Keith Olbermann | Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow: Bring Back Keith Olbermann

Rachelmaddow
Yesterday, MSNBC suspended Keith Olbermann without pay after it was reveled that he did not inform the cable new network about three political donations he made to three Democrats. MSNBC has an internal rule in place that requires approval before any such donations are made by their talk show hosts.

On her own MSNBC program last night, Rachel Maddow pointed out the difference between her network and FOX News, which has no such internal requirement related to political donations from their hosts. She goes on to list the donations, fund-raising appearances and explicit political endorsements made by FOX News television hosts and contributors.

Maddow explained, about MSNBC: "We are not a political operation; Fox is. We are a news operation"

She also seemingly appealed directly to MSNBC bosses: "The point has been made and we should have Keith back."

Watch the entire enlightening segment, AFTER THE JUMP.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Meet Phil Griffin: A small-minded, petty, mostly bald tyrant with a flaccid micropenis whose idea of good news-network management is to suddenly dump the network's top political commentator right after a major election, over something trivial that no one gives a shit about. 'Atta boy, Griffie--way to get the ratings up! What's next--drowning kittens?

    Bring back Olbermann, get rid of Griffin---NOW!!

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Msnbc-President-Phil-Griffin-must-resign-for-suspending-Keith-Olbermann/139866559398958

    Posted by: John Equality Bickford | Nov 6, 2010 12:39:43 PM


  2. Since when did MSNBC become a part of NBC's news division? It was my understanding that they have been long held as separate, and for good reason. Much of what is on MSNBC is not straight news reporting, but enlightened perspectives on news worthy stories. There is too much opinion on Fox to deem that cable station straight "news," and the same applies to MSNBC (I say this, even though I agree with much of MSNBC's perspective). If that is the case, how can NBC apply their news standards to MSNBC? Such a double standard, really, but at least now we can see that MSNBC does hold theirr crew to a standard that Fox never will.

    Posted by: Mack | Nov 6, 2010 12:52:49 PM


  3. Rachel brings up a point that I've been trying to make for years now - and that is that MSNBC is NOT the "liberal version" of FOXNews. Anyone who throws Olbermann in the same boat as say, Beck, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, etc., is simply not paying attention. And it's this general malaise that is the real danger in today's political climate.

    Posted by: Tre Gibbs | Nov 6, 2010 1:34:14 PM


  4. Maddow's off base on this one. It doesn't matter what Fox or it's employees can do or actually do. Olbermann wasn't employed by them. Fox long ago abandoned all notion of journalistic integrity (as she rightly points out) and anyone who goes there looking for such is an idiot.

    Olbermann himself, though, has said he doesn't vote because he is a journalist. He's claimed the title so now his actions can be observed in light of it.

    MSNBC is still clinging desperately to the last shreds of journalistic ethics and standards. Olbermann knew of the prohibition when he took the gig. He then specifically attempted to deceive MSNBC by not telling them about the contributions. On top of all this, he compromised his own ethics by making the donations.

    I don't know if he is a hypocrite in general, but he committed a hypocritical act. While that shouldn't be enough to get him suspended, doing so seemingly with the full knowledge of the hypocrisy by not telling his employers when he was contractually bound to do so is the issue and why he was (and should have been) suspended.

    Posted by: Quakerjono | Nov 6, 2010 2:02:31 PM


  5. Let's not forget that the owner of Fox Rupert Murdoch, gave over a million dollars to the GOP this fall.

    Posted by: patrick nyc | Nov 6, 2010 2:08:41 PM


  6. @PATRICK NYC: Murdoch gave $1 million to the Republican Governors Association and another $1 million to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to fund ads against Democratic candidates.

    And Chris Wallace of Fox has already said that they intend to imbed themselves with every major GOP presidential candidate running in the primaries -- a sort of reality TV show: GOP primaries brought to you by Fox News.

    Posted by: Ninong | Nov 6, 2010 2:20:59 PM


  7. My concern with Olbermann's donation is that at least one of them occurred day of or day after one of the Arizona politicians appeared on his show. To me that makes it sound like paying for an interview, which is generally not kosher for any news organization.

    Posted by: Anonymo | Nov 6, 2010 2:27:29 PM


  8. Comcast hasn't even officially taken over MSNBC yet but I'm sure that their goal after the takeover will be to change the flavor of the political commentary. Don't be surprised to see them cut off their nose to spite their face.

    Phil Griffin fired Phil Donahue at a time when "Donahue" was the top-rated show on MSNBC. He didn't like Donahue's liberal views and his opposition to the Iraq War. Don't be surprised if the new Comcast overlords fire anybody who doesn't conform to their conservative Republican political views once the takeover is officially approved. After all, that's probably their main goal in taking over NBC Universal.

    Thanks to the Republicans, right-wing media conglomerates are taking over everything. And Net Neutrality is dead in the water because politicians from both parties have already been bought and paid for on that one.

    Posted by: Ninong | Nov 6, 2010 2:37:46 PM


  9. The only part I disagree with is the "indefinite" part. Olberman made his bed; now he must lay in it.

    But the punishment should be specific: suspension for 2 weeks without pay.

    It seems, though, that there have been several times this year that some stink or another has been raised about something Olberman has done. I'm wondering if maybe someone is trying to push him off the air...

    Posted by: Jay | Nov 6, 2010 2:41:47 PM


  10. @ANONYMO: You're talking about Congressman Raul Grijalvo, Democrat of Arizona. He has appeared several times on Countdown. You don't have to pay him to appear. He's more than happy to get the exposure.

    He won re-election over that Republican Tea Party guy but it was close.

    Posted by: Ninong | Nov 6, 2010 2:42:36 PM


  11. Correction: I meant to say Grijalva beat that Republican Tea Party woman, Ruth something-or-other.

    Posted by: Ninong | Nov 6, 2010 2:47:32 PM


  12. fuck news channel might as well be the advertising arm of the repuks. they hold no responsibility for what is said by their
    commentators( not news casters)
    they worst part of all this that this cast of clowns are very nasty but thin skinned. they have the ability to attack everybody and when they are attacked back they cry foul or just cry. the fcc should launch an investigation into fox and ruppert murdoch but they won't because fox spreads too much money around.

    Posted by: walter | Nov 6, 2010 2:49:45 PM


  13. Murdoch also donated to Hillary clinton


    Jay, maybe. Comcast merged with NBC and comcast is known for being conservative

    Posted by: mstrozfckslv@yahoo.com | Nov 6, 2010 3:39:03 PM


  14. Even Conservatives think the firing was dumb.

    Posted by: Jason (the commenter) | Nov 6, 2010 3:40:58 PM


  15. Idiotic to suspend Olberman. Everyone would think he gave money to the dems whether he did or not, considering his stance on the news. Glad to see a few people point out that waht happens at Fox really is not related to MSNBC. THis is all about MSNBC, not what murdoch did. Also, Limbaugh is not peret of Fox. Opinion at Fox is separate form news, and they say so. Unless you think Maddow is somehow really news - I see her solely as a political commentator, lebisan or not.

    Posted by: ted | Nov 6, 2010 3:52:23 PM


  16. gaffe on my comment - part not peret, i meant to preface the maddow comment with "At MSNBC, however, opinion is alive and well, unless you....
    So sooooorrrry girls...

    Posted by: ted | Nov 6, 2010 3:54:32 PM


  17. Pretty much all of the pro-net-neutrality Congressmen were targeted & defeated by the corporate lobby in the past election.

    When COMCAST takes full control of NBC they may wipe out all liberal-leaning programming from MSNBC. They can easily say the channel is under-ultilized because news isn't profitable enough.

    Once the GOP/Teabagger/ReligiousRightists take over, gay rights won't be the only thing to suffer. They will consolidate their power & the Supreme Court will back them up.

    Posted by: JONNY NYNY2FLFL | Nov 6, 2010 3:55:59 PM


  18. I want Keith and Rachel on my side. I depend on them to show me what going on. How anyone can believe the lies perpetrated by the anti-American Rupert Murdoch and his evil minions on the American public astounds me. The bombastic Hannity, O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly et al., don't speak for anyone but the Antichrist from Australia.

    Posted by: mad1026 | Nov 6, 2010 4:20:14 PM


  19. She has a poor argument. So, Fox should have fired him since they donate too? She should have examined donations from MSNBC staffers. Always pointing to someone else is getting lame.

    Posted by: Roger | Nov 6, 2010 6:09:16 PM


  20. @Roger - That was not the point of her segment in the slightest. She admitted Olbermann broke the rule and now he is being punished. The reason she brought up Fox News was not that because people do it on Fox it should be allowed on MSNBC. Rather, she was refuting the argument made by many, including Jon Stewart at his rally, that MSNBC is the liberal equivalent of Fox. This is patently false. Fox is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party and their "news" casters openly endorse and fund raise for GOP candidates on air. This does not happen on MSNBC. Maddow was using the unfortunate circumstances to demonstrate that MSNBC, which she admitted featured people like her and Olbermann with liberal views, is nothing like Fox.

    Posted by: SKOC211 | Nov 6, 2010 6:28:45 PM


  21. MSNBC wants to get rid of Olbermann and I'd predict Ed Shultz, too. Instead of Olbermann parking in the wrong spot, they got him on this.

    The "suits" at MSNBC are looking long term and can weather the silly short term storm. Olbermann had the same damn people on his show EVERY night (Wolfe. Eugene Robinson. Jonathan Alter) and even NBC crossovers like Andrea Mitchell or Chuck Todd or Tom Brokaw would flee from him, let alone DC politicians besides the most rabid liberal.

    I saw Deborah Wassermann-Shultz out of Florida interviewed on one of the MSNBC shows (Ed I think I remember) and it was shocking how rudely she was treated (over the public option). She swore to the interviewer she'd never appear again.

    They're cleaning house.

    Posted by: Mark | Nov 6, 2010 10:38:09 PM


  22. Has it occurred to anyone this might all be a publicity stunt by MSNBC? See folks...see how honest we are. I'd like Rachel or anyone else at MSNBC promote, defend, or garner publicity for themselves without mentioning Fox. They should be able to do this independent of Fox. It's like they're trying to ride on Fox's coattails.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Nov 6, 2010 11:46:09 PM


  23. This has nothing to do w/Fox News! This has to do w/MSNBC sucking. And yes-it reeks of a publicity stunt. Fox News did not fire Keith Olbermann. So stop blaming Fox for MSNBC sucking!

    Thank you and good night.

    Posted by: Amy Bagadonuts | Nov 7, 2010 12:17:41 AM


  24. Why are there some people here defending Fox News? Seriously!!!

    Posted by: Fox Is Not The News | Nov 8, 2010 6:54:24 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Ian McKellen On Closeted Hollywood Stars« «