Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Paying the Piper
Posted by: McQ on Monday, May 07, 2007

Olberman an "objective journalist"? No, but certainly good enough to host a debate for Republicans:
In an angry commentary on April 25, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann accused Rudolph Giuliani of using the language of Osama bin Laden with "the same chilling nonchalance of the madman" to argue that Republicans would keep Americans safer than Democrats from terror.

Eight days later, Olbermann hosted MSNBC's coverage of the first debate among Republican candidates for president.

[...]

MSNBC's use of Olbermann as a host for major events predated his "special comments," which began appearing late last summer at the end of "Countdown," his irreverent prime-time newscast. The periodic commentaries often seethe with anger toward the Bush administration and against the war. Spread quickly over the Internet, they've made him a liberal icon and raised his show's ratings.

Olbermann knows to leave his opinions at home when he anchors events, said Phil Griffin, NBC News senior vice president.

"Keith's an adult," Griffin said. "He can tell when it's appropriate to express himself in a commentary and when to be a journalist. That's one of his strengths. He knows exactly the tone and his role when he's doing anything."
But apparently, the same can't be said of Britt Hume, at least as implied by the Democrats as it pertains to Fox. I mean where are the adults on the Democratic side?

The silliness and pettiness of the Democratic pullout of debates on Fox still amazes me. But again, it is another in a long line of apparent demonstrations of the power of the Netroots (at least the perceived power among Democratic politicians). As mentioned yesterday, the upcoming new Iraq appropriations bill will again give us a clue as to that power. Democrats have willingly put themselves in a position where they are dancing to the Netroots tune. It is just my opinion, naturally, but there is definitely going to be a price to pay at some point in the not too distant future.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
"Ramadi suicide blasts a blow to U.S. advances"

Yahoo headline (clicking to the story had another headline)

Have we ever seen a similar headline, say, "Zarkawi death a blow to Al Qaeda" or something like that?

Hey, for every policeman the Al Qaeda kill, I assume 10 more will fill their place....right? Why not?

sorry, that bugged me.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
If the Dems can’t handle Fox....how can you expect them to handle real enemies?
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Hosting a debate, Hosting coverage of a debate. Not all time same same.
 
Written By: Retief
URL: http://
how can you expect them to handle real enemies?
They have a plan for that...they’ll do it smarter and better.

There, satisfied?
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Have we ever seen a similar headline, say, "Zarkawi death a blow to Al Qaeda" or something like that?
Yes, we have.


From CNN:
Capture a ’severe blow’ to al Qaeda in Iraq
From USAToday:
Blair says al-Zarqawi death important blow to al-Qaeda
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
He’s got ya there Harun. Of course us getting Zarqawi is like them killing one of our Generals.
 
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
Hosting a debate, Hosting coverage of a debate. Not all time same same.
MSNBC did both.

In the case of Fox, the Congressional Black Caucus was hosting the debate and Fox was covering it.

Tell me why that’s unacceptable, but the MSNBC template is ok.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Not to undermine your argument, or anything, McQ, but the story you’re covering started when the Guliani campaign complained to MSNBC about them letting Olberman anywhere near the debate coverage.

So I guess this is you vs. Guliani on this one, right, with you arguing that both Olberman and Beck should both be allowed to moderate debates? I could live with that, except the right wing would love to play Lucy with that football.

You’re running up a sand dune when you try to pretend that there’s anything unique about Democrats working the media. Personally, I’d accept that Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman are similar in character and objectivity. The difference is that Glenn Beck’s total lack of even the pretense of objectivity is totally ignored - or actively denied -, whereas Olberman’s lack of objectivity is portrayed as a scandal.

The other difference between Olberman and Beck, which you continue to ignore, is that Olberman is a single individual on MSNBC, whereas 97% of all programming on Fox is a mirror image of Glenn Beck in POV. Fox has a uniform and consistent agenda and MSNBC does not. It’s as clear as day if you choose to discuss it. Only four years ago, Phil Donohue was fired from MSNBC despite high ratings exactly because he sounded somewhat like Olberman.

 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
Not to undermine your argument, or anything, McQ, but the story you’re covering started when the Guliani campaign complained to MSNBC about them letting Olberman anywhere near the debate coverage.
Doesn’t undermine it a bit, ’nost. Guliani may have complained but he didn’t pull out or try to make MSNBC the scape goat, did he?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
he didn’t pull out or try to make MSNBC the scape goat, did he?

Logically, it was too late to pull out. As for #2, open to question, too lazy to find the quotes from his spokesman, but it seems pretty similar except for the lack of pulling out.

And, again: Olberman is a single individual on MSNBC, whereas 97% of all programming on Fox is a mirror image of Glenn Beck in POV. Fox has a uniform and consistent agenda and MSNBC does not.

The bottom line is that the Democratic Debate came out better in the public view for and of the Democrats by not being on Fox. In other news, Bush admin personnel and Republican candidates grant interviews with PowerLine and HughHewitt, but not with DKos, for identical reasons.


 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
Logically, it was too late to pull out.
Nonsense. We’re talking politics and he’d have pleased a large portion of the base if he’d have said "no" to being in the same forum with Olberman.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Pogue,

Thanks for the headlines...I truly feel better. Maybe its just Yahoo (my normal news source) that tends to drive me crazy.

I should have done a google search before complaining too, they even used the word "blow!" Must be like Bus plunge.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Olberman is a single individual on MSNBC
Well, most of them say far fewer Batsh*t crazy things than Olbermann, but they are more ideologically uniform than FOX. Fox is more tabloidish and sensationalist, but less uniform.
whereas 97% of all programming on Fox is a mirror image of Glenn Beck in POV
No, much as at MSNBC, many may be conservative, but they say far less extreme things than Glenn Beck (assuming lefty blogs, Greenwald and Mona can be trusted, I have never listened to the man.)

Besides, the issue was FOX and specifically Brit Hume, who can in no way be compared to Beck or Olbermann.
 
Written By: Lance
URL: www.asecondhandconjecture.com
with you arguing that both Olberman and Beck should both be allowed to moderate debates? I could live with that, except the right wing would love to play Lucy with that football.
Sure He’s saying they should be allowed (I suppose), but also that Brit Hume should be allowed to as well. How is it ok for Olberman, and not for Hume?
 
Written By: Scott
URL: http://
Olberman is a single individual on MSNBC, whereas 97% of all programming on Fox is a mirror image of Glenn Beck in POV. Fox has a uniform and consistent agenda and MSNBC does not.
Wow. It must take a couple pitchers of Kool Aid to wash that pill down. Even then, I’m betting an unhingable lower jaw is still required to get that down the old Asp hole.

Canceling on Fox isn’t "working the media", it’s playing to the far-left commie base. Maybe that’s good politics, maybe it isn’t, but sure aint "working the media".

The fact of the matter is there is no completely-unhinged-yet-still-very-influential corollary on the right to **** the bed over a similar move by the Republicans.

I can’t think of a clearer example of which party is more captive of it’s extreme wing.

[Whiny, Liberal, piss ant voice] "We won’t even go on you stupid TV channel, so nah!".[/Whiny, Liberal, piss ant voice]

God, I can’t wait for Evolution to start back up. :)
 
Written By: Augustus
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider