Let me get this straight. Olbermann consistently BASHES the right/GOP/FOX yet folks cry foul . . .

[wndycty]

. . .over his opting out of the Stewart/Cramer recap on Friday?

Folks you really do need to get lives, yes I said it, get a life.

This is one of the things I hate about people (this is not tied to a particular ideology, its folks in general), we have a serious counter productive "what have you done for me lately" syndrome.

Olbermann has been consistent in his bashing of the right, GOP, FOX NEWS, even CNBC (remember the phrase Slick Rantelli?)

He has even taken on Chris Matthews on air a few times TO HIS DAMNED FACE (do you guys remember that during the presidential election?)

Would I have been happy had Olbermann addressed the Stewart/Cramer dustup on Friday? Hell yes. Did it piss me off that he didn't? I was MILDLY disappointed but I am MILDLY disappointed about something 24 hours a day and this does not rise to any level of legitimate concern.

As for the accusation that Olbermann is controlled by his corporate over lords, GIVE ME AN F'ing break.

Do I believe that MSNBC producers were encouraged to avoid the Stewart/Cramer situation? Yes Do I believe Olbermann respected their wishes? Yes?

Last I saw most folks who get a paycheck try to honor the wishes, direction, policies of their BOSSES, yet its safe to say Olbermann has probably CONSISTENTLY CHALLENGES his bosses more than the folks who are criticizing him over this.

The man has been courageous in his battles with the the right/GOP/FOX and others, yet folks are ready to throw him under the bus for the one battle he chose not to fight.

Folks who criticize him over this need to get a damned life.

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. I'm reminded of Dudley in Harry Potter, bitchin' cuz he got 35 presents, and last year had 37

[madokie]

2. I'm happy to say I like Olbermann just the way he is

He's a smart man doing for me a good service, helping me to cut through the chaff to get to the heart of the matter. He chooses what he wants to talk about and I choose to listen to him, a win/win for both of us.

Early on I didn't like some segments of his program but I either changed or they did, anyways now I'm happy.

[GeorgeGist]

3. It's sad ...

that folks need BOSSES to have a DAMNED life.

[Dorian Gray]

4. Hasn't Stewart criticized him

in the past. I just thought he didn't want to give JS any attention.

[Larkspur]

5. I don't recall Olbermann ever having anyone from CNBC on his show

to talk about the economy. Maybe he thinks they're a bunch of idiots too.

[zanne]

7. Maybe he isn't allowed to. nt

[wndycty]

8. Maybe so but he went after Slick Rantelli more than a few times

:kick:

[GoCubsGo]

35. Or, maybe...

...in the grand scheme of things, it's just not that important? I'm sorry, but I'm just having a difficult time understanding why some people feel it is so important that Keith should have to comment on this. The things he discussed on his show were far more important, IMO. Jon Stewart already ripped Cramer a new one. Isn't that enough? Does that "new one" get un-ripped if Keith doesn't say something about it? It's Jon Stewart's moment. Let him enjoy it by himself.

[zanne]

6. In the Newsweek column I read recently about Limbaugh...

Reporters and talking heads at MSNBC are not allowed to talk about it. I can't find the statement online, but it's in this week's Newsweek. The article is by David Frum.

[pacalo]

9. Absolutely. I can't believe that some people believe that Keith is bound

to bite the hand that feeds him. After all, as was posted on the Greatest Page: "Rachel did -- GOOD FOR HER!"

I'm thankful to Keith Olbermann, who for years, was the ONLY one speaking out for the truth every weekday night. He paved the way for Rachel.

You gave good advice -- something I've been thinking about for awhile: Get away from the computer periodically. Keep your life well-rounded.

Whenever I log on & track back to see all the news I've missed, I see some names that have been on board 24/7. I'm amazed.

[wndycty]

10. Thanks. . .it get's frustrating especially because while it was a great SMACKDOWN. . .

. . .the SMACKDOWN is kind of irrelevant when it comes to the big picture.

Stewart took down Cramer big time, Olbermann discussing it would have been very satisfying but I doubt it would have been effective.

[KharmaTrain]

11. The Question Is More About The Network Than Olbermann

Many are right to observe that had this takedown been about the Faux "business" channel or any part of the Murdoch evil empire, KO would be running with it. However, when the attack was on someone within his own corporate tent, not only he, but everyone else on the network, sans Rachel, avoided the story. It was obvious that this story was too close to home and how could they comment on it without calling even further attention to the story and the network connections.

There is a bigger game at play here. TDS is a property of Viacom, the owners of CBS...NBC's longtime competitor. Giving a lot of time and ink to this story would play to a competitor's advantage...especially if it tore at the credibility of NBC on the whole. While Faux makes an easy target...especially with KO's audience, going after TDS or turning on one a commonly owned network would put him in an awkward position. Keith punted.

What was interesting is Keith's post mentioned that his bosses didn't stop him, but didn't mention the producers...those are the people who do a lot of the shot calling as to what gets aired.

My bets are GE/NBC is still trying to figure out how much damage has been inflicted here.

Cheers...

[wndycty]

12. Its MEDIA NEWS its two media personalities battling this is not GITMO. . .

. . .it was awesome, I am great Stewart took down Cramer and would have loved to hear what Keith had to say but the fact he opted it out is not a big deal. Its a comedian vs. a windbag.

[KharmaTrain]

13. As Stewart Said...."This Song Ain't About You"

I assure you I won't stop watching Countdown due to this...and KO's overall work stand tall compared to what, as you properly state, became a popularity pissing match. The real issue Stewart began with when he made fun of Santelli had long been lost.

I really hoped that the person taken down was Lawrence Kudlow. Talk about slime personified.

Stewart's original focus was on the entire "business news" industry. It was twisted by the corporate media into a personality thing as Cramer took the bait and tried to turn it into a media game. Stewart didn't play the "monkey" again. That's what is getting the biggest attention. Imagine had Cramer come on and they ended up laughing it up or doing some goofy fake fight schtick (like the Conan "feud"). I give Stewart props for speaking what so many are feeling...and Cramer for not trying to be a total ass.

The main premise remains...the credibility of what is said on Greed Central and how its been a cheerleader for Wall Street...and the many games this network has played for years in mainpulating stock prices. Cramer opened just a little door...let's see if someone opens it wider.

Cheers...

[notadmblnd]

18. The clips that Jon showed from the video where Cramer was

explaining how they manipulate the market and steal peoples money, was to me at least, the news. Trillions of dollars and 4,000,000 jobs have been lost as a result of these greed monsters. That's what needs to be covered. That's what the news was and it needs to be investigated. It's not about Cramer, CNBC or Jon Stewart. It's not even about KO!

So far, we've had one republican speak up and say Cramer should be investigated. That's right a republican. If this news doesn't go mainstream so people become aware, nothing is going to change. The greed monsters will continue manipulating the market. People will continue to lose their money and jobs and this country will continue on it's downward spiral.

What I don't get is why everyone is not angry about what Jon revealed?

[Patsy Stone]

15. I have the same opinion

I'm not really sure where the "news" is here. What would KO have said that hadn't been said by ten other people?

"And last night on TDS, Jon Stewart took Cramer to task and kicked his butt."

Now, if Cramer gets busted by the SEC for the old footage, or if CNBC fires Cramer, THAT's news I expect to see covered.

Frankly, I do not believe KO was silenced. Since Rachel covered it, I don't believe there was a "gag order" issued either -- no matter what the TVNewser blurb purports. This story, as entertaining as it is, is certainly not something that's so monumentally important she would decide to cover it even though she might get fired for doing so.

Besides, every once in a while the blogs decide that if (fill in the marginal story blown up to epic proportions here) isn't covered by (fill in the news organization/person here) there's clearly an evil plot afoot. Not to say there wasn't (isn't) a poodle press, and there were major stories left uncovered during the BFEE, but not every single story has the same weight or import for the public's need to know.

My .02 cents.

[Berry Cool]

33. You know, normally I would agree with you

but this time, of all times, I don't.

And lest anyone concern or worry themselves about it, I DO have a life. I'm capable of multitasking on this thing. Don't you fret.

[pmorlan1]

27. The Story is Not About Media Personalities Battling

its two media personalities battling this is not GITMO...

Sorry but you're wrong. You've bought into the "Cramer smackdown" narrative pushed by the MSM so they could coverup the real story of what happened. The whole Stewart/Cramer story is not about a "smackdown" of Cramer it's about Stewart's smackdown of the MSM. Stewart revealed and challenged the media's role in allowing CEO's and others to come on their financial news shows to manipulate the financial markets with outright lies and how those lies went unchallenged by our supposed media watchdogs. It's about how the media acts as stenographers for the powerful instead of watchdogs for the people. So if you believe it's all about two media personalities battling you've missed the entire story and have allowed yourself to be played by the media.

[old mark]

14. MSNBC is the ONLY news/politics channel I choose to watch regularly.

I have found no problems with KO, and I certainly will keep watching MSNBC/NBC for most of my news and information.

I no longer watch CNN except for occasional visits to HLN, and Fox has nothing worth watching except football.

mark

[tularetom]

16. What? How can you say that? I demand that Olbermann agree with me 100% of the time

:sarcasm: of course.

[wndycty]

17. LOL

;) :kick:

[ecstatic]

19. maybe his bosses told him to back off

After all, aren't they all under the NBC branch? :shrug:

[TahitiNut]

20. Uh-huh ... Miley Cyrus is pissed at Keith because of what he DIDN'T do.

Oh. Wait. Maybe I'm confusing DU's inconsistent opinions. It happens. :shrug: (Is Miley a DUer?)

[pmorlan1]

21. I Don't Want a Democratic Version of Fox

Let me get this straight. Olbermann consistently BASHES the right/GOP/FOX yet folks cry foul . . .

I hate to tell you but some of us aren't looking for a Democratic version of Fox. We want honest reporting that serves all the people. We don't just criticize right-leaning organizations or right-leaning individuals when they get it wrong and then turn around and give a pass to those who lean left when they get it wrong. We want our media to report the truth. If a network like MSNBC deliberately ignores a major story just because it makes them look bad then you better believe we are going to question them and criticize them for not serving the interests of the people. They don't get a free pass from us just because they don't lean right on some stories. And if a commentator like Olbermann bows to the pressure of his corporate bosses and doesn't cover the story and then posts lame comments on Daily kos trying to justify it we aren't going to roll over and tell him it's ok. His network was wrong and so was Keith and anyone who is honest about it knows it.

I know there are some people here who think Keith and Obama walk on water and they refuse to criticize them when they do the wrong thing but the rest of us don't look upon these guys as gods. These men are human. They will sometimes do the right thing and sometimes do the wrong thing. It's up to us to hold them accountable or nothing will ever change. And by the way, the problem with our media is not a left/right problem, it's a defend the status quo or serve as a watchdog for the people problem. Keith didn't serve as a watchdog for the people on this issue and he deserves to be called on it.

[Medusa]

23. No one should get a free pass

No journalist should get a free pass for not covering "Y" because they covered "X" in the past.

[Sheepshank]

22. why shouldn't he play by the rules presented to to him?

He gets plenty of really good zingers in while playing within the guides his bosses have prescribed. It's not like this smackdown wasn't available from several dozen different sources. Pissing about missing an op ed piece is indeed similar to being a Dudley.

[pmorlan1]

28. Keith Deserves to be Criticized

I didn't see anything on cable that reported the REAL story of the Stewart/Cramer exchange. All I saw was the deceptive MSM coverage that pretended that this story was all about the "smackdown" of Cramer. It wasn't about Cramer but evidently you believed hook, line and sinker what the MSM was spooning out to you. This story was nothing short of an indictment of the entire MSM. Keith had a chance to cover the real story but he didn't. He let his corporate handlers intimidate him into backing off and that's why he deserves to be criticized.

[pmorlan1]

31. Journalist Code of Ethics

Here's a snippet from the Journalists Code of Ethics for those that think Keith should let corporate handlers have a say in what news is covered. Being a journalist is not just a job, it's a profession and as such has ethical standards.

Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.

Journalists should:

—Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
— Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
— Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
— Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

[Sheepshank]

32. Perhpas you see the 'show' differently than I

I don't necessarily see this form of op-ed entertainment as falling under the same noble standards you are prescribing for journalists as a whole.

[NoSheep]

24. Exactly. Whining spoiled babies.

[deaniac21]

25. He is one helluva baseball analyst!

[merh]

26. LOL - you came to the same conclusion I came to

though you approached the topic from a different perspective.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5250797&mesg_id=5251650


:rofl:


:hi:

[4lbs]

29. It's not really just KO, but rather the entire MSNBC channel heeding to the wishes of the GE higher

ups.

There was a memo passed to all the MSNBC show producers telling them NOT to discuss the Stewart-Cramer interview on their shows.

Rachel Maddow was the only person to devote more than 10 seconds to it on Friday.

Morning Joe, nothing. In fact, Cramer was scheduled to appear on the show and didn't. That was ignored too by Joe the Scar.

Hardball, nothing.

1600 w/David Schuster, nothing.

Countdown with KO, nothing.

Also, the morning talking heads didn't mention it either.


The MSNBC shows need to have the freedom to cover negative news regarding shows on their own channel, or sister NBC/Universal channels. That's the main point of the argument.

[Berry Cool]

34. Agreed. I think there was a cover-up here.

And I am not one given to tinfoil-hat theories about Big Media Conspiracies in which Keith poses as slave to his GE masters.

Attempts to belittle, ridicule or exaggerate my opinion are pointless. I'm not going to stop watching Countdown over this, nor take down all the life-size kissable Keith Olbermann posters in my bedroom.* But am I pleased with this situation? Am I pleased that Keith saw fit to spend five minutes on his show a few weeks ago proving to everyone that he has a degree from Cornell University just because Ann Coulter said he didn't, and five minutes Friday night on another easy smackdown of Bill O'Reilly, and didn't see fit to spend a second on this story? And that his excuses were things like "My producers and I didn't think it was newsworthy because we don't cover everything Jon Stewart says" and "I was at the Mets game all day yesterday"? No.





*For the record, just in case anyone takes it too seriously, I don't really have life-size kissable posters of Keith Olbermann in my bedroom. (I keep them in the den.)

[DS1]

30. According to DU, anything witty spoken by an on-air personaility was probably lifted from DU

So I guess that means they owe US

:crazy:

[wndycty]

36. So true, so true. . .LOL

:kick: