Keith Olbermann pulled from MSNBC

[HotHotHeat]

Suspended with no pay for political contributions to democrats.

Don't see why a partisan TV commentator can't show his colours in the same way he does on air each night. These were personal donations from what I understand, not in the name of NBC.

FOX corp donates all the time to the GOP.

Unfortunate, he played an important role in balancing FOX News, however biased himself.

In a statement earlier Friday, Olbermann defended his donation, saying, "I did not privately or publicly encourage anyone else to donate to these campaigns nor to any others in this election or any previous ones, nor have I previously donated to any political campaign at any level."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_779586.html

EDIT: More coming out now about the suspension...Apparently the issue NBC had was he didn't gain approval from executives before donating. So the donations themselves weren't a problem.

My guess is he'll be back on the air by next week, once MSNBC realizes he's the only one that brings that station and ratings.

[Flashpoint]

Guess I won't be watching MSNBC for a while.

Bummer man.

[Weiser Wonder]

Olbermann's awkward and overly dramatic but he's not in the ball park of the wackos on Fox News. Seems odd to pull him for political contributions everyone assumed he was making.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

Olbermann's awkward and overly dramatic but he's not in the ball park of the wackos on Fox News. Seems odd to pull him for political contributions everyone assumed he was making.

He was pulled for violating company policy - not the donations. He was supposed to inform executives at the company before donating and didn't do so.

On one hand I can see that - if you're part of the "news" you should probably go with full disclosure.

On the other hand - if my employer had this as a company policy, I would consider it a violation of my civil rights. Who I donate to is my business and my business alone.

[mykalberta]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This day just keeps getting better and better.

[Weiser Wonder]

I get that it's a violation of policy, but it seems like such a small deal. Obviously Olbermann supports Democrats and will do so financially, so to suspend him for not disclosing seems way over the line. Seems more about power dynamics than anything.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

Olbermann's awkward and overly dramatic but he's not in the ball park of the wackos on Fox News. Seems odd to pull him for political contributions everyone assumed he was making.

he's the exact same as the people on Fox News just at the other end of the political spectrum

100% the same

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

he's the exact same as the people on Fox News just at the other end of the political spectrum

100% the same

No he's not. At all. He uses reason to come to his conclusions. Just because he's a leftist and the other guys are right wingers doesn't mean they are equally good or reasonable commentators. If you can't tell the difference between Keith Olbermann and Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck it shows a complete lack of critical thinking on your part.

[mikey_the_redneck]

This is great news!

Olbermann is an idiot.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

he's the exact same as the people on Fox News just at the other end of the political spectrum

100% the same

If you let yourself believe this, the only person you're doing a disservice to is yourself.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

No he's not. At all. He uses reason to come to his conclusions. Just because he's a leftist and the other guys are right wingers doesn't mean they are equally good or reasonable commentators. If you can't tell the difference between Keith Olbermann and Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck it shows a complete lack of critical thinking on your part.

He plays 100% off of emotion, I detest him and guys like O'Reilly or Limbaugh or Beck because the contribute to the absolute idiocy of the American political system and the belief by most that the goal is to "win" over the other side and not to do what is right for the public, but they are all pretty the same and they all do it.

They play a role to their ideology and look at politics strictly though that lens. But whether or not you agree with that doesn't mean others who don't have a "complete lack of critical thinking".

Both sides look at "reason" to come to their conclusions because they think they are not only right but logical.

The thing I don't get is NBC even suspending Olbermann, last election they mixed their political people throughout MSNBC and NBC. This year they stuck all the the left leaning people on MSNBC and the actual news people on NBC. It's not like they are hiding that MSNBC is the Fox News of the left.

also and I saw this in a story, such a huge hypocrite

Olbermann, as well as MSNBC executives, was a vocal critic of the $1 million donation by Fox News' parent News Corp. to the Republican Governor's Association earlier this year, saying at the time, "We now have another million reasons Fox News is the Republican news channel."

In a subsequent show, Olbermann also pressed House Majority Whip James Clyburn if there was a "legislative response" to a networks that "starts to shill for partisan causes."

I fail to see the difference between the network doing it, and the host of a network show doing. But that being said I don't think he should have been suspended

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

also and I saw this in a story, such a huge hypocrite



I fail to see the difference between the network doing it, and the host of a network show doing. But that being said I don't think he should have been suspended

How do you fail to see the difference? The host of a network show is, at the end of the day, an individual with his own opinions and his own thoughts. He has no need to live an "unbiased" life outside the structure of the network he works for.

The network on the other hand, is an entity which is expected to operate impartially, because of the weight and influence it carries as an entity that covers the news.

Huge difference.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

He plays 100% off of emotion, I detest him and guys like O'Reilly or Limbaugh or Beck because the contribute to the absolute idiocy of the American political system and the belief by most that the goal is to "win" over the other side and not to do what is right for the public, but they are all pretty the same and they all do it.

They play a role to their ideology and look at politics strictly though that lens. But whether or not you agree with that doesn't mean others who don't have a "complete lack of critical thinking".

Both sides look at "reason" to come to their conclusions because they think they are not only right but logical.

The thing I don't get is NBC even suspending Olbermann, last election they mixed their political people throughout MSNBC and NBC. This year they stuck all the the left leaning people on MSNBC and the actual news people on NBC. It's not like they are hiding that MSNBC is the Fox News of the left.

also and I saw this in a story, such a huge hypocrite



I fail to see the difference between the network doing it, and the host of a network show doing. But that being said I don't think he should have been suspended

This is where the critical thinking comes in. Olbermann does not play off emotion to near the extent Limbaugh or Beck do. He uses reason and facts to make his argument. Yes, he does the long pauses and dramatic tones/hyperbole that get on my nerves, but he still maintains that foundation in reason.

Limbaugh: Barack "Hussein" Obama is making this country socialist!

does NOT equal:

Olbermann: Obama has sold out healthcare reform along with the other Democrats who have accepted massive donations from healthcare companies.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Igottago

How do you fail to see the difference? The host of a network show is, at the end of the day, an individual with his own opinions and his own thoughts. He has no need to live an "unbiased" life outside the structure of the network he works for.

The network on the other hand, is an entity which is expected to operate impartially, because of the weight and influence it carries as an entity that covers the news.

Huge difference.

The following Fox Newsers have offered support for Republican candidates or organizations during the 2010 election cycle:

Fred Barnes, Fox News contributor
Glenn Beck, host of Fox News' Glenn Beck
Eric Bolling, host of Fox Business' Follow the Money
John Bolton, Fox News contributor
Tammy Bruce, Fox News contributor
Elaine Chao, Fox News contributor
Monica Crowley, Fox News contributor
Mike Gallagher, Fox News contributor
Newt Gingrich, Fox News contributor
Sean Hannity, host of Fox News' Hannity
Mike Huckabee, host of Fox News' Huckabee and Twentieth Television's The Huckabee Show
David Hunt, Fox News contributor
Laura Ingraham, Fox News contributor
John Kasich, former host and contributor
Brian Kilmeade, co-host of Fox News' Fox & Friends and host of Fox News Radio's Kilmeade & Friends
William Kristol, Fox News contributor
Michelle Malkin, Fox News contributor
KT McFarland, Fox News national security analyst and host of FoxNews.com's DEFCON 3
Angela McGlowan, Fox News contributor
Dennis Miller, Fox News contributor
Dick Morris, Fox News contributor
Rupert Murdoch, CEO and chairman of News Corp., parent company of Fox News
Andrew Napolitano, Fox News senior judicial analyst and host of Fox Business' Freedom Watch
Sarah Palin, Fox News contributor and host of Fox News' Real American Stories
Dana Perino, Fox News contributor
Dave Ramsey, listed Fox Business personality and former host of Fox Business' The Dave Ramsey Show (through June)
Sandy Rios, Fox News contributor
Karl Rove, Fox News contributor
Rick Santorum, Fox News contributor
Doug Schoen, Fox News contributor
Andrea Tantaros, Fox News contributor
Stuart Varney, Fox News contributor and host of Fox Business' Varney & Co.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Igottago

How do you fail to see the difference? The host of a network show is, at the end of the day, an individual with his own opinions and his own thoughts. He has no need to live an "unbiased" life outside the structure of the network he works for.

The network on the other hand, is an entity which is expected to operate impartially, because of the weight and influence it carries as an entity that covers the news.

Huge difference.

And NewsCorp. is the parent company of Fox News, but isn't Foxnews.

Jon Stewart made an interesting point this week when he interviewed the guy from Fox News Sunday. MSBC has done themselves a great disservice in becoming the Foxnews of the left instead of playing it straight.

Keith Olbermann is an idiot, and is just as bad as most of the Foxnews folks, as Diane said, you just agree with his ideology.

[Stimpy]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

The following Fox Newsers have offered support for Republican candidates or organizations during the 2010 election cycle:

Link?

[MelBridgeman]

How dare he!

[Displaced Flames fan]

What may have been the determining factor is that he made the opponents of each of the candidates he donated to his "Worst Person of the Day" at some point recently.

Pretty irresponsible.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

The following Fox Newsers have offered support for Republican candidates or organizations during the 2010 election cycle:

Do you also have a list of Fox news contributors that donated to Democrats' campaigns?

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Do you also have a list of Fox news contributors that donated to Democrats' campaigns?

Don't know about this campaign but media voting habits in America have been fairly well established through a lengthy period of time . . . .

In 2008, media contributions favoured Democrats by a ratio of 100 to 1.

Individuals who reported being employed by major media organizations made the following contributions:

NBC, NBC Universal: $104,184 to Democrats / $3,150 to Republicans

CBS: $45,508 to Dems / $966 to Republicans

ABC: $17,320 / $4,717

Turner Broadcasting, TBS: $30,161 / $3,950

Fox: $40,573 / $0

Fox News/Fox News Channel: $1,280 / $0

MSNBC: $210 / $282

CNN: $2,286 / $1,250

Associated Press: $2,550 / $545
Reuters: $10,745 / $3,450

Washington Post, Newsweek: $4,268 / $0

New York Times, NYT Co: $8,143 / $0

Time, Inc: $40,988 / $4,850 ($2,300 to Republicans was from someone identified as a jeweler, so the total may actually be $2,550)

Time Magazine: $1,250 / $0

USA Today: $6,067 / $0

Totals for the above: $315,533 to Democrats ; $22,656 to Republicans

Ironically, an MSNBC staffer the previous year, measuring from 2004 to the start of the 2008 campaign, did a research project which also revealed journalist campaign contributions massively favoured Democrats over Republicans.

MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/

The charts below are fairly well-known . . . . .










http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp which, it's easy to see, is a fairly biased site in itself. . . . . although they've got a lot of genuine ammunition. Nevertheless, the material it uses in the charts isn't a big secret or a heart-stopping surprise when added to everything else, including the money trail.

To be clear, both sides of the political spectrum claim the other side is favoured by media. This is classic psychology defined by a famous phenomenon called "Hostile Media Phenomenon," the subject of this landmark study: http://www.zaxistv.com/sociology/pop...fMediaBias.pdf You can clearly see the psychology of this exhibited in this thread.

You know you've found a decent media outlet when both sides claim the outlet is biased against their side. That means the outlet is likely treating subject matter fairly evenly handed.

Unfortunately, in an increasingly partisan age when the paying consumer can easily find places that reinforces an already pre-established opinion they might have, therefore helping them prove how smart they are to themselves . . . . . . . having a slant is what pays the freight.

On the other hand, it is fair to say the average consumer has never had access to as broad a range of information sources and opinions as today.

Rare, however, is the consumer who doesn't mind flipping between MSNBC and FOX to hear what everyone is saying, then making up his/her own mind.

Cowperson