Good Riddance?

To be sure, Keith Olbermann will be back.

Where? Who knows. Who will take him? Would you?

There are likely multiple reasons why MSNBC unceremoniously dumped Mr. Olbermann so suddenly: disagreements with management; Olbermann’s suspension late last year over his political contributions to Democratic candidates; the imminent take-over of NBC Universal by Comcast; even, possibly, that Olbermann’s ratings were in danger of upset by his own popular MSNBC colleagues, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell.

The list could probably go on. Officially, Comcast denies that Mr. Olbermann was dumped due to any of its influence, but it seems too much of a coincidence that the firing occurred so close to the announcement of the US government approval of the merger.

Maybe Mr. Olbermann’s ungracious fall is all related to the recent criticism of the pugilistic and rhetoric-driven nature of “opinion TV,” a negative light brought about by – among other events – Jon Stewart’s recent Rally to Restore Sanity and the horrific events in Tucson. Not likely, but one could hope. Other than the few moments when the hot rhetoric cooled off a bit after Tucson, we fully expect the negativity on the airways to continue and to generate high ratings on network and cable television. In an interesting twist, it was a political contribution to Ms. Giffords that resulted in Mr. Olbermann’s suspension last year.

So, we are left to ruminate and speculate about what happened at MSNBC and what is next for the TV personality. Mr. Olbermann has been prevented from speaking publicly about the ouster, and he has some restrictions as to what he can do next (ala Conan O’Brien deal with NBC).

Despite the tone of my earlier post about MSNBC, there was value to having Mr. Olbermann spouting his view on television every night. My whole point was that MSNBC should not pretend that they are too much different from Fox News. Just as the conservatives, Tea Partiers and other assorted characters need their daily dose of Hannity, Beck and Palin, it is important for the Left to have its own fighters and opinion-hawkers. MSNBC provided a strong balance. While CNN is often accused of being in service to the Left, their valiant – but unsuccessful – attempt to claim the Middle is very clear when you place the three networks together. Just look at the MSNBC line-up – Schultz, Olbermann, Maddow and O’Donnell. Talking about the “Lefty” assault brigade! But that was the whole point, right (or Left)? MSNBC ratings sky-rocketed the more opinionated its programs became. No surprise, reports are that Lawrence O’Donnell will take over the “Countdown” slot for MSNBC with his own program, “The Last Word.” No word yet of any other changes at MSNBC.

So what about Mr. Olbermann? Although he was a necessary defender of all things liberal, he too often came across as arrogant, spiteful and obsessed. Like too many other TV opinion-makers, he focused too many assaults on his competitors in the media. Sometimes it sounded like no more than a fearful rant against people with higher ratings. Every week that went by seemed to have Mr. Olbermann carrying on-and-on about Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity or one of the other Fox News commentators. That turned really old, really quickly. Viewers of Mr. Olbermann’s show already knew the deficiencies of the Fox News line-up; they did not need the constant reminders. True liberal commentary is much better spent on addressing topics of policy, politics and human rights. We want to hear about what the government is or is not doing for the people of this country; not who over at Fox was the most senseless of the bunch. Maybe it helped his ratings, but Mr. Olbermann did a disservice to the liberal agenda by focusing on the people rather than the policies.

Good riddance, yes – but come on back when you are ready to fight the good fight.

Update (1/23/2011): another article on what lead to the divorce from MSNBC…he was apparently a pain in the tuches…what a surprise!

Update (1/24/2011): a blog post that really tries to differentiate MSNBC, specifically Mr. Olbermann, from Fox, specifically Glenn Beck. Even though the post is full of way too many parenthetical comments (really), the blog post is a good one. However, the poster still gives too much credence to the concept that Mr. Olbermann’s were always based on facts and Mr. Beck’s never are based on reality. Both commentators mix truth and opinion too closely together. That said, I would absolutely agree that Mr. Olbermann is no Glenn Beck.

Sorry MSNBC, You are More Like a Fox than a Peacock

Do not get me wrong. If given a final choice, I would take MSNBC over Fox News any day. No issue there. Why? Because MSNBC is closer to my world view than Fox News…by a long shot.

But please, MSNBC, do not pretend that you are all that uniquely different than Fox News when it comes to your prime-time lineup and how you handle the news and commentary. Your key nightly lineup – Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell – should not be mistaken for balanced commentators, and their regular assaults on conservatives, the Republicans and Fox News clearly place them near and dear to the hearts of liberals. But isn’t that why we watch them? Their color, viewpoints and comments add a certain juice to the news and are a nice balance to the insanity spouted by O’Reilly, Sustern, Stossel and Hannity.

So what prompted this post and my attempt to put MSNBC and Fox News int he same sentence? Initially, it was MSNBC’s decision to “indefinitely” suspend Mr. Olbermann for donating money to three Democratic political campaigns without asking for permission, an action that is apparently against the policies of MSNBC’s parent company, NBC News. This seemed like an odd move on MSNBC’s part given the host’s outspoken liberal tendencies, but we can understand that a policy is a policy. News that MSNBC quickly ended Olbermann’s suspension was no surprise since the action sparked such a great controversy. But it was Rachel Maddow’s commentary on her own show that really perked my ears. She used the suspension to distinctively differentiate MSNBC from Fox News, but in the same breath said that Obermann’s suspension should be lifted (the “point has been made”). Granted, her valiant trashing of Sean Hannity’s explicit political endorsements was very nice to see and should not be forgotten. She also bashed Republican fundraising activities by Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee, but muddled the fact that these are done outside of their duties as Fox News hosts. While clearly Ms. Palin and Mr. Huckabee engage in political fundraising, that is done in the “other jobs.” On the air, they are no more conservative and outspoken than Ms. Maddow is liberal and outspoken. Ms. Maddow clearly called Fox News a “political organization” while MSNBC is a “new organization.” Obviously, to Ms. Maddow, one is lower than the other.

I have no doubt that Fox News peddles a specific political viewpoint, and various commentators, guests and news stories help espouse that viewpoint. Some even give money to support these viewpoints. No doubt. But Ms. Maddow should not use her pulpit to seemingly place herself in the realm of Cronkite, Brokaw and Jennings. If I want news, I go to the BBC, The New York Times or (increasingly less) CNN. If I want rightist spin on that news, I watch O’Reilly or Fox News Sunday. If I want the liberal spin, I tune into Ms. Maddow or Mr. Olbermann. The fact that they are not allowed to give money makes no difference. Actually, I would be surprised if Ms. Maddow did not contribute in some way to her own particular world view. And you know what, that’s perfectly respectable and expected.

 

[Amended: some good commentary]