It is currently 06/14/24 8:14 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Go to page Previous  1, 2   Page 2 of 2   [ 47 posts ]
Author Message
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/07/10 10:04 pm • # 26 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Another media stunt?


Top
  
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 2:15 am • # 27 
Olbermann and the dangers of partisan media
By John P. Avlon, CNN Contributor
November 8, 2010 6:20 a.m. EST

(CNN) -- Keith Olbermann's suspension for making political contributions to three Democratic candidates is just the latest example of the problems that come with the rise of partisan media.

In the fallout, other MSNBC personalities were also found to have given to Democratic candidates, while Media Matters uncovered the fact that more than 30 Fox News hosts and contributors had donated to conservative candidates.

Whole news networks are being transformed into little more than on-air advocates for political parties. The idea of objectivity is now increasingly dismissed as a myth rather than honored as an ideal toward which the news industry should strive.

Americans are self-segregating themselves into separate political realities -- responding to the proliferation of information by consuming news that confirms their political prejudices. Loyal viewers see opinion-anchors like Olbermann or Glenn Beck as the only "truth-tellers" in town, while dismissing the rest of the media as cowardly or biased. We are devolving back to the era when newspapers were owned and operated by political parties.

The result: Partisan warfare is on the rise, and trust in media is on the decline. The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has documented the trend and concluded that "virtually every news organization or program has seen its credibility marks decline" over the past decade.

Even C-Span, which offers unedited coverage of public events without commentary, has experienced a steep -- and absurd -- decline in believability. In this hyperpartisan environment, people literally don't trust what they see with their own eyes. Polarizing for profit might be good for ratings in the short run, but its bad for the country.

Olbermann's on-air protégé Rachael Maddow described the difference between MSNBC and Fox as this: "They run as a political operation, we are not." She added, "The point has been made and Keith should be back hosting 'Countdown'" -- less than 24 hours after his suspension.

It's natural for Maddow to defend Olbermann -- they are close colleagues, talented broadcasters cut from the same ideological cloth. What was more surprising was the number of conservative commentators who rushed to Olbermann's defense. They embrace the idea of hyperpartisanship in all things news and opinion.

Fox News -- which rarely loses an opportunity to attack the left -- gave comparatively little coverage to Olbermann's suspension. Here's the reason for their reaction: Conservative media warriors welcome outright liberal advocates, because they justify the right's own ideological approach.

Olbermann symbolizes a fight for public opinion that the right believes it can win. After all, at any given time roughly 50 percent more Americans self-identify as conservative rather than liberal. A 2009 Pew poll found that 15 percent of Americans call themselves conservative Republicans while just 11 percent describe themselves as liberal Democrats.

If right-wingers give Americans false choices between the two, they know they can win. But this approach ignores the plurality of Americans who are in the center -- and the fact that independent voters are the largest and fastest growing segment of the electorate. That is a huge unmet market looking for a strong advocate.

In the current hyperpartisan media environment, it's easy to forget that it hasn't always been this way. Broadcast icon Edward R. Murrow was not a registered Democrat or Republican -- he was an independent. Before courageously taking on Sen. Joe McCarthy, he was considered an anti-communist, supporting, for example, the execution of the Rosenbergs as spies for the Soviet Union. He wouldn't have dreamed of giving donations to political candidates.

Murrow's colleague Charles Collingwood said, "His politics were based on old-fashioned notions of morality and honor, not ideology." If this sounds simply old-fashioned, it should not. This idea is at the enduring heart of both good government and good journalism.

Sen. Patrick Daniel Moynihan famously said, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." But the current polarized political environment results in Americans engaging in civic debates armed with only their own exaggerated partisan "facts" -- for example, the latest overheated myth that President Obama's trip to India was going to cost $200 million a day and be accompanied by 34 warships -- and cynicism becomes justified with the knowledge that news anchors are shilling for political parties. This is ultimately dangerous for a democracy.

The current spin cycle might be hitting such a sickening extent that there is a demand for something different -- that's the impulse that I believe was behind the success of Jon Stewart's Rally for Sanity last weekend. After all, 44 percent of Americans born after 1977 identify themselves as independent, according to the Pew Center. The American people want something more than the predictable parroting of partisan talking points.

Independent on-air journalists don't have to be without opinion to be nonpartisan -- they just have to be honest brokers, punching left and right as their conscience and common sense dictates. We need to play offense from the center and create a strong alternative.

The ideal of independence is being degraded by the proliferation of partisan media. The fact that undisclosed donations by opinion anchors like Olbermann are being defended is evidence of how far off course we've gotten. The lines between political and media figures are blurring; we are getting used to journalists functioning as party apologists while elected officials sound increasingly like radio talk show hosts.

But the search for the truth doesn't conform to a partisan prism. Reasserting reasonable standards of independence can help restore trust in the news media and help stop the political Balkanization of the United States.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of John Avlon.

Link 

 



Last edited by Sidartha on 11/08/10 2:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 3:51 am • # 28 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112

That's an important and excellent read, Sid ~ with your permission, I'd like to copy/repost your post as the lead in a thread to discuss the media's ideal role, vs today's reality, in all things political ~

Sooz



Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 3:56 am • # 29 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
I still believe there's more to the story than we're privvy to ~ and I believe the honchos were VERY nervous because the Comcast mega deal is still awaiting approval ~ Sooz

SHORTEST SUSPENSION -- IN THE WORLD.... We learned Friday morning that MSNBC's Keith Olbermann contributed to three Democratic congressional candidates this year, with checks totaling $7,200. NBC News, citing personnel policies prohibiting such donations, announced Friday afternoon that the "Countdown" host had been suspended indefinitely, without pay.

The word "indefinitely" has a certain connotation, suggesting a fairly long period of time. With that in mind, it came as something of a surprise to learn late yesterday that Olbermann will be back behind his desk tomorrow.

Quote:

"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," the MSNBC president, Phil Griffin, said in a statement. "We look forward to having him back on the air Tuesday night."

Mr. Olbermann has declined interview requests since Friday, and he did not immediately confirm that he would resume his program, "Countdown," as of Tuesday. But on Sunday afternoon, he posted to Twitter a thank-you to fans for "support that feels like a global hug."

"MSNBC Folds!" read a headline on Daily Kos, one of the leading Web sites for progressives, on Sunday night after Mr. Griffin's statement was released.

I'm not privy to internal NBC News deliberations, but this certainly seems like a fold on the network's part.

To be sure, the executives found themselves in a pretty awkward position. If they ignored Olbermann's transgression, they'd send a signal that they don't take their own standards seriously enough. But by issuing an indefinite suspension, the network caused even more problems for themselves -- the decision was widely panned as excessive; it angered MSNBC's viewers; and kept its top-rated host off the air, which isn't exactly good for ratings.

Faced with all of this, NBC News appears to have concluded that two nights off the air is sufficient punishment.

Whether one sees this as a face-saving gesture or not, I'm glad the flap is over.

—Steve Benen 8:00 AM November 8, 2010

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archiv ... 026524.php


Top
  
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 5:20 am • # 30 
This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic. Murdock owns Fox and gives a million to the GOP but a talking head can't give a few thousand without losing his job.

You are watching the end of democracy in the US. Prepare for the New Feudal Society.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 6:00 am • # 31 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
I'm inclined to think this is all a publicity stunt.
He only wanted a long week-end and he got one.
So they got some mileage out of it.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 7:05 am • # 32 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.


Top
  
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 8:47 am • # 33 
sooz08 wrote:

That's an important and excellent read, Sid ~ with your permission, I'd like to copy/repost your post as the lead in a thread to discuss the media's ideal role, vs today's reality, in all things political ~

Sooz

Absolutely...


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 1:13 pm • # 34 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 4713
macroscopic wrote:
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.

Very true, but an important point here is that Olbermann did this privately. He didn't announce which candidates he supported nor imply or outright state that he wanted his viewers to do the same.

What would be the next step, telling employees they cannot vote because that shows they are not impartial?


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 1:19 pm • # 35 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
John59 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.

Very true, but an important point here is that Olbermann did this privately. He didn't announce which candidates he supported nor imply or outright state that he wanted his viewers to do the same.

What would be the next step, telling employees they cannot vote because that shows they are not impartial?

Spot on, John.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 2:42 pm • # 36 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
I have mixed emotions about the whole scenario ~ as Chaos said several posts ago, Olbermann is smart, signed a contract, and violated that contract ~ apparently by choice ~ key to my mixed emotions is that all that was required was to report his intention to contribute and get pre-approval ~ why he chose not to do that is anyone's guess ~ I still believe there's more to the story than has been made public ~

Sooz


Top
  
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 3:51 pm • # 37 
MSNBC glosses Olbermann's program as a "newscast" and Olbermann served as one of MSNBC's anchors for their election night news coverage.  That puts him in a position of needing to observe journalistic ethics guidelines.

This simply points out the folly of "news" channels relying on partisan commentators as newscasters.  MSNBC and Fox have decided they aren't going to provide straight news and are instead offering opinions as news.  Sid's article was a very good one - both MSNBC and Fox have fallen off the wagon and are contributing greatly to the division in the country through their political advocacy.  They have blurred the line between news and opinion.

Both would serve the public far better if they jettisoned the Olbermanns, Maddows, O'Reillys, Becks Hannitys and the rest.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 4:02 pm • # 38 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/04/09
Posts: 4072
Amen to that.  The last thing needed in this country was propaganda as a spectator sport.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 4:04 pm • # 39 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
John59 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.

Very true, but an important point here is that Olbermann did this privately.
not really.  he was actually the one who revealed the donation to NBC.  they didn't "discover" it.  he then went ON to tell them about the other two.  or by "privately", did you mean "not on the air"?


Last edited by macroscopic on 11/08/10 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 4:05 pm • # 40 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
oskar576 wrote:
John59 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.

Very true, but an important point here is that Olbermann did this privately. He didn't announce which candidates he supported nor imply or outright state that he wanted his viewers to do the same.

What would be the next step, telling employees they cannot vote because that shows they are not impartial?

Spot on, John.
which part?


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/08/10 4:08 pm • # 41 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
gopqed wrote:
MSNBC glosses Olbermann's program as a "newscast" and Olbermann served as one of MSNBC's anchors for their election night news coverage.  That puts him in a position of needing to observe journalistic ethics guidelines.

This simply points out the folly of "news" channels relying on partisan commentators as newscasters.  MSNBC and Fox have decided they aren't going to provide straight news and are instead offering opinions as news.  Sid's article was a very good one - both MSNBC and Fox have fallen off the wagon and are contributing greatly to the division in the country through their political advocacy.  They have blurred the line between news and opinion.

Both would serve the public far better if they jettisoned the Olbermanns, Maddows, O'Reillys, Becks Hannitys and the rest.

i don't think that is true.  opinion is just that.  it is not fact.  and anyone who thinks so, should, as Beck himself once suggested, have their heads examined.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/09/10 4:39 am • # 42 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 4713
macroscopic wrote:
John59 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.

Very true, but an important point here is that Olbermann did this privately.
not really.  he was actually the one who revealed the donation to NBC.  they didn't "discover" it.  he then went ON to tell them about the other two.  or by "privately", did you mean "not on the air"?
Yes, Macro, I should have said "not on the air". My point being that he didn't announce the contributions and imply that his viewers should do the same.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/09/10 4:49 am • # 43 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 4713
gopqed wrote:
MSNBC glosses Olbermann's program as a "newscast" and Olbermann served as one of MSNBC's anchors for their election night news coverage.  That puts him in a position of needing to observe journalistic ethics guidelines.

This simply points out the folly of "news" channels relying on partisan commentators as newscasters.  MSNBC and Fox have decided they aren't going to provide straight news and are instead offering opinions as news.  Sid's article was a very good one - both MSNBC and Fox have fallen off the wagon and are contributing greatly to the division in the country through their political advocacy.  They have blurred the line between news and opinion.

Both would serve the public far better if they jettisoned the Olbermanns, Maddows, O'Reillys, Becks Hannitys and the rest.
There is nothing wrong with opinions as long as they are rooted in facts. That's the difference between someone like Olbermann and someone like Beck. Are any of these commentators perfect? Of course not, but it's one thing to report the news and then offer opinions and another to report something untrue and then give opinions.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/09/10 4:58 am • # 44 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
John59 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
John59 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
i doubt it was a PR stunt, but it certainly served that purpose.

for the record, i wrote to MSNBC and told them that their policy was capricious, in that nobody really expects impartiality out of Olbermann, and they should reinstate him.

Very true, but an important point here is that Olbermann did this privately.
not really.  he was actually the one who revealed the donation to NBC.  they didn't "discover" it.  he then went ON to tell them about the other two.  or by "privately", did you mean "not on the air"?
Yes, Macro, I should have said "not on the air". My point being that he didn't announce the contributions and imply that his viewers should do the same.

ok, gotcha.


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/09/10 5:32 am • # 45 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
I've only seen Olbermann on air a few times ~ I think he does a better-than-most job of explaining of why/how he got to his opinions and presenting supporting facts ~ the subliminal message here is one of perception ~ we all know perception can/does sway public opinion ~

John, I agree with your differentiation between Olbermann and Beck ~ it's my understanding that most of the big media outlets do have policies either forbidding or restricting/governing political [and other civic] involvement that could be used to tweak that subliminal message of perception ~ NBC/MSNBC does have corporate policy governing political contributions that requires reporting and prior approval ~ Olbermann chose to thumb his nose at that policy for whatever reason ~ that is, I'm sure, a violation of his contract terms ~ so I'm curious what kind of 'punishment' you think would have been appropriate ~

Sooz


Top
  
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/09/10 6:22 am • # 46 
It just occured to me that he did MSNBC a favour by graphically demonstrating the difference(s) between it and Fox "News".


Top
  
 Offline
 Post subject: "Olbermann's Checkbook"
PostPosted: 11/09/10 9:03 am • # 47 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 4713
sooz08 wrote:
I've only seen Olbermann on air a few times ~ I think he does a better-than-most job of explaining of why/how he got to his opinions and presenting supporting facts ~ the subliminal message here is one of perception ~ we all know perception can/does sway public opinion ~

John, I agree with your differentiation between Olbermann and Beck ~ it's my understanding that most of the big media outlets do have policies either forbidding or restricting/governing political [and other civic] involvement that could be used to tweak that subliminal message of perception ~ NBC/MSNBC does have corporate policy governing political contributions that requires reporting and prior approval ~ Olbermann chose to thumb his nose at that policy for whatever reason ~ that is, I'm sure, a violation of his contract terms ~ so I'm curious what kind of 'punishment' you think would have been appropriate ~

Sooz

I'm not so sure Olbermann thumbed his nose at the policy. I'm also not sure about the policy.



A STATEMENT TO THE VIEWERS OF COUNTDOWN
by Keith Olbermann

I want to sincerely thank you for the honor of your extraordinary and
ground-rattling support. Your efforts have been integral to the remedying of
these recent events, and the results should remind us of the power of
individuals spontaneously acting together to correct injustices great or small. I
would also like to acknowledge with respect the many commentators and
reporters, including those with whom my politics do not overlap, for their
support.

I also wish to apologize to you viewers for having precipitated such anxiety
and unnecessary drama. You should know that I mistakenly violated an
inconsistently applied rule – which I previously knew nothing about – that
pertains to the process by which such political contributions are approved by
NBC. Certainly this mistake merited a form of public acknowledgment and/or
internal warning, and an on-air discussion about the merits of limitations on
such campaign contributions by all employees of news organizations. Instead,
after my representative was assured that no suspension was contemplated, I
was suspended without a hearing, and learned of that suspension through the
media.

You should also know that I did not attempt to keep any of these political
contributions secret; I knew they would be known to you and the rest of the
public. I did not make them through a relative, friend, corporation, PAC, or
any other intermediary, and I did not blame them on some kind of convenient
'mistake' by their recipients. 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.

I genuinely look forward to rejoining you on Countdown on Tuesday, to
begin the repayment of your latest display of support and loyalty - support and
loyalty that is truly mutual.
--K.O.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/41623358/A-Statement-to-the-Viewers-of-Countdown


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Go to page Previous  1, 2   Page 2 of 2   [ 47 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
© Voices or Choices.
All rights reserved.