End Of Detente? Olbermann Makes Murdoch His “Worst Person”

by Robert Quigley | 8:48 am, November 6th, 2009

» 6 comments

Now that Fox News is going just the slightest bit softer on the White House, there are signs that they’re turning their attention to their favorite whipping boy, MSNBC. But MSNBC’s not taking it lying down: in last night’s Countdown, Keith Olbermann slammed Rupert Murdoch, neatly summing up everything that’s dubious about the Fox newsroom. So much for baseball diplomacy.

First, a recap: as we wrote yesterday, Murdoch devoted a chunk of News Corporation’s recent earnings call to explaining Fox News’s beefs (beeves?) with the White House and MSNBC. He had this to say on the MSNBC side:

“We did not start this abuse, which we thought went way beyond … It was personal and went way beyond — not on me but on others. Finally, we had to allow people to retaliate. The moment they stop, we’ll stop. We don’t believe in it, and we don’t think it’s good business.”

A straightforward enough statement, Olbermann said, until you pick it apart and see that it implies that Murdoch not only overrides the “alleged news people of Fox, like Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly” in determining what goes on the air, but that Fox decides what stories to run not based on personal vendettas rather than actual news value:

Thus, simply, Rupert Murdoch has revealed his company’s news coverage and the people who deliver it are there simply to pursue their own petty vendettas. Rupert Murdoch: not only doing this carnival fun-house version of actual journalism, but stupid enough to admit it in public. Today’s worst person in the world.

Mediaite has called out Olbermann for the holes in his own news coverage, but in this case, he nailed Fox fairly well. It’s no great newsflash that Fox has an agenda in what it covers: see its blanket coverage of the White House’s feud with innocent cable network Fox News. But Murdoch’s talk of “allow[ing] people to retaliate” comes across as petty, especially so given the context.

Olbermann got some flak yesterday for playing hooky to watch baseball with his friend Sean Hannity — Mediaite commenter Puter Boi said that it proved that cable news feuds were as phony as pro wrestling. Maybe so, but this time, Olbermann didn’t hold back when he stepped into the ring.

fox news, Gawker, keith olbermann, Keith Olbermann Worst Person, Olbermann Baseball, Olbermann Sean Hannity, rupert murdoch, Rupert Murdoch Worst Person, Ryan Tate, Sean Hannity, Worst Person In the World

TfT

I don’t think it’s petty at all. Really, Olbermann has NO show without FNC. His personal attacks are outrageous and they deserve to be countered.

Agenda? “It is my job to make sure this President succeeds” – Chris Matthews on the air.

I’ll stick with FNC like most other cable news hounds (see ratings).
ImNotBlue

What Olbermann illustrates is the difference between a network with goals and actual leadership. FNC made the decision early on not to get involved in a pissing match between themselves and MSNBC… afterall, as the big dog, punching down is never a good strategy. So Olbermann ups the ante, and the folks at FNC get more annoyed that he bashes and lies about them nightly. Finally, they get fed up, lay the smack-down on NBC and GE, and all of a sudden, GE isn’t so happy with MSNBC’s big mouth.

MSNBC, on the other hand, has been run without leadership for a long time. The hosts were allowed to do as they please, say whatever they want, do whatever they want, because nobody was paying attention. KO’s nightly hate-fest started to pull in some good ratings (relatively speaking, of course), so that became the template… with Maddow and Schultz being brought on, and Schuster and Matthews falling in line.

The difference is, FNC built its strategy around its goals… MSNBC built its strategy around its “talent.” This is the difference, and why the folks on MSNBC are allowed to say crazy things (or not show up for work on an important night), without fear or repercussions… THEY run the network, not the management.

Proof? Ask Mediaite’s founder, Dan Abrams, why it was Keith Olbermann who bragged that he caused Dan to get the boot from the management team. KO wields the power over there, not the management… and that’s no way to run a company.

This story is just another, KO spinning to make FOX look bad, even when there’s nothing to complain about… and the people who want to believe follow in lock step.
realitycheck

“but in this case, he nailed Fox fairly well. ”

The possibility Olbermann nailing anything, including the truth, is a ridiculous notion.

I don’t get it, why are you all so invested in Olbermann? He does nothing for your cause. You throw in a little criticism of him, but no one is buying that. Why??? why????
hkyplayer

its the jealous Olbermann again…He probably sent his resume 100 times over the last two years to FOX News and never got a reply… When you put so much hate and anger into a competitor, its obvious he is jealous..
carolb57

Olbermann’s “hate and anger” is child’s play compared to the vicious venom that comes out of the mouths of Beck and Hannity (and sometimes O’Reilly) on a daily basis, not to mention their equally vicious guests, Limbaugh, Malkin, Ingraham, Levin, Coulter, Bozell, Hewitt and every other rightwing talk show nut out there.
germ

@carlb57 oh yes, because the hosts and guests you mention continually invite and applaud guests that call the other side “racists, teabagging rednecks.” Where was the outrage from that? The Fox News hosts at least invite the alternate view when debating the stories.

Although I can’t stand Hannity he does give half of his show to a roundtable discussion that has one conservative (doesn’t always champion Hannity’s views), one liberal, and one entertainer (views that are liberal and conservative). They even have a civil discussion without yelling at eachother.

That can’t be said for Olbermann or Maddow. When I was watching Maddow the other day she had leader from one of the anti-ObamaCare movements (think it was the Americans for Prosperity President?) and flat out called him “sick”, “a parasite”, and a “disgrace” to his face. Gee, that sure seems civil now, doesn’t it?

With Olbermann you are more likely to find him debating an actual “V” than anyone with opposing views than his and he often applauds those that are in line with his hate and anger. See Janeane Garofalo.

No matter your personal bias, you will see much more civility with the Fox News hosts than you will ever find on Matthews’, Olbermann’s, or Maddow’s shows with discussing dissenting opinions.