. It's awkward for the network.
The real journalists do exist, and they continue to do good work at many newspapers and Web sites and TV news operations around the nation, not to mention NPR. Fox and MSNBC are to a great extent in a different line of work.
Conservative news critic Bernard Goldberg has been circulating the poll result that in 2008, 60 percent of DEMOCRATIC LEANERS thought the press favored Obama in that election. Have their been similar evaluations since then about people's perception of press bias as regards Mr. Obama and its effect on elections?
Whatever press honeymoon there was for candidate Obama ended a long, long time ago. He has been hammered hard in the news media, often for good reason.
Why is Fox so quiet on this subject?
Fox has nothing to gain by weighing in. It can just sit back and enjoy it.
I think this is a classic case where the rules haven't caught up to the reality. Brian Williams and Keith Olbermann have very different jobs, and it doesn't make sense for them to be governed by the same codes of conduct.
I doubt that's the case. And while Olbermann's numbers certainly lag behind Bill O'Reilly's, he has increased MSNBC's auidence greatly. In fact, his approach really inspired MSNBC's strategy, which took a perennial also-ran and catapulted it past sturggling pioneer CNN.
I agree that Fox and MSNBC are fundamentally different from the other networks and CNN. Both are unabashedly partisan, and that's a huge shift. Of course, there are exceptions. For example, that description hardly applies to Shepard Smith's program on Fox.
I think you are on to something. There really is a need for guidelines that differentiate between traditional journalists and partisan, opinion-driven hosts.
You are absolutely right. It is a big mistake for MSNBC to have Olbermann anchor news coverage. It confuses the public, big time.
I heard an interview a few weeks ago where Jon Stewart essentially said that part of the success and brilliance of Fox News (yes, no matter how you feel about what they say they are a successful model) and specifically Roger Ailes is that they give their hosts and celebrities room to push the envelope and them also provide them with cover. They don't flinch at the slightest controversy. Your thoughts?
Yes, Fox honcho Roger Ailes and his boss, Rupert Murdoch, are not big on flinching.
I agree, which is why the initial decision to punish Olbermann was surprising. It looked like MSNBC wanted to have it both ways and wasn't entirely comfortable with its partisan identity. But the quick cave-in suggests it wasn't really THAT uncomfortable.
Yes, Fox has a much larger audience than MSNBC. But MSNBC's audience has grown quite a bit, and it's certainly much more a player than it was before it adopted its current approach. Whether that's a wonderful thing is another question.
Yes, the way MSNBC handled this was laughable. First the moral outrage and the "indefinte" suspension, then the rapid retreat. The larger issue is that the rule involved here doesn't make much sense when applied to someone in Olbermann's position.
Remember, MSNBC, do not contribute to candidates, unlike Fox, which just hires the candidates. How do you view Fox hiring so many, especially Republican, candidiates?
Yes, it certainlyn does. Fox is the full employment act for unsuccessful GOP politicians.
Thoughts, comments, suggestions or criticisms about The Post's Live Q&As? Send us an e-mail.
Become a fan of Post Live on Facebook.
Follow @WashingtonPost on Twitter.