4
   

Keith Olberman - Tarnished Star of the Left, Has Tarnished NBC

 
 
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 10:59 am
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090800008_pf.html

MSNBC's decision to adopted a left-wing bias made sense, and their increased viewership since makinging the change supports the economics of the decision.

Where the parent network NBC, obviously, went wrong was in allowing the left-wing bias to spill into it's "legitimate" news operation.

At best, Olberman is a highly opinionated, contraversial commentator who has staked out a clear position on the left.

Installing him as the anchor on serious live political events (i.e. the Coventions) was a dumb mistake which they have just rectified. The FOX equivalent would have been to have Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly replace Britt Humes.

How did they allow this mess to happen?

Could it be that their already liberal perspective wasn't able to perceive just how extreme Olbermann actually is?

Why did they finally catch on?

After all of the objections of Republicans, conservatives and Hillary Clinton supporters? Of course not.

It was Jon Stewart's ridicule that made an impression.

Iteresting



 
ebrown p
 
  4  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 11:41 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I won't argue the point about Olberman.

But... assuming you watch Fox News, do you even notice the partisan crap their anchors pull? I figure it is only fair to have a network with the opposite bias.
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 11:55 am
MSNBC's ratings speak volumes on the shift to the left. They have no audience. The right doesn't care anout libbie TV and the left are too busy watching FOXNews.
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 11:58 am
@ebrown p,
Maybe the left can start a Radio Station. Let's call it Air America.

Oh, wait. That did not work out too well either.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:10 pm
As a long time amateur media analyst, I can honestly say that it is extremely difficult to pick up any bias in Fox's straight news reporting--if anything they go out of their way to be more fair to the left. The special analytical programming, talk shows, etc. do tilt right of center but are still more fair than what you find on other networks.

And THAT is why Fox is trusted by so many and why it beats all the other cable networks in ratings.

From a UCLA study
Quote:
The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found.

"If viewers spent an equal amount of time watching Fox's 'Special Report' as ABC's 'World News' and NBC's 'Nightly News,' then they would receive a nearly perfectly balanced version of the news," said Milyo, an associate professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Missouri at Columbia.

Five news outlets " "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," ABC's "Good Morning America," CNN's "NewsNight With Aaron Brown," Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and the Drudge Report " were in a statistical dead heat in the race for the most centrist news outlet. Of the print media, USA Today was the most centrist.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx


Once MSNBC gave up any pretense of fairness in their reporting and obviously promoted leftwing ideology and supported exclusively liberal Democrats, their ratings tanked in a major way. Even those who agree with their ideology and politics couldn't stand the mindless and meaningless pandering.
ebrown p
 
  2  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:24 pm
@Foxfyre,
Quote:
I can honestly say that it is extremely difficult to pick up any bias in Fox's straight news reporting


Not only is this very funny...

It also says a lot more about you than it does about the network.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:30 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
I can honestly say that it is extremely difficult to pick up any bias in Fox's straight news reporting


Not only is this very funny...

It also says a lot more about you than it does about the network.



Well I posted some support for my opinion. Please post yours. What's your favorite cable news source? How does it compare in ratings with Fox? Hmmmm?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:35 pm
fox;
ratings=non-bias?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:44 pm
Fox gets away with it because guys like OReilly and Hannity are presented only as "commentators" not journalists.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:48 pm
@farmerman,
Because thats what they are is commentators.
They dont claim to be journalists, and they never have

But are you saying that since they are on Fox that they are journalists, or are you saying that since you dislike them they are journalists?
BTW, can you provide evidence to even one time where either of them have claimed to be journalists?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 12:59 pm
We watched the Fox coverage of the Democratic convention just for laughs.

The immediate response to the Hillary speech (where she said she supported Obama 100%) a long-spun discussion that she was giving a half-hearted endorsement.

The Bill Clinton speech response was pretty much the same.

It is Republican talking points left and rights. (Maybe Foxfyre's point is that Republican talking points are fair and balanced).

0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 04:39 pm
i didn't have a problem with much of what olberman said, but when & where he said it.

should have saved it for after or his next countdown.
nimh
 
  3  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 06:47 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

MSNBC's ratings speak volumes on the shift to the left. They have no audience. The right doesn't care anout libbie TV and the left are too busy watching FOXNews.

Olbermann's Countdown show "reaches more than a million viewers a night, a higher television rating than any other show in the troubled 12-year history of the network." (IHT)

Although MSNBC remained in last place among the broadcast and cable news networks when it came to reporting the conventions, it did "nearly double .. its audience compared with the 2004 conventions". (IHT)
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 07:31 pm
@ebrown p,
What is the "partisan crap" FOX anchors pull?

I don't argue there isn't a place/market for a left-wing MSNBC, but any attempt to equate FOX news anchors with those of MSNBC is fairly tortured.

A fair comparison with Olberman and Matthews are Hannity and O'Reilly - neither of whom have anchored FOX news programming.

If you really mean to compare Humes, Baird, Shepherd et all with Olberman and Matthews, frankly, you're pressing. However, I'm open to specifics.

0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 07:33 pm
@farmerman,
Get away with it?

Get away with what?

Hannity and O'Reilly are commentators.

That's the point.

FOX doesn't try to suggest that they are objective news reporters.

MSNBC, on the other hand, did try to "get away with" contending that Olberman and Matthews were.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 07:37 pm
@DontTreadOnMe,
That, clearly, is the point.

I don't give a damned what any clearly biased commentator has to say. Idiots will reveal themselves as such.

MSNBC, however, crossed the line when they attempted to pass off opinionated commentators as objective news reporters, and in so doing, damaged the larger NBC brand.

They've admitted their mistake.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 07:42 pm
@nimh,
Again, good for them. They've tapped into a market they can exploit.

One can argue that the left-wing biased MSNBC programming can't match the audience of the right-wing biased FOX because:

1) There are fewer left-wingers watching TV in America

2) Left-wing watchers already have the three broadcast networks to meet their needs.

Odds are pretty good that it is #2 which is why MSNBC has to be "in your face" left-wing so as to attract the liberals who think that ABC, CBS and NBC are conservative.

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2008 07:57 pm
@nimh,
I think MSNBC is sorely missing Tim Russert. Russert's death seems to have left them with a big void in the political sphere, and people who might have been appropriate to anchor the conventions seem to have been deployed elsewhere on NBC/MSNBC because so many of them seem to be doing double duty to fill in for Russert.

I like Keith Olbermann on Countdown, and I like Chris Matthews on Hardball, but as the anchors of a convention they were not great. It wasn't so much the bias that bothered me, I'm about as liberal as they come, I just found them dull to listen to for very extended periods of time, and they did not seem to work well together. Tom Brokaw and Andrea Mitchell would have been a much better anchor team if I were doing the picking for MSNBC. Long stretches of convention coverage are dull, so it helps to have anchors who are informative and historically knowledgable, and not just spouting opinions.

In general, I have found the political coverage on MSNBC dull lately. It is too much of the same small group of regular commentators saying the same things over and over. They do include Pat Buchanan in this group, so there is some diversity of perspective, but he is as redundant as the others.

More and more, I have been watching CNN rather than MSNBC. When I want to hear a more right wing perspective I tune in to Fox (but only in small doses Laughing). I do want to listen to a range of opinions, and listening to all three cable channels is the way you can get the most diversity. Anyone who complains about bias, or too narrow a range of views, should just do more channel flipping.

But truthfully, if I really want the news, beyond the headlines, and if I really want considered analysis, I read newspapers as well as serious commentary magazines. Television will never replace the written word when it comes to information--it's just too limited and superficial.

Foxfyre, the study you posted is three years old. It might or might not be applicable today.



:
Robert Gentel
 
  3  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 01:39 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Here is what was the last straw:



MSNBC shoudn't have ever used him as an anchor, not just because he's biased and trying to make a name for himself as a liberal but because he lacks any basic self control in refraining from editorializing when it is inappropriate.

That being said, I think that TV journalism on the whole needs to practice this restraint more often. The lines between reporting and commentary are being getting more and more blurry as commentary becomes entertainment and blowhards become celebrities.
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 06:42 am
@Robert Gentel,
Oberman has lost his mind. Drunk Drunk Drunk
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Keith Olberman - Tarnished Star of the Left, Has Tarnished NBC
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/07/2019 at 08:28:25