comment #1

BNick says ...

Olbermann's echo chamber is a response to the O'Reilly-Hannity style shows that involve a right wing host berating a liberal guest. Olbermann cuts out the rancor by only having on guests who will either agree with him or at least not question the slanted premises of his questions. I don't know which is worse but I don't like either.

comment #2

nemo says ...

'They want the shortcut. `Wow, that guy's smart. I get him.'"

Has anybody ever said `Wow, that guy's smart' about O'Reilly? Even people who agree with him?

Lots of people who disagree with them think Will or Buckley are smart. But O'Reilly? Even his admirers don't think he's smart. His whole act is about the opposite of being smart. It's about being the loudest blowhard on the barstool.

comment #3

CinemaPhreek says ...

Beside the fact that Olbermann backs up his slant on the news with facts, he is also honest enough not to put on sham guests to use as straw men. No opinion host in their right mind would ever invite on a guest that could one-up them.

O'Reilly, Hannity and the rest of that ilk have bullshit "opposition" people on, which is why every now and then you get nice clips of them on the edge of meltdown when a supposedly safe guest shames them.

comment #4

Geoff says ...

FOX became VERY popular right around the time Bush was elected president.

If Obama wins I'll be watching FOX just to see how they adjust. I'll also be interested in the ratings.

comment #5

corey3rd says ...

After watching the glorious Fox News segment that claimed Obama has been stealing his speeches

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2f4nSMQI6w

This is news? Any other reporter who shows up with this as "proof" would be fired by their editor. But at Fox News, you get a contract extension. At what point is this Fox story not pure propaganda?

It's a shame Keith doesn't have guests that he can talk over and yell "Shut up! Cut his mic!"

comment #6

BNick says ...

CinemaPhreek,

Even if one gives Olbermann the benefit of the doubt, as you seem to, that he doesn't mislead or lie outright on air, the most avid fan must still admit that he presents only one point of view.

I'm not sure how you can get your news from someone who clearly is not concerned about giving even the appearance of balanced coverage. I'm not saying Fox is any better (that Obama/Cuomo segment is cringe-inducing) but Olbermann should have the courage of his obviously deeply held convictions and actually debate someone once in a while.

comment #7

LexG says ...

Geoff said: "FOX became VERY popular right around the time Bush was elected president.

If Obama wins I'll be watching FOX just to see how they adjust. I'll also be interested in the ratings. "

Eh... Limbaugh was never so huge as when Clinton was first elected. Indeed, the 1992 results were pretty much the best thing that ever happened to right-wing talk radio, which certainly wasn't as big a deal during the previous 12 years of Republican rule.

Fox News will no longer be the WH's "house band," but I suspect they'll be re-energized under a Dem president.

As for O'Reilly, guy fucking OWNS.

"WE'LL DO IT LIVE! FUCK IT!"

comment #8

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

This thread is curiously defensive. One observation from Jeff about Olbermann and 33 attacks on Bill O'Reilly.

"O'Reilly, Hannity and the rest of that ilk have bullshit "opposition" people on, which is why every now and then you get nice clips of them on the edge of meltdown when a supposedly safe guest shames them."

So... the proof that their shows are shams, is that frequently the sham collapses and they get smacked down by a guest?

To Jeff's original point, though, the original cocooner in this deal was Olbermann himself. When he first came to MSNBC in the mid-90s he was fresh, funny, nervy... and he started coming unglued on camera, hating the ugliness and insanity of the Clinton impeachment. So he gave it up and went back to sports. Then somehow, despite his obvious high-maintenance personality and capacity for self-loathing, he somehow sucked it up or drank the Kool-Aid and came back as exactly the sort of partisan ranter that he despised in the Clinton years.

But at least he's a Bob & Ray fan (he was even on their show as a teenager, and some of the releases of their radio work are from the tapes he made as a kid). That makes up for some things.

comment #9

Terry McCarty says ...

LexG wrote:
As for O'Reilly, guy fucking OWNS.

"WE'LL DO IT LIVE! FUCK IT!"

103.1, playing a string of mashup songs recently, blended the O'Reilly INSIDE EDITION soundbite with a techno track.

comment #10

Nicanor says ...

One, never trust a guy who uses the word ilk.

Not sure where there is any comparison between Olbermann, or O'Reilly other than the same time share. Olbermann knows who the war criminals were at Malmady, where as O'Reilly preferred to label American soldiers as war criminals because it was politically expedient at the time. So, for all you chaps who take O'Reilly as a blow hard but relatively harmless, consider the dead at Malmady that he slandered.

comment #11

supertaster says ...

Careful folks, say a bad word about Olbermann and Joe Leydon is liable to come from out of nowhere and cold-cock you with a string of slurs that would make your mother blush....

I'll agree Olbermann is truthful regarding the HALF of every story he tells. He has spent hours excitedly harpooning McCain for his advisers, and then doesn't even mention James Johnson...not once!

...pretty scary to think there are people out there thinking they are getting the entire picture from him. He is extremely selective and partisan to the point where you you can't watch him and walk away well informed. The ratings game is case in point -- cherry picking a demographic that *marketers* and *advertisers* cherish to prove he beat Oreilly in a week where billo was off three nights? So the ability of Olbermann to sell more commercials aimed at thirty-somethings makes him a better journalist?

I'll catch Countdown one or two nights per week but no more because Olbermann's not elevating the conversation or offering solutions, he's happy to simply throw darts story after story, night after night. He'll irrationally defend his idols (re Gore: it takes a lot of energy to power a 20-room house) and then will highlight on "worst persons" some podunk republican sherriff somewhere in the middle of nowhere for running over someone's cat.

He's got the intelligence and the passion but is so blinded by his contempt for anything conservative or Republican (yes, they are distinct terms) that he becomes repetitive, monotonous, and tedious to sit through. He'll never break through as a household name so long as he is all negative, all the time, nor will he contribute to betterment of this country's government.

comment #12

Sweetbubba says ...

Olbermann isn't for the like-minded, Olbermann is for lazy dolts.

O'Reilly is more of a folksy, social conservative. He's like a reclusive neighbor you at the grocery store or when heading out for dinner while he's off to the Bingo parlor. His views seem antiquated and out of touch with reality but at least he means well and actually thinks he's trying to help people.

Olbermann is just an angry bigot who probably spent too much time being taken out behind the portables at school being punched in the face and is now seeking misguided revenge against the world.

comment #13

BNick says ...

Supertaster said it well.

Olbermann is more easily compared to Hannity than he is to O'Reilly. Hannity will always, always, always take the conservative and/or Republican side. He'll never surprise you with an interesting insight or make an attempt to be intellectually honest, or to even seem intellectually honest. Olbermann is the same way.

O'Reilly's strange band of populist social conservatism means he's a little more scattered across the political map from issue to issue.

comment #14

D.Z. says ...

BNick: "the most avid fan must still admit that he presents only one point of view. I'm not sure how you can get your news from someone who clearly is not concerned about giving even the appearance of balanced coverage."

I think it's more balanced, since he does actually try to take the other side into account, rather than just resort to name-calling.

Lex: "Eh... Limbaugh was never so huge as when Clinton was first elected. Indeed, the 1992 results were pretty much the best thing that ever happened to right-wing talk radio, which certainly wasn't as big a deal during the previous 12 years of Republican rule."

Of course, now Limbaugh's no longer huge, just over-weight.

Mgmax: "exactly the sort of partisan ranter that he despised in the Clinton years."

I think you're confusing someone out for blood with someone who looks at a situation analytically.

supertaster: "...pretty scary to think there are people out there thinking they are getting the entire picture from him."

That's better than no picture from Faux News.

"So the ability of Olbermann to sell more commercials aimed at thirty-somethings makes him a better journalist?"

No, the ability for Olbermann to actually communicate to an audience which goes for punch lines is what makes him a better journalist.

"re Gore: it takes a lot of energy to power a 20-room house"

Yes, and Gore's converted to green, while Reagan took down a solar panel.

"He's got the intelligence and the passion but is so blinded by his contempt for anything conservative or Republican (yes, they are distinct terms)"

Not during the last 25 years.

"He'll never break through as a household name so long as he is all negative, all the time, "

He should just insult people like Coulter.

"nor will he contribute to betterment of this country's government."

That's not his job.

Bubba: "Olbermann isn't for the like-minded, Olbermann is for lazy dolts."

He should spread a false rumour that Obama is a Muslim.

"His views seem antiquated and out of touch with reality"

He should advocate drilling for more oil.

"Olbermann is just an angry bigot"

He should attack black people.

comment #15

Sweetbubba says ...

DZ: "Olbermann should spread a false rumour that Obama is a Muslim. He should advocate drilling for more oil. He should attack black people."

Whatever floats your crazy boat.

comment #16

Arizona Joe says ...

Keith Olbermann is pretty good. I agree with him politically, but I don't make a habit of watching him because he does a lot of shtick. However, once in a while he does a very fine essay.

I still think of him as a sports guy, especially since they have him doing highlights on NBC Sunday Night Football - "They're not gonna get 'em." I think that is a mistake by Keith and his agent. It dilutes his credibility as a newsman.

Olbermann is a talent, a humorist, very bright, but he is still a utility ballplayer and not a big hitter in the heart of the order. He is a great guy, but not compelling. I do prefer him to Chris Matthews who acts like a spastic from the National Forensic League.

My brother saw Olbermann in a Santa Monica cigar store. I guess Olbermann has quite a girth. That must of been some ouchy blow to his head that impaired his vision.

Here's a dark horse for the Tim Russert replacement: Dan Abrams. He is a lawyer, his father is a Constitutional scholar, and Abrams has done managerial work. I think if Abrams applied his legal training into the gathering of serious political fodder, he'd do all right.

However, Abrams would have to have the requisite talent to shmooze in Washington.

comment #17

Movie Watcher says ...

The problem with O'Reilly(O'Really) is the shit he puts on his "show". Culture quiz? Reality Check? Pinheads and Patriots? His show is turning into a part news/part entertainment one-hour show. I know, I know, Olbermann has Bussshed, oddball, I get it. I do switch between the shows, but Olbermann's show has more news stories, more political stories, than O'Reilly does. Plus Billlo is always pimping his shit at the end of the show. How can anyone sit through the entire hour of The Factor?

comment #18

Krazy Eyes says ...

I'd take Olbermann over O'Reilly and Hannity any day but then I tend to agree more with his viewpoints even if I think he comes across as overblown once in a while.

What does the notion of viewer cocooning mean for people who like Rush Limbaugh. That's just scary.

comment #19

Josh says ...

How is Olberman a success exactly?

His ratings are worse than infomercials.

comment #20

GonePostal says ...

Olbermann's biggest problem is his own ego, and reading that New Yorker piece just confirms it. His inane belief that he's somehow the successor to Edward R. Murrow would have Murrow spinning is his grave. Murrow would advocate a side, but do it dispassionatly and with hard analysis, or just let the video do the talking. When Olbermann goes one for 10 MINUTES on something McCain said that he's knowingly taking out of context, or the RFK rant at Hillary, he becomes a Hannity, and not an O'Reily, who has on occasion been at least a minor critic of the Republicans and Conservatives. As the guy who once produced Cronkite said, Olbermann is not a newsman. He is an entertainer and a self-promoter in the same awful way that Hannity is. I think it's hilarious that Tom Brokow has publicly rebuked his attitude twice. And I bet Olbermann wishes he could call out Brokow as well, but know that THAT would get him canned.

I think with Russert gone, Williams and Brokow are going to have a tough time keeping Olbermann and Matthews from hyperventalating on election night.

comment #21

Movie Watcher says ...

Postal, your are right about that. In a sad and strange way, with Russert gone, Matthews stature might rise during the election coverage. I hope he does it with some class. I don't want to see him with a look that says " Finally, I get a shot to be the big cheese." Olbermann might do the same. I just hope someone at NBC/MSNBC will keep an eye on them. Someone higher up than Williams/Brokaw.

comment #22

Nike Duck Shoes says ...

your website is so great that i love it very much. thank you for sharing it with us.

comment #23

jany says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability solution