Keith Olbermann Apologizes For David Shuster

[orleans]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23060662#23076398

"a comment about the chelsea clinton comment"

"and by now you have probably heard on this network yesterday, my colleague david shuster--discussing chelsea clinton's role, a first for her in her mother's campaign asked a guest: quote doesn't it seem like chelsea's sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way.

"i have the greatest possible respect for david shuster's work; his reporting for this show and others is insidious, excellent and his political insight is keen. all that being noted it was still an utterly inappropriate and indefensible thing to say. the clintons have every right to be furious, hurt and appalled. many of us here have similar reactions, ones that transcend political parties and politics itself.

"david has been suspended--it remains only for me to apologize without limit to president clinton, to senator clinton, and to ms. clinton on behalf of msnbc. we are literally, dreadfully sorry.

------------

and for the folks on du who thought it was no big deal--olbermann appears to disagree with you, as do i.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Reason #4,317 to like Keith. nt

[LaurenG]

2. I somehow missed that, "David Shuster has been suspended"

what a big mistake that was!

[jlake]

3. I am glad Keith is taking the high road. I know he loathes Hillary, but at least

he hasn't said something as inappropriate as Shuster.

[reality based]

4. Olbermann eats crow better than anyone I've seen except maybe Bill Clinton.

I think his plate is still pretty full given MSNBC's excessively biased performance during this primary season. Chow down some more, Keith, you're not redeemed yet.

[Berry Cool]

13. Yeah, he's biased and he "loathes" Hillary.

That must be why he thanked the Clintons in the acknowledgments of his latest book.

That must be why Obama supporters post in DU all the time about how disgustingly he favors her.

Sounds like there are a lot of filters out there.

[NastyRiffraff]

5. Good for Keith

I think he meant it, too, unlike David Shuster's apology.

I don't get the people who think David's comments aren't a problem. Yes, there's a deeper problem; it's not all him. Believe it or not, a lot of people watching TV don't know about the blogosphere's new usage of "pimping." Nobody took it literally, as in selling sexual services, but the widespread usage, and understanding, in this context is selling someone else's services for gain, with an underlying nasty connotation. Any mother should understand Hillary's reaction when it was used about her daughter.

If the same comment had been about Michelle Obama, there would have been a (justifiable) outcry of racism. Whoever you support, it was ugly, nasty, and unjustifiable. Keith knows that; I don't think David does.

[orleans]

7. oh god--i never thought of what reaction would have been if

shuster's comment had been in reference to michelle obama. you're right. people would have lost their fucking minds over that one.

[IsItJustMe]

16. Better yet, what if he would of done it with one of Bush's daughters?

[TankLV]

18. and that's an UNDERSTATEMENT!

[splat]

11. Pimping shouldn't be in a network-level reporter's daily vocabulary

They can't even say "sucks."

[niyad]

6. thank you, keith. I missed his program last night, so missed hearing

about shuster's comment. by the way, I am not a fan of shuster's, even though he has done some good reporting.

trite though it may be, something about the way his mouth moves just drives me crazy.

[Fleshdancer]

8. Shuster owes Olbermann a big "thank you"

Olbermann has a way with words. This is the best apology I've ever heard from a news network on the way something was reported/discussed.

MSNBC is lucky to have Keith.

:thumbsup:

[classof56]

9. Amen to that!

I got Keith's book a few days ago. He has a way with words indeed, and I'm likin' every one of them!

Tired Old Cynic

[Fleshdancer]

10. oooh! I'm headed to the bookstore later today

I'll have to get it! :D

[classof56]

15. It was my spouse's birthday present to me.

Made turning 70 worth the trip!

Best,

Tired Old Cynic

[Ichingcarpenter]

12. The video is available and Keith did a wonderful, sincere job.

David was wrong and deserved this reprimand. However, David also covers the deep
corruption issues of the Bush cabal that hardly anyone else touches so I want to see
him back covering those issues.


You tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQW_7aFJ8YU&feature=related

[goclark]

14. This Obama supporter thinks it was a big deal

and I hope it is a long suspension.

These Media types are gaining way too much power on Cable to say anything they dream up~insulting.

[Exilednight]

17. A copy of a letter I wrote to Keith Olbermann and MSNBC

This is a copy of a letter I wrote to Keith Olbermann and MSNBC.

Dear Mr. Olbermann,



On your February 8, 2008 program you apologized to Senator Clinton and her family for remarks made by your fellow journalist David Schuster. I find your apology on behalf of your employer to be a double standard at best, and a question of your integrity as a journalist at worst.



During a Special Comment, titled appropriately enough, Your Hypocrisy is so Vast on your program on September 20, 2007, you stated; “And in **pimping** General David Petraeus, Sir, in violation of everything this country has been assiduously and vigilantly against for 220 years, you have tried to blur the gleaming **radioactive** demarcation between the military and the political, and to portray **your** party as the one associated with the military, and your opponents as the ones somehow antithetical to it.”



Mr. Olbermann, it is now your hypocrisy that is so vast.



Mr. Schuster’s comments, when placed in context, are no less insulting than yours. I supported you when you used such language. I understood that your comment was not an insult to General Petraeus, but a question of Mr. Bush’s motives to send him before Congress. When Mr. Schuster’s comments are placed in context they are not an insult to Chelsea Clinton, but a question to Senator Clinton’s motive as to why Chelsea was the person selected to make the calls in question.



If you truly feel that Mr. Schuster’s remarks deserved him a suspension, and the need for a public apology on behalf of your network, then you sir also deserve a suspension and a public apology to General Petraeus on behalf of your network. If you stand by your statement of General Petraeus; then Mr. Schuster deserves a public apology, from you, on behalf of your network.



I could have swallowed this apology from any other on air personality at your network, but I held you to a higher standard. You asked to be held to that higher standard. You spoke of integrity and equality when no other journalist would. Integrity and equality only work when they are applied universally and without prejudice to party or politician.



Where is that integrity and equality now when you, in your own language, used the same word, in the same context, on the same network? Please do not become a man who will sacrifice that integrity in exchange of your network to save face with Senator Clinton.



I still believe you to be man of integrity, and the voice of reason in unreasonable times. Please do not make me regret that belief. I hope you will do the right thing before it is to late, and your reputation is tarnished.

Sincerely xxxxxxx

[TankLV]

19. still trying to defend the indefensible - simply disgusting...

shame on you...

[Exilednight]

21. For What?

The part that angers me is that people of my own party are supporting Hillary in her bid to win this nomination through the use of super delegates, yet these are the same people who yelled foul and said that Gore had the election stolen from him.

These are the same people who stood up and cheered when Keith Olbermann used the exact same term when describing Bush's use of General Petraeus before Congress, yet cry foul when a journalist on another opinion show uses the same words when describing Hillary's use of Chelsea to make these calls.

These are the same people who yell that Republicans have a double standard when it benefits their candidate, yet they apply a double standard when it benefits their candidate.

I'm sorry, but the Democratic party is just as much mine as it is their's. We say that we hold our elected officials to a higher standard. We say we do not tolerate those with a double standard. We say we will not tolerate those that possess a hubris personality. I refuse to just pay lip service to those words, and I will not tolerate it in my party.

A true test of character is setting a standard and holding it.

P.S. I am not trying to defend what Schuster did, I am annoyed with Keith for holding a double standard. If he really finds the word that offensive, then he deserves the same punishment. Keith used it in the exact same context, but with different names.

[nuxvomica]

20. He said "assiduous" not "insidious"

It should read "...his reporting for this show and others is assiduous...." Not to nitpick, but there's a big difference in meaning.