The first thing that Keith Olbermann needs to understand, but will never understand is that the concept of objectivity does NOT mean that a journalist can never come to a judgment. Rather it means a respect for ideas and for conversation itself. A respect for analysis, for debate, for the back and forth.

Olbermann gives nod to that notion, but with his ‘Vince Foster — the moon is a balloon’ analogy, it is only to liken it to suggesting that he’s being asked to give air time to any inane idea out there. In Olbermann’s world, facts are as concrete as baseball card and he’s collected all of them. He doesn’t need any conflicting analysis, thank you very much…That’s because to Keith there IS only one viable point of view. His. All else is lies, distortions, fallacy.

Edward R. Murrow, the man whom Keith gives as an best example of informed subjective reporting, did NOT conduct his show as though he had nothing to learn from varying voices. He did not act as though issues and political positions were doctrinal matters where an airing of contrary ideas is tantamount to playing with blasphemy. The example of Murrow’s confrontation with Sen. McCarthy, belies Olbermann’s own methods, rather than bolstering them.

(It makes one wonder if in Olbermann’s analysis of Murrow’s treatment by CBS, after his McCarthy interview, if Olbermann isn’t suggesting that he is soon to be the victim of corporate interests aligning against him.)

Olbermann cannot give us an example of Cronkite or Murrow yelling at an American president to “shut the hell up”. He cannot show us where they juxtaposed the head of an American president with a groundhog. Neither Murrow or Cronkite would have entertained the likes of Michael Musto, replete with sneering insults at social conservatives and obscene double-entendre about American citizens banding together in opposition to an presidential administration’s policies.

Just as Olbermann wants to suggest that MSNBC policies are both illegal AND laudable because they are more strict than those at FOX, he wants it both ways now with Koppel. He’s essentially arguing that he should be able to run a tv show where he routinely denigrates a rival network, names his time slot competition as “Worst Person In the World”, and has a defacto ban on anyone who may espouse an a conservative position. AND be accorded respectful consideration and credibility when doing subjective news analysis.

Well, someone needs to tell him (and MSNBC) that he can’t do both. He can’t run his show like it’s an adjunct of Daily Kos, the Daily Show, and O’Reillysucks.com, AND have the gravitas to be considered anything other than a partisan polemicist.

God knows, EVEN Keith Olbermann would give lip service to the fact that he’s no Murrow, Cronkite, or Koppel. However, Olbermann isn’t even a Chris Matthews, who does enjoy politics, discussion, and debate.

That makes Keith’s pompous schooling of Koppel especially ignorant and arrogant. It’s the height of irony that in course of making the scions of journalism his boyhood heros, that in their “little l liberalism” Olbermann saw only an appeal to cultural elitism, ego, and disdain for opposition.

Olbermann is most certainly not a “little l liberal” and he’s not a big L LIberal either. He’s a capital I, as in me, myself, mine. He’s a closed minded snob of the most rabid sort. He’s a toxic presence wherever he goes, no more so to his own fans, who hold him accountable only to their own ethos of ideological zealotry.

Mr. Olbermann is certainly no Ted Koppel, Walter Cronkite, let alone Edward R. Murrow.

No, you sir, are only a narcissist and a demagogue (small d), sure to muck up any sandbox you sit in.

This lengthy smack down was posted a mere 2 minutes after this piece was posted? Wow. That’s quick.

The fact that neither Olbermann nor O’Reilly are seen as “objective” makes their sometimes important, but always subjective, words often fall on deaf ears.

I think you are wrong Colby. No one would mistake Olbermann of being objective, but I think Bill is regarded as objective to sane people that actually listen to him (versus mindless libs that just hate everything FOX news).

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:

I think you are wrong Colby. No one would mistake Olbermann of being objective, but I think Bill is regarded as objective to sane people that actually listen to him (versus mindless libs that just hate everything FOX news).

Spoken like a true partisan. You believe this only because your own political views are far more closely aligned with O’Reilly’s than Olbermann’s. Most sane people (not including “mindless conservatives or mindless libs”) view both of them as partisans.

Paul, I hope you are having a great day!! Carry on!

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Paul, I hope you are having a great day!! Carry on!

Thank you Michelle. Likewise.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
The fact that neither Olbermann nor O’Reilly are seen as “objective” makes their sometimes important, but always subjective, words often fall on deaf ears.

I think you are wrong Colby. No one would mistake Olbermann of being objective, but I think Bill is regarded as objective to sane people that actually listen to him (versus mindless libs that just hate everything FOX news).

How can someone as unobjective as you talk about objectivity?

It boggles the mind the you would even talk about “sane” people like you are one of them.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
How can someone as unobjective as you talk about objectivity?

This is a good, fair question.

I am going to have to go with Ceclia on this! Wow. Colby you should ban her before she takes your job!
My 3 favorite moments:
1. OReillysucks.com
2. Facts are as concrete as baseball cards and he’s collected all of them
3.he’s a capital I, as in me, myself, mine

That was the best thing I’ve read on here in along time.

Cecelia said:
The first thing that Keith Olbermann needs to understand, but will never understand is that the concept of objectivity does NOT mean that a journalist can never come to a judgment. Rather it means a respect for ideas and for conversation itself. A respect for analysis, for debate, for the back and forth.

Olbermann gives nod to that notion, but with his ‘Vince Foster — the moon is a balloon’ analogy, it is only to liken it to suggesting that he’s being asked to give air time to any inane idea out there. In Olbermann’s world, facts are as concrete as baseball card and he’s collected all of them. He doesn’t need any conflicting analysis, thank you very much…That’s because to Keith there IS only one viable point of view. His. All else is lies, distortions, fallacy.

Edward R. Murrow, the man whom Keith gives as an best example of informed subjective reporting, did NOT conduct his show as though he had nothing to learn from varying voices. He did not act as though issues and political positions were doctrinal matters where an airing of contrary ideas is tantamount to playing with blasphemy. The example of Murrow’s confrontation with Sen. McCarthy, belies Olbermann’s own methods, rather than bolstering them.

(It makes one wonder if in Olbermann’s analysis of Murrow’s treatment by CBS, after his McCarthy interview, if Olbermann isn’t suggesting that he is soon to be the victim of corporate interests aligning against him.)

Olbermann cannot give us an example of Cronkite or Murrow yelling at an American president to “shut the hell up”. He cannot show us where they juxtaposed the head of an American president with a groundhog. Neither Murrow or Cronkite would have entertained the likes of Michael Musto, replete with sneering insults at social conservatives and obscene double-entendre about American citizens banding together in opposition to an presidential administration’s policies.

Just as Olbermann wants to suggest that MSNBC policies are both illegal AND laudable because they are more strict than those at FOX, he wants it both ways now with Koppel. He’s essentially arguing that he should be able to run a tv show where he routinely denigrates a rival network, names his time slot competition as “Worst Person In the World”, and has a defacto ban on anyone who may espouse an a conservative position. AND be accorded respectful consideration and credibility when doing subjective news analysis.

Well, someone needs to tell him (and MSNBC) that he can’t do both. He can’t run his show like it’s an adjunct of Daily Kos, the Daily Show, and O’Reillysucks.com, AND have the gravitas to be considered anything other than a partisan polemicist.

God knows, EVEN Keith Olbermann would give lip service to the fact that he’s no Murrow, Cronkite, or Koppel. However, Olbermann isn’t even a Chris Matthews, who does enjoy politics, discussion, and debate.

That makes Keith’s pompous schooling of Koppel especially ignorant and arrogant. It’s the height of irony that in course of making the scions of journalism his boyhood heros, that in their “little l liberalism” Olbermann saw only an appeal to cultural elitism, ego, and disdain for opposition.

Olbermann is most certainly not a “little l liberal” and he’s not a big L LIberal either. He’s a capital I, as in me, myself, mine. He’s a closed minded snob of the most rabid sort. He’s a toxic presence wherever he goes, no more so to his own fans, who hold him accountable only to their own ethos of ideological zealotry.

Mr. Olbermann is certainly no Ted Koppel, Walter Cronkite, let alone Edward R. Murrow.

No, you sir, are only a narcissist and a demagogue (small d), sure to muck up any sandbox you sit in.

Yet, with Bill-o, we have a man who sexually harassed a co-worker, Andrea Makris, and settled a lawsuit she brought against to have the records sealed. We have a man who said a young woman, Jennifer Moore, brought on her sexual assault, her rape, by being out late at night and wearing clothes he deemed to suggest. We have a man who said that a teenage boy, Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction, kidnapping and false imprisonment because he didn’t have to go to school. Yet, Mr. Olbermann is the anti-Christ? Has the world tipped out of its axis?

Well, you know what they say about girls who taunt boys.

realitycheck said:
I am going to have to go with Ceclia on this! Wow. Colby you should ban her before she takes your job!
My 3 favorite moments:
1. OReillysucks.com
2. Facts are as concrete as baseball cards and he’s collected all of them
3.he’s a capital I, as in me, myself, mine

That was the best thing I’ve read on here in along time.

And written in only 2 minutes!

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
It boggles the mind the you would even talk about “sane” people like you are one of them.

It’s not Michelle-in-Utah’s fault. She keeps getting black-balled. Sane people are very unfair to her.

BFD, I take your disdain of me as a compliment. If someone like you liked me, I would take it as a serious character flaw. It’s rare that I come across someone as low on the humanity totem pole as you.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
BFD, I take your disdain of me as a compliment. If someone like you liked me, I would take it as a serious character flaw. It’s rare that I come across someone as low on the humanity totem pole as you.

O, Michelle-in-Utah, you say that about everyone. It’s lost all force and meaning.

@paulmdoro

I guess Cecilia just needed a place to get it out! Or maybe Cecilia is Colbys ghost screen name… Maybe he doesn’t even believe the stuff he writes.

Objective means trying to get to the truth of the matter.

All O’Reilly and Olby are doing is trying to prove THEY are right about everything.

I already did the math for The Factor and totaled that it had approx 75% conservative voices and 25% liberal.
When a show approaches the vast majority of it’s content from a right-leaning view just saying “we report, you decide” doesn’t make it objective.

paulmdoro said:
This lengthy smack down was posted a mere 2 minutes after this piece was posted? Wow. That’s quick.

She repurposed it from the previous thread.
It may have still been on her clipboard, when this post went up.

(I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with it. It just looks to be the case)

BFD what about olby

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
BFD, I take your disdain of me as a compliment. If someone like you liked me, I would take it as a serious character flaw. It’s rare that I come across someone as low on the humanity totem pole as you.

I take your disdain of my disdain with disdain.

percentages

Magister said:
She repurposed it from the previous thread.
It may have still been on her clipboard, when this post went up.

(I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with it. It just looks to be the case)

Ah I see. Makes sense.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
I take your disdain of my disdain with disdain.

I gave you a Thumb’s Up for that. You probably won’t be in positive territory for long. Michelle-in-Utah and Tumbleweed will be signing on under new names to vote you down, but enjoy for now. I know it means as much to you as it does to me. As you know, I am very sensitive.

paulmdoro said:
paulmdoro says:
November 16, 2010 at 4:29 pm paulmdoro

Magister said:
She repurposed it from the previous thread.
It may have still been on her clipboard, when this post went up.

(I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with it. It just looks to be the case)

Ah I see. Makes sense.

I don’t know, Paul. I think repurposing is sort of cheesy.

I told you these two jokes would come out swinging.

cjd ohio 1 said:
percentages

Olby has 0 right-leaning guests, so his show has even less objectivity than O’Reilly’s.

If objectivity was raisins then Bill would be Raisin Bran and Keith would be the generic supermarket brand with hardly any raisins at all.

I hope my raisin analogy was helpful..

gave you a Thumb’s Up for that. You probably won’t be in positive territory for long. Michelle-in-Utah and Tumbleweed will be signing on under new names to vote you down, but enjoy for now. I know it means as much to you as it does to me. As you know, I am very sensitive.

You’re projecting again, King. The only one who does that is you and your buddy Iris the virus.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
Olby has 0 right-leaning guests, so his show has even less objectivity than O’Reilly’s.

If objectivity was raisins then Bill would be Raisin Bran and Keith would be the generic supermarket brand with hardly any raisins at all.

I hope my raisin analogy was helpful..

Not too much. I’m rather scared of raisins. Figs, too.

its cool BFD , you were honest, outstanding

The Real Royal King said:
Yet, with Bill-o, we have a man who sexually harassed a co-worker, Andrea Makris, and settled a lawsuit she brought against to have the records sealed. We have a man who said a young woman, Jennifer Moore, brought on her sexual assault, her rape, by being out late at night and wearing clothes he deemed to suggest. We have a man who said that a teenage boy, Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction, kidnapping and false imprisonment because he didn’t have to go to school. Yet, Mr. Olbermann is the anti-Christ? Has the world tipped out of its axis?
Well, you know what they say about girls who taunt boys.

Wow, those things would be real bad if they were true, but they are not.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Iris the virus.

Not to be confused with Con Air’s awesome villain Cyrus the Virus.

better than this fuck nut gordon

gordonbloyershow said:
Wow, those things would be real bad if they were true, but they are not.

He didn’t settle a sexual harassment lawsuit with that woman? He didn’t criticize a rape victim for what she was wearing?

RRK poll……….15 thumbs down……..3 thumbs up………You are a loser RRK.

The Real Royal King said:
Yet, with Bill-o, we have a man who sexually harassed a co-worker, Andrea Makris, and settled a lawsuit she brought against to have the records sealed. We have a man who said a young woman, Jennifer Moore, brought on her sexual assault, her rape, by being out late at night and wearing clothes he deemed to suggest. We have a man who said that a teenage boy, Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction, kidnapping and false imprisonment because he didn’t have to go to school. Yet, Mr. Olbermann is the anti-Christ? Has the world tipped out of its axis?

Well, you know what they say about girls who taunt boys.

What we don’t have is O’Reilly anchoring election coverage or schooling Ted Koppel on the history of journalism.

I didn’t Olbermann’s past employment history, sexist remarks on the air, and contretemps with an ex-girlfriend about a private detective, but thanks for showing uncharacteristic restraint by not saying “loofah”.

How long till you utterly derail this thread and have everyone who contradicts you defending themselves against your charges of being a holocaust denier or a racist?

gordonbloyershow said:
RRK poll……….15 thumbs down……..3 thumbs up………You are a loser RRK.

The internet isn’t a popularity contest, dipshit. lolol

cjd ohio 1 said:
better than this fuck nut gordon

When the cable provider wanted to rid the riff-raff from Access Cable in Portage, Indiana, Marceaux, I mean Blower, began a terrible downward spiral. When “Painting With Poop” was canceled in Austin, the same thing happened with its star.

gordonbloyershow said:
RRK poll……….15 thumbs down……..3 thumbs up………You are a loser RRK.

Michelle-in-Utah and Tumbleweed have been very, very busy, haven’t they?

I’m crushed. Simply crushed.

I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?

realitycheck said:
That was the best thing I’ve read on here in along time.

Thanks very much!

It’s a testimony to my lack of mechanical prowess, that I didn’t mean to post that here, I had put it in another thread.

A cut and paste error… oops…

Cecelia said:

The Real Royal King said:
Yet, with Bill-o, we have a man who sexually harassed a co-worker, Andrea Makris, and settled a lawsuit she brought against to have the records sealed. We have a man who said a young woman, Jennifer Moore, brought on her sexual assault, her rape, by being out late at night and wearing clothes he deemed to suggest. We have a man who said that a teenage boy, Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction, kidnapping and false imprisonment because he didn’t have to go to school. Yet, Mr. Olbermann is the anti-Christ? Has the world tipped out of its axis?

Well, you know what they say about girls who taunt boys.

What we don’t have is O’Reilly anchoring election coverage or schooling Ted Koppel on the history of journalism.

I didn’t Olbermann’s past employment history, sexist remarks on the air, and contretemps with an ex-girlfriend about a private detective, but thanks for showing uncharacteristic restraint by not saying “loofah”.

How long till you utterly derail this thread and have everyone who contradicts you defending themselves against your charges of being a holocaust denier or a racist?

I’m not defending Mr. Olbermann. I was just going for fairness and balance.

I had the loveliest asparagus Parmesean risotto last night, Cecelia, with a crispy Bordeaux. I went to bed happy and dreamt of Mandalay.

Tommy Christopher said:
I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?

I think it must be something akin to junior high school cheerleader elections. A great deal of thought goes into it, and the selection is always on the basis of skill and talent.

Tommy Christopher said:
I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?

About the same difference that any of this makes.

The Real Royal King said:
I had the loveliest asparagus Parmesean risotto last night, Cecelia, with a crispy Bordeaux. I went to bed happy and dreamt of Mandalay.

Well, you are the quintessential Mrs. Danvers.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
The internet isn’t a popularity contest, dipshit. lolol

In your case it IS.

Lets test it out. Everybody give this comment a thumbs up, and my next one a thumbs down, and see what happens!

Lets test it out. Everybody give this comment a thumbs down, and see what happens!

Tommy Christopher said:
I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?

Why did Mediaite put the thumbs there? Why don’t they show up on YOUR posts? They must mean something if you are afraid of them?

Done.

Tommy Christopher said:
Lets test it out. Everybody give this comment a thumbs down, and see what happens!

Done, too.

Tommy Christopher said:
Lets test it out. Everybody give this comment a thumbs up, and my next one a thumbs down, and see what happens!

That is good except they don’t show up on YOUR comments.

gordonbloyershow said:
Why did Mediaite put the thumbs there? Why don’t they show up on YOUR posts? They must mean something if you are afraid of them?

lol, wheels within wheels, man! Wheels within wheels!

Tommy Christopher said:
and see what happens!

Some sort of tear in the space-time continuum, OR, perhaps, your head catches fire.

Sorry Tommy, but the Staff posts can’t get rated.
Though to answer your question, they really don’t mean anything. They’re just there.

Cecelia said:
Well, you are the quintessential Mrs. Danvers.

I saw “Mrs. Miniver” over the weekend and was reminded how drawn I was to her.

You would make a lovely Lady Beldon.

Oh, there’s no thumbs on staff comments? Damn! OK, someone else duplicate my experiment.

gordonbloyershow said:
That is good except they don’t show up on YOUR comments.

Really?

Magister said:
Sorry Tommy, but the Staff posts can’t get rated.
Though to answer your question, they really don’t mean anything. They’re just there.

How do we know? Has anyone ever gone 100-0, or 0-100? Maybe something cool happens.

Cecelia said:
Some sort of tear in the space-time continuum, OR, perhaps, your head catches fire.

I was thinking more like an online gift certificate or something.

Tommy Christopher said:
Oh, there’s no thumbs on staff comments? Damn! OK, someone else duplicate my experiment.

I can’t help you, Tommy. Michelle-in-Utah and Tumbleweed don’t read any of the posts except their own, and they always give me “Thumb’s Down”.

Dave Noland said:
More false equivalency. Imagine that

I object. Whenever someone compares and contrasts two things, someone is always there to lazily declare “false equivalence,” without ever backing it up. Comparing things isn’t the same as saying they’re equivalent.

I can’t help you, Tommy. Michelle-in-Utah and Tumbleweed don’t read any of the posts except their own, and they always give me “Thumb’s Down”.

WOW, I had NO idea you were actually here beside me. I read every last one of your pathetic, ego-filled posts. Every single, kart -o- crap and Mary’s in heaven. Perhaps I do need that restraining order since your obsession with me is worse than I originally thought.

The Real Royal King said:
Really?

Really.

A puzzle how you were able to see them.

Cecelia said:
Really.

A puzzle how you were able to see them.

The workings of the creative mind, and with you, my muse so near, creativity abounds.

Tommy Christopher said:
I was thinking more like an online gift certificate or something.

Same difference, depending on your pov.

The Real Royal King said:
The workings of the creative mind, and with you, my muse so near, creativity abounds.

More stodgy sorts call what you do fabricating, but why quibble.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
The internet isn’t a popularity contest, dipshit. lolol

To El Gordo the internet IS a popularity contest…haven’t you noticed how important the “thumbs” are to him?

Of course, he’s lived his miserable life in the shadow of a heroic brother, always striving to be half the man his brave sibling was, yet failing bitterly time after time.

Hugo Daun said:
To El Gordo the internet IS a popularity contest…haven’t you noticed how important the “thumbs” are to him?

Of course, he’s lived his miserable life in the shadow of a heroic brother, always striving to be half the man his brave sibling was, yet failing bitterly time after time.

That explains so much.

Cecelia said:
More stodgy sorts call what you do fabricating, but why quibble.

Choir practice. That pesky Christmas Eve is just around the corner. As Lawrence Welk sang, “Adiós. Au Revoir. Auf Wiedersehen.”

Cecelia said:
More stodgy sorts call what you do fabricating, but why quibble.

The Real Royal King said:
Choir practice. That pesky Christmas Eve is just around the corner. As Lawrence Welk sang, “Adiós. Au Revoir. Auf Wiedersehen.”

Whoah! Do I sense candlelight and Al Green records in the air? Get a room, you two!

ssshhh king, we know your going drinking

Tommy Christopher said:
Al Green records in the air?

Anything but Lawrence Welk.

Tommy Christopher said:
I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?

None!

The Real Royal King said:
Really?

Yes REALLY. Are you blind?

Cecelia said:
No, you sir, are only a narcissist and a demagogue (small d), sure to muck up any sandbox you sit in.

Wow! Several paragraphs ranting about Olbermann and only this one line at the end about O’Reilly. Not exactly fair & balanced.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
I think you are wrong Colby. No one would mistake Olbermann of being objective, but I think Bill is regarded as objective to sane people that actually listen to him (versus mindless libs that just hate everything FOX news).

One question: What color is the sky in your world?

JamesA1102 said:
Wow! Several paragraphs ranting about Olbermann and only this one line at the end about O’Reilly. Not exactly fair & balanced.

I already said I posted it in this thread in error, Einstein, so you can now return to your daily stalking..eh…brilliant task of opining to sarainitaly that she can’t live in Italy with her Italian husband AND also care about America.

The Real Royal King said:
Yet, with Bill-o, we have a man who sexually harassed a co-worker, Andrea Makris, and settled a lawsuit she brought against to have the records sealed. We have a man who said a young woman, Jennifer Moore, brought on her sexual assault, her rape, by being out late at night and wearing clothes he deemed to suggest. We have a man who said that a teenage boy, Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction, kidnapping and false imprisonment because he didn’t have to go to school. Yet, Mr. Olbermann is the anti-Christ? Has the world tipped out of its axis? Well, you know what they say about girls who taunt boys.

If the court records are sealed, how do you know he sexually harassed her? For all you know, she “settled” paying O’Reilly’s attorney’s fees and costs and she requested the records be sealed. You can’t have it both ways, unles you are claiming omniscience.

JamesA1102 said:
One question: What color is the sky in your world?

I’m guessing that the sky you see is varying shades of green, depending upon influence of solar activity on Uranus.

AnonymousFinch said:
If the court records are sealed, how do you know he sexually harassed her? For all you know, she “settled” paying O’Reilly’s attorney’s fees and costs and she requested the records be sealed. You can’t have it both ways, unles you are claiming omniscience.

Yeah, with that reasoning we all must assume that Pres. Clinton undeniably harassed Paula Jones.

I’m guessing that the sky you see is varying shades of green, depending upon influence of solar activity on Uranus.

HAHA, you are on a roll, Cecilia! Go girl!

I get tired of all the badgering of the other side. Fox does it much less, but I don’t watch it much even though I tend to agree with O’Reilly more than Olbermann. It is just that every moment of Olbermann-Maddow-Schultze-O’Donnell’s broadcasts are obviously designed to boost the fortunes of the Democratic Party. Fox does it too, but much more subtle in their delivery. I don’t think the failure to expose the Iraq War / WMD debacle was a result of traditional media. Bush just drug us into the damned thing. We’d have been better off with Saddam. Do you think he would have allowed Ahmadinejad to have the bomb ?

Well truely Tommy, you give Conkrite way to much import with this statement:

But for better or worse, neither Olbermann nor O’Reilly have the objective credibility to have the impact of a Cronkite a Murrow. But in this day and age,

Conkite never had any real credibility with the conservatives in this country — he just claimed it and you lefties endoresed it. Uncle Walter is the father of opinion media…anyone with any knowledge of history will or should acknowledge that.

Putting Olbermann and O’Reilly in the same game is also a fallacious argument — there is no way they play on the same court – O’Reilly understands what the baseline is, Olbermann not so much.

Koppel went off on his high horse, and Olbermann and O’Reilly kicked him off it, each in their own way. Koppel proved himself to be just another elitist media personality who thinks he knows more than the rest of us, and in reality, he doesn’t. It was Koppel and his ilk that gave us FNC and MSNBC, if he and his media whores (word approved by NOW and Governor Brown) had done their job, this story wouldn’t even exist.

Koppel can’t take the heat, he needs to get out of the kitchen. Cable news will outrank the broadcasters in the next several years, and the likes of Ted, Katie, Brian and Dianne will be old news — literally and figuratively.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
The fact that neither Olbermann nor O’Reilly are seen as “objective” makes their sometimes important, but always subjective, words often fall on deaf ears.

I think you are wrong Colby. No one would mistake Olbermann of being objective, but I think Bill is regarded as objective to sane people that actually listen to him (versus mindless libs that just hate everything FOX news).

Funny way to put it when talking about objectivity. I think BillO’s ego and personal preference has a lot to do with how objective he is from day to day. He does have liberal guests on on a regular basis. As to his challenge about lying. He has lied and will lie again, and I think that is about ego as well.
Just for yucks I did a search on Bill O Reilly lies on you tube. Quite a few examples, not including the one I remembered.

Tommy Christopher said:
I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?

It’s like kids on the playground proud of having the most marbles, rather than their posts being an indication of the quality of the marbles they possess.

The Real Royal King said:
I don’t know, Paul. I think repurposing is sort of cheesy.

I don’t. A good point is a good point and bears repeating in threads that relate. We do have threads about the same cast characters fairly often, or even several threads on the same incident , such as this one.

I do it myself to get it out to more readers.

AnonymousFinch said:
If the court records are sealed, how do you know he sexually harassed her? For all you know, she “settled” paying O’Reilly’s attorney’s fees and costs and she requested the records be sealed. You can’t have it both ways, unles you are claiming omniscience.

I’m betting you don’t really believe that. Do you think ORielly would have passed up a chance to expose here as a liar if that was the case. He denied it until it was revealed that she had recordings. Then a settlement was reached. That’s not proof positive but it’s pretty suspicious.

Cecelia said:
The first thing that Keith Olbermann needs to understand, …..

Good piece! You need to write for Mediate

Tommy, two laughs for the day:

First, re the thumbs up/thumbs down question…good point, but you work at Mediaite, so who best to answer such a dumb ass question? Talk to your boss, and if you dont have a good reason, get rid of the thumbs up/thumbs down. It is indeed meaningless. Easy fix. Not rocket science, so maybe Tommy and Abrams have the ability to figure it out.

Second, “In many respects, cable news audiences (and media critics) have not caught up with Olbermann’s vantage point or astute analysis.” Olbermann and astute? Really? Tommy, do you spit or swallow?

A perfect example a Bill O’Reilly stretching the truth happened in the first 10 minutes of his show today…

“Tina Fey, who makes a good living off of Sarah Palin….”

Ummm….Tina is a comedy writer, a SNL alum and has directed, starred and written successful movies and a television show.

That is NOT an “objective” view of how she makes a “good living”. It makes it sound like Tina “made her bones” impersonating Palin. Far from it.

You are not entitled to your own facts, Bill. Please be more fair in the future.

“Bill O’Reilly, who makes a good living cursing out stage hands….” lolol

I love this , So does My boyfriend.he is almost 11 years older than me.i met him on a hot place.
*Agelessbbw*.*com*. A’ ge is not a problem, It gives you a chance to meet your a’ ge g a’p matches. Maybe you wanna check it out or tell your friends
werwr3r

Fact: I had to scroll and scroll down, down and more down just to get here. All left nut/ d-baggers sux popsicles down to the wood sticks. Thumb that up your buns!

Just4thefax said:
I had to scroll and scroll down, down and more down just to get here.

That’s ok.

I heard you like to go down.

Wow BFD, you really had to stretch for that one. The fact is, if you ask 100 people what they know about Fey, probably 75% or more will say they know her from spoofing Palin. Ok, that’s an opinion, not a fact, but you get the point. You got nothing!

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
You are not entitled to your own facts, Bill. Please be more fair in the future.

Does anyone honestly think Bill would ever introduce Dennis Miller as…

“Dennis Miller, who makes a good living calling Nancy Pelosi names…..” (which he does constantly)

Of course not.

Bill is a lot of things…objective is not one of them.

TfT said:
Well truely Tommy, you give Conkrite way to much import with this statement:

But for better or worse, neither Olbermann nor O’Reilly have the objective credibility to have the impact of a Cronkite a Murrow. But in this day and age,

Thanks, but I didn’t write that. Colby did.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Ok, that’s an opinion, not a fact,

Those 75% of people don’t pay her a “good living”, dipshit.

She has been wildly commercially successful long before Palin ever came along. She makes a good living on writing, TV and Movies. She probably got paid a few thousand dollars for her SNL guest appearances and only a small part of that was for her 5 minute Palin routine.

You and Bill are wrong. She does not make a good living from Palin anymore than Miller makes a good living from Pelosi.

You will never admit that though.

My point is to use that as proof Bill is a liar is laughable. You’re such a pleasant person.

Tina Fey is the most successful comedienne in America since Lucille Ball and Carol Burnett.

She doesn’t make her living from Sarah Palin.

I can’t resist. BillO and him asking for lies to be pointed out as if he never does.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKH5rLVhxK4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrdfRAaSWj0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beJ9yJpR_DA&feature=related
and my fav, when ORielly gets pissed at the son of a 9/11 victim, and later lies about what he said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IwIRNM5noY&feature=related

Oh, and tells him to shut up which he never did?

The fact is, her Palin impressions are what she’s known for now, not 30 Rock, which no one watches. And she’s no where near as successful as Jerry Seinfeld or Larry the Cable guy, oerhaps you should rethink your statement that she is the most successful since Ball and Burnett

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
My point is to use that as proof Bill is a liar is laughable.

No. Your point was that Bill was right.

Now that I shot that down your point is I’m nit-picking.

Sucks when you don’t even know your own point.

My point is this is how Bill will slant EVERYTHING from the Left negatively. Tina is a small point in a larger narrative of his.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
And she’s no where near as successful as Jerry Seinfeld or Larry the Cable guy, oerhaps you should rethink your statement that she is the most successful since Ball and Burnett

You do know what a comedienne is, right? lol

Larry the Cable Guy? He’s the guy with one joke and 5 shitty movies, right?

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
My point is to use that as proof Bill is a liar is laughable. You’re such a pleasant person.

I just posted a couple. There’s more. I actually like BillO okay, and I think his lies are mainly ego oriented, but that doesn’t make them the truth.

Larry the Cable Guy? He’s the guy with one joke and 5 shitty movies, right?

Yeah, the guy who makes about $20 million a year.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
“Bill O’Reilly, who makes a good living cursing out stage hands….” lolol

That’s funny right there , I don’t care who ya r

I think Ellen Degeneres would take issue with you saying Fey is the most successful since Ball.

Another Bill O’Reilly lie…

“Their (PBS) funds are gonna be lifted. There’s no doubt they’re gonna be lifted”

No doubt, Bill??!?!! Are you a fucking fortune teller. NO DOUBT?

This is exactly what Koppel was talking about, turning an opinion into a fact.

LOL…I’m only 15 minutes into O’Reillys show and already he lies like a dog.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
I think Ellen Degeneres would take issue with you saying Fey is the most successful since Ball.

That’s right, now you got it.

Comedienne means female, moron. lmfao

Like I said before, you are so pleasant. What’s is like to go through life being hateful all the time? Doesn’t it ever get old?

And your assertion that Fey is more successful than anyone since Ball isn’t true, so doesn’t that make you a liar by your standards?

CosmosDan said:
I do it myself to get it out to more readers.

Well, thanks, CosmoDan, but I’ll come clean.

It wasn’t a pasting error, it was my attempt to garner the attention of the Pulitzer Prize Committee.

I’m going for their Domestic Goddess Disses Keith Olbermann journalism award.

(By the way, have I told that you’re a mensch today?)

Tommy! If we are turning this into a suggestion box.. Could you get someone to redesign the comment section so you could reply directly to a certain comment, you know those cute little collapsable replies!! Then all those that hurl insults back and forth at each other, all day, could do so… Among themselves. Please!

realitycheck said:
Tommy! If we are turning this into a suggestion box.. Could you get someone to redesign the comment section so you could reply directly to a certain comment, you know those cute little collapsable replies!! Then all those that hurl insults back and forth at each other, all day, could do so… Among themselves. Please!

Well, I actually hate those collapsible dealies, but I will pass it on. I’ve long said that the answer to trolls is to require Facebook/Twitter accounts, and to add a layer of moderation based on friend/follower count. It still leaves the option of an anonymous identity, but not one that people will easily trash by being assholes.

Cecelia said:
I’m going for their Domestic Goddess Disses Keith Olbermann journalism award.

I’ll put in a good word with the committee.

Cecelia said:
(By the way, have I told that you’re a mensch today?)

Why no you haven’t. Thank you Goddess.

Tommy Christopher said:
Well, I actually hate those collapsible dealies, but I will pass it on. I’ve long said that the answer to trolls is to require Facebook/Twitter accounts, and to add a layer of moderation based on friend/follower count. It still leaves the option of an anonymous identity, but not one that people will easily trash by being assholes.

I have neither of those accounts and even though there might be some here that would be glad for me to not be. I don’t think that is a good option. Of course only for people like me that have no interest in either of those sites.

And in reality I could imagine the trolls could open an account on either one of those and still continue to troll.

But this software does need revamped. It sucks, sorry to say.

The Real Royal King said:
Yet, with Bill-o, we have a man who sexually harassed a co-worker, Andrea Makris, and settled a lawsuit she brought against to have the records sealed. We have a man who said a young woman, Jennifer Moore, brought on her sexual assault, her rape, by being out late at night and wearing clothes he deemed to suggest. We have a man who said that a teenage boy, Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction, kidnapping and false imprisonment because he didn’t have to go to school. Yet, Mr. Olbermann is the anti-Christ? Has the world tipped out of its axis? Well, you know what they say about girls who taunt boys.

And what does have to with Koppel’s issue wih cable news? It appears Koppel loathes opinion programing on cable. It’s alright when broadcast news does its news reports with a subtle slant. Koppel doesn’t watch cable news because doesn’t mention the fact that hosts like O’Reilly or Hannity always have guest that are opposite their right of center or conservative opinions. Beck presents the issue, gives an opinion but puts the onus on his viewers to come up with their own take on the issue. Greta Van Susteran is the most middle of the road host amongst the others on prime time. Chris Matthews always look for hypocrisy with those he disagrees with because he can’t take an issue straight on. Schultz is a plain ideologue. He’s not interested on the other side’s take. Olbemann’s program is all about Olbermann. Maddow goes with opinion, people are not allowed to change their mind on an issue and when she has someone she disagrees with, it’s attack when the cue light on the camera goes on. Laurence O’Donnell is still trying to find his schtick even though he leans left. Broadcast news gives us up to two hours of news per day. Cable news gives us 6 hours opinion programming in prime time, about another three for morning show fluff, the balance of their 24 hour day they give us their version of straight news and news specials . Cable news stations gives us more news than the broadcast stations. My conclusion, Koppel is clueless when it comes to cable news.

Cecelia said:
I already said I posted it in this thread in error, Einstein, so you can now return to your daily stalking..eh…brilliant task of opining to sarainitaly that she can’t live in Italy with her Italian husband AND also care about America.

Wow you really resort to namecalling and distortions quickly. Guess that’s what you have to do when you can’t defend your rants.

Cecelia said:
I’m guessing that the sky you see is varying shades of green, depending upon influence of solar activity on Uranus.

Wow! More insults and really lame ones too.

Koppel was stating the simple facts. Both MSNBC and FOX or “Opinions” on Politics they are not NEWS. FOX out and out lies all the time while MSNBC at least tries to get the facts straight.

To get the real news your best bet is PBS.

@ Tommy
” is to require Facebook/Twitter accounts, and to add a layer of moderation based on friend/follower count. It still leaves the option of an anonymous identity, but not one that people will easily trash by being assholes.”

Good grief… I am sure there would have to be a mediate commentor protection program. Why mess with a middle man when they could directly harass a Facebook or twitter account all day… Although it would be interesting to see behind the great avatar curtain.

Obermann and O”Rielly are different in a major regard, O’Rielly may disagree with some guests, but he has not subjected those he disagrees with to open ridicule and hatred like Obermann. Yes, both sides can claim access to facts that support their point of view. The dirty little secret of journalism is that “truth” has nothing to do with facts.
Everyone has an opinion, a bias or POV and to claim otherwise is to deny reality.
Koppel is an old line journalist and excellent at his craft, but he suffers from the fallacy that claims establishment journalism is not liberal and does not reflect any measurable bias. The marketplace and millions of viewers believe otherwise.

Colby Hall’s sneering at O’Reilly’s ‘beat cop’ approach but we are still left with the factthat Koppel and others have made accusations that they can’t back up, and O’Reilly is right to challenge him in any way he likes.

It’s hard to credit that Koppel would mention Olbermann and O’Reilly ibn the same sentence, unless speaking alphabetically. (I suspect that like many attacked of O’Reilly he hasn’t reslly tuned in.) Equally hard to credit is that Koppel would mention MSNBC and “commercial success” in the same sentence.

1. sorry about my many typos above–still typong w/2 fngers after all these years.

2. Tommy ChristopherWell, I actually hate those collapsible dealies, but I will pass it on. I’ve long said that the answer to trolls is to require Well, I actually hate those collapsible dealies, but I will pass it on. I’ve long said that the answer to trolls is to require Facebook/Twitter accounts, and to add a layer of moderation based on friend/follower count. It still leaves the option of an anonymous identity, but not one that people will easily trash by being assholes.

Please! Forcing people to have Facebook/Twitter accounts would be intolaerably cruel. While I admit to having no idea what “collapsible dealies” are, they can’t possibly be worse than that.

Colby wrote, “O’Reilly metaphorically pokes Koppel in the chest, challenging the news vet to ‘give me examples of me lying on the air, using an opinion not based on fact,’ ”

OK, Koppel, here’s 10 for you to take to O’Reilly’s show:

O’Reilly falsely claimed Bush didn’t oppose 9-11 Commission. O’Reilly defended President George W. Bush from a Kerry-Edwards ‘04 TV ad highlighting Bush’s opposition to creation of the 9-11 Commission by denying that Bush had ever opposed the commission. In fact, Bush did oppose the creation of the 9-11 Commission. (10/21/04)

O’Reilly falsely claimed Iraq had ricin. O’Reilly responded to a caller to his radio show by defending the Iraq war: “They did have ricin up there in the north — so why are you discounting that so much?” In fact, the Duelfer report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. (10/19/04)

O’Reilly repeated discredited claims on Iraq-Al Qaeda link. O’Reilly interrupted a former Clinton administration official who tried to correct the record on O’Reilly’s claim that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi constitutes a direct link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. He also allowed a conservative guest to repeat without challenge other discredited claims about Iraq’s supposed involvement in terrorism — claims O’Reilly has himself cited in the past. (9/27/04)

O’Reilly fabricated “Paris Business Review” as source for success of French boycott. O’Reilly falsely claimed “they’ve lost billions of dollars in France according to ‘The Paris Business Review’” due to an American boycott he advocated of French imports. Media Matters for America found no evidence of a publication named “The Paris Business Review.” (4/27/04)

O’Reilly cited phony stats to argue that taxes on rich are excessive. O’Reilly tried to “blow off” the argument that wealthy Americans ought to pay more taxes by citing phony statistics about the tax burden the rich currently bear. (6/30/04)

O’Reilly confused on elementary economics. O’Reilly told a caller on his radio show, “We [the United States] have a trade deficit with everybody, because everybody wants our stuff, and we’re not wild about snails” — indicating that he doesn’t know the definition of “trade deficit” and implying that the United States runs a trade surplus with France. In fact, in the first four months of 2004, the United States had a $3 billion trade deficit with France. (6/10/04)

O’Reilly doctored quotation to suggest Soros wished his own father dead. During his smear campaign against progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros, O’Reilly doctored a 1995 quotation by Soros to make it seem as if Soros wished his own father dead. (6/1/04)

O’Reilly questioned if Kennedy would show up to Democratic convention … as Kennedy spoke behind him.

O’Reilly teased an upcoming segment of The O’Reilly Factor, broadcast live from the Democratic National Convention, by saying of convention speaker Senator Edward Kennedy: “When we come back, we’ll let you listen to Ted Kennedy for a while, if he shows up.” In fact, Kennedy had already shown up and had been speaking for several minutes, as O’Reilly need only have turned around to see. (7/27/04)

O’Reilly disparaged Democrats with trifecta of voter falsehoods. In a discussion about what went wrong for Democrats in the November 2 election, O’Reilly claimed that Democrats “lost votes from four years ago”; that “18- to 24[-year-old]s didn’t go” to the polls; and that “[c]ommitted Republicans didn’t carry the day for the president; independents did.” All three claims are false. (11/4/04)

O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie No. 2: “Socialistic” French, Germans, and Canadian governments tax at 80 percent. Lie No. 3: Canadian, British, and French media are “government-controlled,” but Italian media is free. (7/7/04)

Tommy Christopher, Mediaite Staff, says:

“I should probably know this, but what difference do the thumbs up and down make? Any at all?”

It means nothing, Tommy, but when you asked the question, Gordon was avoiding answering a direct question that he had no answer for.

Tommy Christopher says:
“Oh, there’s no thumbs on staff comments? Damn! OK, someone else duplicate my experiment.”

then “How do we know? Has anyone ever gone 100-0, or 0-100? Maybe something cool happens..”

and “I was thinking more like an online gift certificate or something.”

Forcing me to ask: slow news day Tommy?

The difference between BOR & KO is that KO never has conservatives on his show—-period, while BOR often has liberals and center-left types that don’t automatically agree. The suck-up house negroes like Eugene Robinson and Cornell West, just to name two of very many, that KO employs demonstrates his complete lack of any attempt at serious journalism. His entire show is built on the NBC special FX dept. showing off their stuff, sort of like 30Rock without humor, skill, or relevance and with a completely rigid party line.

I was on Nightline twice in the day as a Middle East expert and Koppel was fair and balanced. However, now I’m afraid he’s just a shell of his former self and almost irrelevant. Also, his so-called “false equivalence” actually gave KO more cred than that total shill/tout/hack deserves. BOR is a boring, overbearing semi-tough guy, but compared to KO, he’s a more objective Walter Cronkite [who admits recently he pitched on his CBS Show against the US govt. in Vietnam while the jury was still out.] Uncle Walter was the man behind the curtain in the Emerald City. And Koppel is nowadays a superannuated snob.

David Mangan says:
“The difference between BOR & KO is that KO never has conservatives on his show—-period, while BOR often has liberals and center-left types that don’t automatically agree. The suck-up house negroes like Eugene Robinson and Cornell West, just to name two of very many, that KO employs demonstrates his complete lack of any attempt at serious journalism.”

“house negros? You could at least pretend that your not a racist in defense of the conservative, violence inciter O’Reilly. (Remember his hatred expressed for “baby killers?”

You confuse balance (debate for opposing sides) with telling the truth. Both are forms of journalism. What you’re saying about KO I could easily write about Beck only then the difference is that Beck lies more in one show than KO does in a year.

But this is about KO and BOR, so I will stack up KO’s honesty against BOR’s dishonesty any time.