Media: Journaletics & Journos: Maddow interprets Olbermann's f+ring by MSNBC

Huffington Post, "Maddow: Keith Olbermann proves difference between MSNBC and Fox News" (Nov11,2k10) Rachel Maddow

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow closed her program Friday night with a segment about the suspension of her "colleague and friend Keith Olbermann," arguing that the suspension underscores the difference between MSNBC and Fox News.

Maddow ran down a list of Fox News hosts' and contributors' political donations and fundraising activities, ranging from Sean Hannity's political donations to Glenn Beck's on-air fundraising to Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin's political careers.

Maddow argued that MSNBC's suspension of Olbermann in light of his political donations (without prior network approval) showed that it is a real news organization, as opposed to Fox News, which allows its hosts to engage in political activity without consequence.

"Let this incident lay to rest forever the facile, never-true-anyway, bull-pucky, lazy conflation of Fox News and what the rest of us do for a living," she said. "I know everybody likes to say, 'Oh, that's cable news, it's all the same. Fox and MSNBC, mirror images of each other.' Let this lay that to rest forever. Hosts on Fox News raise money for Republican candidates. They endorse them explicitly, they use their Fox News profile to headline fundraisers. Heck, there are multiple people being paid by Fox News now to essentially run for office as Republican candidates....They can do that because there's no rule against that at Fox. They run as a political operation; we're not."

Maddow continued by saying, though she and Olbermann are avowed liberals and others at MSNBC make their political beliefs known, MSNBC is "not a political operation," while Fox News is.

"We are a news operation and the rules around here are part of how you know that," she said.

Maddow also praised Olbermann, saying he took on the Bush administration "before it was politically safe to do it," and that he was "the one who brought to light Fox News' water-carrying-role for the Bush administration."

"Now, weirdly, it is Keith who is illustrating the difference between what he does on TV, what we do here at MSNBC, and what goes on across the street" at Fox News.

Maddow did acknowledge that Olbermann broke an NBC News rule, adding, "I understand this rule, I understand what it means to break this rule. I believe everybody should face the same treatment under this rule."

But she called on her MSNBC bosses to end the suspension, saying that the point had been made.

"I also personally believe that the point has been made and we should have Keith back hosting 'Countdown,'" she said.

Maddow also referenced "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough's political donation to a Republican friend in 2006, though she did not reference Scarborough by name.

"You can [donate] if you ask in advance and management tells you OK. That's what I understand happened with our morning show host's political donations in 2006, under previous management," she said.


Follow Us

Journaletics and Journos: Keith Olbermann: F+ring a matter of payola

Here's an ensemble of nooz items I found on the Net over the peak-week of this story:

NBC suspends Keith Olbermann indefinitely for contributing to Democratic campaigns

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann suspended for contributing to 3 Democratic candidates">MNSBC's Keith Olbermann suspended for contributing to 3 Democratic candidates

Keith Olbermann suspended by MSNBC:  Flashback to July Feud with Tucler Carlson

Keith Olbermann suspension criticized by reporters, conservative pudits

Olbermann doesn't answer to 'NBC standards

Biden asked Olbermann for anger advice: NYT

200,000 sign petiton for Olbermann

Keith, how we knew ye

Time to stop hiding

This last item raises some of the moral issues in the Olbermann case.  However, the formulation of the moral problem here is decidedly rather non-analytic as to what goes on in some venues when hosts/journos donate to persons or cawzes that benefit the journo directly and remuneratively in the long run.  This is rather different from the way FoxNooz hosts operate.  They try consistently to be "fair and balanced" in regard to the interviewees they inv+t to their studios and their cameras.  Then, when they give to their favourite cawzes, their personal contributions are made a matter of public record.  And there's not much room for the purchase of interviewees holding public office.

But liberal (yes, liberal) news organizations -- MSNBC and NPR, not to mention the New York Times and others -- have gotten this all bolloxed up lately, continuing to separate their journalists and commentators -- Juan Williams and now everyone at NPR else out of fear -- from their communities. They all refused to let their journalists attend the Rally to Restore Sanity, which turned out not to be a political event at all but a repudiation of media -- including most of Fox News plus Olbermann himself... a lesson all their journalists should have heard.

They do this because they want to stand above Fox News as objective. What they do instead is stand apart from their communities as -- what? -- sterile, gutless, distant. Fox News comes off as caring to its audience ("Fox News speaks for us," say the tea drinkers. "Fox News understands"). MSNBC comes off as... what? Don't we liberals deserve our Fox News, but with intelligence, sanity, openness? That was its promise. But like NPR, it is now a place where opinions and action are verboten.

M+ theory is that MSNBC realized that Keith Olbermann's political donations of money to the Democrats was actuarally a poyal program to grease the supply from Dems of prominents on KO's TV show, on a minute's notice when needed.