Olbermann Fill-In: Host Worried His 'Wings Would Be Clipped' Under New Management

[deminks]

http://www.thewrap.com/television/column-post/olbermann-fill-host-worried-his-wings-would-be-clipped-under-comcasts-new-man

David Shuster, a former MSNBC anchor and fill-in host for Keith Olbermann, says he believes Olbermann worried "his wings would be clipped" under a new Comcast management structure that would have given NBC News more control of his show.

Olbermann announced last Friday's show would be his last one week before Comcast is expected to close its purchase of NBC-Universal.The new company's restructuring, Shuster said, will give the overtly objective NBC News more say over MSNBC, which has become the No. 2 cable network since Olbermann and other hosts starting offering a liberal tilt.

"I think Keith anticipated, perhaps justifiably so, that his wings might be clipped, that some of the special commentaries that he would be making, that there would be much more deference that would have to be paid to NBC News' standards and judgements," Shuster said on CNN's "Reliable Sources" on Sunday.

(end snip)

So, Comcast = Capus/Brokaw = no more KO. But Comcast can say that Capus did it,or Griffin did it, or Brokaw did it, or KO did it "'cause he is such a diva." How Rovian, really, put it out there in the Reich wing media that KO is hard to work with, and then blame him for leaving 'cause "people say" that he is hard to work with.

No mention here that Shuster also said Brokaw is a Capus ally.

Also, KO left NBC earlier because he was told to talk about Clinton's impeachment more often.

[Shagbark Hickory]

1. I like Olbermann as much as the next guy but if I had the choice of having

an actual news channel with journalists and newsmakers or
an opinion channel with pundits and commentary, I'd pick the news channel.

It's pretty pathetic that I learn more about whats going on in the world from the opening of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart than I do all day on any of the cable news channels.

If I took over the channel, I'd clip everyone's wings and we'd start talking about news.

[EffieBlack]

2. I agree 100%!

I like Keith Olbermann and the others on MSNBC (at least, most of them), but I think the network has gone way too far over into commentary and opinion. It's impossible to get straight news on television after 7:00 anymore.

I'd love them to bring in real news people to cover and report the news in a way that educates us rather than heps us up for a fight - I can get that anywhere.

[gateley]

4. It used to be called "the place for politics" - not a word about 'news'.

I'd love REAL news, too, and then have the commentary shows as well. I do get a lot of education from KO, Rachel, etc., so they go beyond the headlines and explain it in ways that I can understand. Especially Rachel.

[Shagbark Hickory]

8. Right but the OP says...

"The new company's restructuring, Shuster said, will give the overtly objective NBC News more say over MSNBC, which has become the No. 2 cable network since Olbermann and other hosts starting offering a liberal tilt."

Ok well bring it on.
Start a new network for politcal commentary.

I would probably enjoy one hour of a "countdown"-like show, similar to what shepherd smith does on fox. But without the politics.

Honestly, I really don't care what sarah palin says and does and I especially don't care what rush or glen beck says or does. 50% of Countdown is talking about people that I don't want to hear about.

[csziggy]

12. It's impossible to get straight news on television - PERIOD

All of the media sources are slanted. There is no straight news. Maybe there never was, but now it is obvious that every single outlet for information is slanted one way or another. I almost prefer Fox News over the broadcast network news programs, since Fox does not hide their bias.

MSNBC has been schizoid about their news - some of their on air personalities go one way, some another and a few pretend as though they have no bias. CNN tries to pretend, but given alternative sources for information, their slant sticks out like a pimple.

I used to use Google News to get information and look at the background behind the headlines, but now it is pretty impossible to find more than a very few sources for each story and they have removed the previous valuable ability to go "back in time" to follow the development of stories.

I appreciate DU - while we all may be slanted in our views, we have enough skeptics that most links are questioned, validity of information explored, and a wide variety of subjects are raised every day.

[Shagbark Hickory]

19. In the usa, yes, you're right.

Other countries do have unbiased news. Some streams are available online.
We used to heave cnn's "headline news" but they've gone to mostly opinion shows.

[deminks]

5. While I, too, long for true journalism, it is very expensive, and doesn 't fit in

with the corporate bottom line. Nor, evidently, does left leaning news analysis based on what little factual news is still out there.

I really long for the old days of CNN, when they had news bureaus all over the world. When you got mostly news and not corporatist propaganda.

[Shagbark Hickory]

9. What do you think of Fareed Zacharia?

[deminks]

10. I like what little I have seen of his programs.

I have not watched much CNN of late. That will probably change now. His shows seemed to be factually based as well, but still a commentary show.

[Shagbark Hickory]

18. I like fareed / gps a lot

he gets some good guests and doesn't throw softballs.

[sabrina 1]

15. Real news would necessitate investigative journalists which

are extinct in the U.S. media today. It is simply not allowed on the Corporate Owned media. You have to go to other countries to find them.

Dahr Jamail, eg, did some incredible reporting from the war zones, speaking to the actual people there, following their stories, his photo-journalism was prize-worthy. But he is not welcome on the U.S. MSM

For over a decade, there wasn't even a Political opinion show that was allowed to speak truthfully (left) about these wars, about the lies and the death toll and killing of innocents.

They fired people for doing that and then black-listed them.

Then for some reason they put Keith on the air. A small concession to the audience they lost, people like me who simply cancelled TV eg.

There is NO way there will ever be hard-hitting actual news in the U.S. so long as the media is owned by a few Corporate Entities.

So, Keith et al, after managing to get on the air, did the best they could and did it very well.

You don't become 'left' just for the sake of it.

It is not 'left' to take a position against your government's actions when those actions are illegal. That is called citizenship in action. But the truth tellers are invariably referred to as 'left'.

If Keith can produce a real news network and show real investigative journalists such as John Pilger, Dahr Jamail et al reports that would be great. But I think he would come under so much pressure and attacks, most likely smears etc. that it probably is impossible.

The Empire needs its controlled media in order to stay in power ~ and the people are apathetic, which they know.

I'll take the political commentary shows, like Keith's, Rachel's rather than what we had before, which was nothing. And maybe some day this country will be free again from Corporate influence and we can have a really free press. Keith would make a great journalist, so would Rachel since both have the necessary skills to seek out the facts and present them.

[Shagbark Hickory]

17. We still have the internet.

At least for a while.

[leftstreet]

25. +1

[tularetom]

3. NBC News is hardly "overtly objective"

With Brian "raccoon eyes" Williams and David "dances with Rove" Gregory overtly kissing republican ass at every opportunity and lesser network lights such as Andrea Greenspan missing no opportunity to get in a few digs at Democrats ("the Democrat Party") they could hardly be even called remotely objective.

They never liked Keith (and they were jealous of his success). I don't think they like Tweety either but they aren't averse to using him when it suits them.

[davidwparker]

13. +1

[pacalo]

14. +1.

[gauguin57]

6. I, too, long for the old days of CNN. I'd accept HLN going back to being a headline network.

I don't mind some pundit shows in the evening, but during the day, I'd love to see the old days when the anchors didn't act like a bunch of silly-pants (giggling and joshing around with each other when they're supposed to be delivering the news).

[slay]

7. Shuster lives!

I hope both Keith and David get their own shows at CNN over time and that CNN makes MSNBC regret like hell the day they got rid of either.

[Kurovski]

20. If Olbermann left MSNBC for fear of wing-clipping, I can't imagine that the corporate-heavy

CNN would keep the clippers on the shelf.

[slay]

21. Depends on their priorities

if it's $$$$ - then Keith and Shuster seem like a solid buy. CNN could never challenge foxnews - they could however challenge M$NBC at this point.

[Kurovski]

22. True. They tried and failed to be FOX2.

But they also stink as "fair&balanced." Remember when they had Glenn Beck? That's when I stopped even "checking in" on CNN.

[Jumping John]

11. He could be concerned about his head being targeted by a crazy also. eom

[Politicalboi]

16. We should all

Just watch Rachel's show ONLY! Fuck them. Let them all sink.

[TicketyBoo]

24. Rachel is a close second to Keith.

Ed makes me nervous. Lawrence makes me snore.

I usually don't turn on the TV until Hardball comes on in the afternoon (here it's at 4 p.m.).

I usually turn the TV off again until the news at 5:30 rather than to listen to Ed rant (depending on the topic and/or guest).

Countdown was what made me a loyal viewer, though. I will be more likely to drift away now.

[SoCalDem]

23. It was good to finally see Shuster again.. Maybe Keith & he will end up together again..somewhere

It's just a bit sad that when these things happen, we rarely get it from the people involved because money settlements often come with muzzles:(