Olbermann's New & Conflicting Statements Fan Flames of GE-MSNBC-Fox Controversy

[spiritual_gunfighter]

Open Left
David Sirota

In my morning post on the MSNBC-Fox-GE controversy, I noted that all we learned last night is that Keith Olbermann said he wasn't "party to any deal" - something the New York Times reported in its original story. To my mind, whether Olbermann was or was not a party to a deal is far less important than the behavior of General Electric and MSNBC executives. Nonetheless, because this is such a destructive and precedent-setting example of corporate manipulation of news content, it's important to check out these new posts by Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher after Olbermann just released a statement today.
It seems Olbermann is now saying two mutually exclusive things: Last night, he said he was not part of any deal, but today he tells Glenn that everything Glenn has reported is completely accurate. And since Glenn has reported exactly the opposite - that, in fact, Olbermann was part of some sort of deal - there doesn't seem to be a way for both of Olbermann's statements to be true.

So, yes, as Jane says, "There will be a cloud over Olbermann's credibility until he clarifies what really happened."

ADDENDUM: Some readers may believe this story is not important - they may believe that we should just forget about this whole sordid affair simply because Olbermann does great work on behalf of progressive causes like ending the war in Iraq and enacting a universal health care system. My response is simple: We can all agree on the quality of Olbermann's work, while disagreeing on the significance of this particular story - and additionally, there's no contradiction in simultaneously believing that Olbermann does great work and that this is an important story. Many of us - and especially many of us working in independent media - believe that corporate control of the media is a crucial issue that tends to distort and impact all other issues (and especially when it involves as huge and as economically significant company as General Electric).

As an MSNBC and Olbermann fan, I'm bummed to see Olbermann caught up in this situation - but I'm not surprised. The problem of corporate control of the media is so big and powerful, there's no way Olbermann could avoid it, despite his vehement protests to the contrary last night. Indeed, his new statement today seem to confirm that very reality.

And so I'll just conclude by saying this: You may like Keith Olbermann (as I do), but if your love of Keith Olbermann makes you refuse to defend/demand respect for independent journalism, then you ought to consider how fucked up your value system really is. Loyalty to an individual over loyalty to principles is the definition of cultism. MSNBC partisans insisting that we should ignore General Electric's manipulation of the news out of deference to Keith Olbermann's supposedly infallible awesomeness are at best being intellectually dishonest, and at worst endorsing in precisely the kind of propagandistic pro-censorship sycophancy that is at the heart of this scandal.

http://www.openleft.com/

[Dennis Donovan]

1. I think KO's WPitW segment on Monday speaks volumes about the supposed "truce"

...between MSNBC & FNC. He categorically denied any involvement in said truce, repudiated the author of the NYT article and, for good measure, called O'Reilly out on some recent nonsense.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

2. and yet

he confirmed that Greenwald's reporting was accurate.

[Champion Jack]

5. where?

[spiritual_gunfighter]

11. Here

I honor Mr. Greenwald's insight into the coverage of GE/NewsCorp talks, and have found nothing materially factually inaccurate about it. Fox and NewsCorp have continued a strategy of threat and blackmail by Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, and Bill O'Reilly since at least 2004. But no matter what might have been reported by others besides Mr. Greenwald, and no matter what might have been thought around this industry, there's no "deal." I would never consent, and, fortunately, MSNBC and NBC News would never ask me to.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

[KittyWampus]

6. No. He didn't. Stop lying. He simply tried to be respectful to Greenwald. Why, I don't know

Greenwald is nothing more than a crank.

As is Sirota.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

8. You again?

Are you in the business of scouring DU in search of threads related to this story and maligning the posters and Glenn Greenwald in the process? Do you feel the same about Fire Dog Lake, Open Left and the goddamn New York Times as well?

I said you were dense in a previous post and you are further confirming it, you are saying that Olbermann didn't say that Greenwald's reporting was accurate?????? He admitted as much on Daily Kos on Monday. But I guess you are having a hard time getting your poor head around the truth.

Please refrain from calling me a liar, when you can obviously read what Olbermann stated.

As for Greenwald being a crank you obviously haven't read his reporting.

[KittyWampus]

9. Me again? I'm actually quite busy gardening and taking care of guests. Your interpretation

of what Olbermann said is quite off.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

16. You obviously didn't read it carefully

I didn't write this, Dave Sirota did. Glenn Greenwald did the reporting, Fire Dog Lake has followed up with more reporting all stemming from the NYT article. But I guess you like your news shiny and corporate, all that independent media is trying to crush my hero Keith Olbermann!!!

[dorkulon]

13. Way to embody the last paragraph of the OP. nt

[KittyWampus]

17. I actually don't like or watch Olbermann all that much. I DO recognize cranks like Greenwald

and Sirota who desperately want attention and unconsciously resent any journalist or analyst who gets more face time then they do.

[dorkulon]

19. I'm sorry, but I can't imagine you really are all that familiar with either man

if that's what you think of them. You should try it sometime, you might learn something about truth and integrity.

I still think you're just mad because they picked on your boyfriend.

[zipplewrath]

12. Everyone seems to be splitting hairs

Greenwald admits that he had no prior statements from Keith confirming that he had been "silenced". He has statements from people claiming that GE had "ordered" him not to do it. Keith's primary focus has been on Fox's/O'Reilly's apparent cooperation in some "deal". Furthermore, he may be aware that someone at GE "agreed" with Fox that it should stop, and in fact led Fox to believe that the deal was struck. Keith may also be aware that this was a lie, that he had never agreed to it, and may in fact never have been personally approached. In fact, what he may be aware of is that a person at GE took advantage of foreknowledge that Keith was going to personally decide to suspend jokes about Bill to get Fox to stop.

What appears to be going on here is that Keith figured this all out, probably some time back. He couldn't really say much because it involved exposing his own bosses "negotiations in bad faith". Furthermore, he probably couldn't really "prove" that Bill was any more complicit than he was. But now that the cat is out of the bag, he has a chance to make hay with it and give "Bill-O" a hard time.

The only reason I am suspicious of such is that I found it strange when Keith was doing his segment on this. There was a disconnect in it. He was claiming there was no "deal", and he was about to prove it. However, then he jumps all over Bill for effectively agreeing/complying with some deal on Fox's part. It did seem to me that at the very least that he knew Fox was "ordering" O'Reilly to shut up but he couldn't find a way to draw him out. He may have been aware that someone at MSNBC was leading Fox to believe the deal was struck, using Keith's own decision as cover. And Greenwald's (and others) reporting gave him the basis for exposing all of this. He gets to put someone at MSNBC on the hot seat. He get's to expose Fox and O'Reilly for who they are. And he gets to establish himself as "independent". His tricky space is that he's got to be careful how critical he is of the reporters caught up in all of this. Ultimately he still wants to be part of the journalism club.

[high density]

3. I don't know why we should be shocked about any handshake deals between MSNBC and Fox News

We all lived through the Bush years and aren't that naive about the "news" operations. Countdown may have started out as a "news" program, but now it is a commentary/entertainment program. Olbermann seems to retain vast editorial control over it. If his producers ask him not to talk about Billo, I don't see how that's any more disruptive to the show than telling him he must cover American Idol. A daily rant about Fox News was getting old anyway. Less Howard Beale is a good thing.

[dorkulon]

15. Agreed, but as I recall, KO made it seem like some prinicipled stance

that Billo's crimes were too serious to make light of, which made it kind of odd that he simply switched to targeting Rush instead.

[high density]

22. Olbermann blamed it on O'Reilly's talk about the murder of Dr. Tiller

It's convenient timing if this story is to be believed, but I am still not convinced of the root motivation here.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

29. This was the main problem I had with this story

I sincerely hope that Keith didn't use Tiller's death as a ruse to do GE's bidding. That would suck.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Sorry Jane...This One's A Loser...

The bottom line is Olbermann is on the network at the "leisure" of those bosses. His contract is signed to the company and there are conditions on his employ that are strictly between him and his employers, not the New York Times, Firedoglake or anyone else. He doesn't own the hour and has proven time and time again his independence from the "talking points" that used to predominate that and other cable networks. His body of work over the past 4 years has been a bright light in a very dark corporate media tunnel.

Truth is his "feud" with O'Reilly really has no impact these days. He used it as a gimmick to get attention and show he wasn't like the others. It wasn't the focus of his program and became a distraction. We all know that O'Reilly is a major asshat...KO didn't need to keep saying it, plus there were many other targets and mediatypes who needed to be taken down a knotch or two. So instead of going after O'Reilly and Faux, KO turned his attentions to Rushbo and the even deeper cesspool of hate radio.

Want a truly non-corporate network? There are some...Free Speech Television and Current are examples...and how well are they supported? Not very well...and that's the problem. The media operates on the golden rule...ye who has the Gold makes the rules. You provide the gold and those who you employ play by your rules. The rushpublicans learned this and developed financial models that rewarded their mediatypes...showing that catering to the wingnuts means money. If Democrats and Progressives could do the same, you'd see Amy Goodman or Bill Moyers.

So Olbermann isn't their knight in shining armour? Well, there's yet another case of people projecting their values or hopes on someone else. Seems to be in vogue these days.

[flyarm]

7. wow ..believe in the Fourth Estate much? Pathetic how so many are willing to give it up!!

I guess that is cult-like! Especially when it is slapping you in the face..and you suck it up with joy!

[KharmaTrain]

10. Huh?

Project much? I'm extremely cynical of the "fourth estate" as I've had experience working within it. I also know the reality of the situation of our corporate media. It's a commercial system that needs to generate revenues to pay salaries and operate...it's not some altrusistic ivory tower. It's corrupt but it dominates what people see...and I've been endlessly critical of how it doesn't inform and it's value as a source of information is useless...all it does is echoes what is found elsewhere.

Today's journalism happens on the internet. It's folks like Jane and Glenn who have trailblazed in creating an alternative source of information that has eroded the corporate media's credibility and hold on where people get their information. I'm making an observation...and one that points to the sad fact that the corporate media does and will continue to cater to those who prime their pumps...make them money.

Peace...

[madokie]

14. Thanks KT

as always you're right on with this

[WeDidIt]

18. David Sirota is lying his ass off

Olbermann denied Greenwald's reporting about Fox and MSNBC. He was surprised at the allegations about Richard Wolfe.

I think Sirota is just pissed off that he can't get a full time gig on MSNBC.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

20. Here's what's silly about all this

Even if it's true.......which I doubt it is....

This isn't some deal to shut up about health care, or the war, or the fact that FOX is on the RNC dole.

It's to stop two talking heads from calling one another names.

I mean, really folks......c'mon.

Besides, I like KO's new Lou Dobbs impression better.

[Ian David]

21. Has Keith ever made Joe Scarborough or Chris Matthews "Worst Person in The World?"

Or, for that matter, while he worked at MSNBC, was Tucker-Exclamationpoint-Jazzhands-Spiritfingers ever named "Worst Person?"

[Berry Cool]

23. He made Tucker Worst Person AFTER Tucker left MSNBC.

And that was fine with me. Most people don't ridicule and cut down their coworkers on the job, no matter how much they dislike them or disagree with them. Why is it so terrible that he not be any different?

As for this whole "controversy," it seems to be yet another chapter of Progressives Eating Our Own. The ones who are not a part of major corporate media outlets spending lots of time and effort wringing their hands over how ideologically impure their colleagues in the MSM are, because they work for a BIG CORPORATION, which apparently is enough to make a person evil as all heck all on its own. Only independent journalists are to be trusted, we are told; everyone else is hopelessly compromised, whether they'll admit to it or not.

I get my news from a lot of media outlets. Some are corporate and some are not. Some are independent and some are not. I try to look for those with professional standards and integrity. But I have yet to believe that corporate employment and integrity are completely mutually exclusive concepts. There are also times when I have, frankly, found more professionalism in the corporate media than I have in some of the noncorporate media.

To accuse everyone who doesn't automatically believe the worst about Olbermann from all this (and this particular source has it wrong; not even Greenwald is accusing him of saying mutually exclusive things anymore, but rather of confirming his own claims) of also having no integrity, of having placed the cult of personality above all else, is deeply unfair. It also overlooks the reason the person in question has, after many years, earned our trust, in many ways the way Walter Cronkite did. Not that he presents the same persona as Cronkite, but ask any of us who watch Olbermann regularly and, all jokes about his physical attractiveness and delight in his sense of humor aside, we will tell you that deep down, it's because we trust him to tell us the truth. Every once in a while he may say or do something that we think is more based in ego than in fact, but it's usually pretty easy to tell what those things are after you've watched him for a while, and we note them, and we forgive him for it. Why? Because in general, he has the integrity we seek.

He carried us through some really dark times in this country when no one else in the MSM was saying what he was saying. He proved you could do such a thing and still keep your job. And we are loath to throw him out on the scrap heap just because someone else in the progressive journalism movement has yet again accused his shit of stinking merely because he "works for GE," whereas the shit of the progressive bloggers and Amy Goodman and all of the other supposed "unsung heroes" who are supposed to be the only people we can trust has absolutely no odor at all.

[Ian David]

24. Agreed. n/t

[zbdent]

25. deleted by self

[kjackson227]

26. When I use the phrase "corporate-owned msm" there's a reason...

I think most of us are not that naive to believe that the corporate-owned msm (notably MSNBC) is 100% credible, although I must admit that I wondered how KO was able to get away with some of his comments on a daily basis, and came to the conclusion that it would be only a matter of time before GE would silence him. Frankly, I found the O'Reilly pieces on Countdown annoying at best because I already knew that O'Reilly along with Faux (Fox)News was little more than a television version of the National Enquirer. However, I do think that Keith is one of the most credible journalists (along with Rachel Maddow), there is. His crediblity is some-what compromised now, so I'm wondering and somewhat hoping that Keith will validate my assumptions of his honesty and credibility by telling his employers to "take this job and shove it". I'm sure he wouldn't have any problems what-so-ever in finding a non-profit progressive outlet to hire him, or even hitching onto satellite radio could be an option. However, I'm not so naive to think that the millions he makes at MSNBC wouldn't play a huge part in his decision if he was inclined to entertain these ideas.

So far as I'm concerned, I'll continue to watch Countdown with a more discerning and/or speculative eye, and take it for what it is (a corporate-owned msm program).

[spiritual_gunfighter]

28. I agree with you 100 percent

I posted this because I think that Olbermann should come clean, I love watching Countdown and will continue to do so. Rachel and Keith are two lone voices in the MSM who I think are more often than not straight up with the viewer. I also thought it was just a matter of time before GE silenced him on something and it looks like this was that time. I hope that Keith will address the concerns that Glenn Greenwald, Fire Dog Lake and Open Left have on this issue and answer why it seems like he is contradicting himself. I think this might be a gut check moment for Keith I hope he makes the right decision.

[DevonRex]

27. Does anyone think a cable guy can be completely independent?

Of course not. Keith is as independent as it gets, though. I think Sirota might have a bit of envy going on.