Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is Olbermann the victim of his own success?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 08:56 PM
Original message
Is Olbermann the victim of his own success?
http://www.salon.com/news/keith_olbermann/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/01/21/countdown_rip

Is Olbermann the victim of his own success?
By Steve Kornacki

snip//

At the end of his Aug. 30, 2006 show, Olbermann looked directly into the camera and spoke: "The man who sees absolutes where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning is either a prophet or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet." His blistering takedown of the defense secretary was a viral sensation. Millions of liberals were equally exasperated with the Bush administration; but few could express themselves as exquisitely and powerfully as Olbermann. They asked for more, and Olbermann gladly gave it to them; over the next few years, there would be dozens of “special comments,” each delivered in the same dramatic style.

Nor did Olbermann limit himself to criticism of the war and its planners. He became an all-purpose critic of the administration and its cheerleaders, and then of the Republican Party and the modern brand of conservatism it has embraced. For years, liberals had watched the growth of Fox News with dismay and alarm. With "Countdown," they finally had their own prime-time cable news show to flock to. Olbermann embraced the rivalry, skewering Fox and its personalities -- particularly Bill O’Reilly -- with biting humor and sarcasm, daring them to respond and acknowledge him. His ratings climbed -- not to Fox levels, to be sure, but to levels that had been unheard of at MSNBC.

MSNBC, for its part, embraced the identity Olbermann was offering them. By 2008, his frequent guest, Rachel Maddow, was given her own show at 9 p.m. And liberal radio host Ed Schultz was given his own shortly after that. Lawrence O’Donnell, another left-of-center voice, was added just a few months ago. Eventually, the network adopted a new motto -- "Lean forward" -- that’s about as subtle as Fox’s "fair and balanced" pledge. MSNBC’s prime-time lineup is now awash in progressive politics. The most conservative voice after 5 p.m. belongs to Chris Matthews, a former aide to Tip O’Neill who nearly ran for Senate in Pennsylvania as a Democrat last year. After casting about for years, MSNBC at last knows exactly who it is -- and isn’t -- trying to reach.

Of course, now that he’s surrounded by similar voices, Olbermann isn’t nearly as essential to MSNBC’s brand, which surely has something to do with his abrupt departure on Friday night. Exactly what led to his exit remains unclear, but it’s hardly a secret that he’s had several intense clashes with his bosses recently, one of which led to a brief suspension in November. Now that they’ve built a loyal prime-time audience of left-leaning viewers, NBC’s executives may simply feel that they can afford to be rid of Olbermann and all of the headaches he brings with him. It used to be that he was the only reason liberals turned on their channel at night. Now he’s one of many reasons -- a victim of his own success, in other words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. Don't assume this is right...it makes no sense
They fired the person who is worth more in revenues and ratings than anyone else they could put in that time slot.

It doesn't make sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. And Comcast has been trying to absolve itself and blame him
Edited on Sat Jan-22-11 09:11 PM by EFerrari
since 1 second after it happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-23-11 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. It makes sense to me. Keith was a threat to the overall plan by the
rich to steal everything. The fact that his particular show was profitable for the network was not able to trump his threat to the "big heist". I'm surprised that he lasted as long as he did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Codeine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-23-11 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. But he was also making a pot of cash.
Perhaps the amount of money he wanted was no longer commensurate with the amount of money his falling ratings would justify?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-23-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. My sentiments exactly. I doesn't make any sense. Especially when..
They could have given him another agenda.

If a corporation, that is only looking out for itself, is out to fire anyone on MSNBC, it would probably fire Dylan Ratigan.
Not Keith O.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. If only Rushbo or O'Reilly could become a victim of their own success.
Funny how it never works out that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-23-11 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
7. I was wondering if he left because of something else
Remember a week or so ago when he was sick and he missed the show the next day? I wonder if he had some bad news from the doctors. Just a thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC