Sage Francis
Self Fighteous
Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21362
|
| Keith Olbermann suspended without pay indefinitely |
 |
|
First came the story.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44734.html
Then I thought to myself, "Wow...the conservatives will have a field day with this."
Then I thought, "Wow...maybe not. Because that will turn the microscope back onto them."
And then came the news that the conservative pundits are criticizing MSNBC's decision to suspend Olbermann
http://huff.to/9PulAJ
$1000 or $2000 donations aren't anything compared to the stumping Olbermann does for Democrats each night so this is definitely a strange move on NBC's part. That being said, he should have kept his hands clean. |
Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:11 pm |
|
|
C.R.A.Z.Y
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Posts: 2713
Location: Vote for me and i'll vote for you. |
that really sucks.
i take contributions for my job from journalists all the time. which they always donate anonymously so as to not be linked to extreme radical leftists.
ive taken hush hush on the dl money from three jounalists i can think of since last year. they always give a wad of cash and ask me not to write their name or address down. i get it several times a year from investigative journalists, editorialists and war time correspondents.
i think journalists say fuck it and give money all the time if they want to anyways and just hope to not get caught. |
|
Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:19 pm |
|
|
Mark in Minnesota
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 1900
Location: Saint Louis Park, MN |
Joe Scarborough isn't a flagship prime-time personality being paid under a multi-million dollar contract to come in at third place for the network that is part of negotiations for the sale of a huge and expensive media enterprise to a cable company that almost certainly has plans to re-work the cable news network to compete more directly with Time Warner's offering.
My guess is that this is a deal where Olbermann, intentionally or otherwise, gave cost-conscious executives an opportunity to get an expensive contract off the books prior to an impending merger, and the executives took it. |
|
Fri Nov 05, 2010 8:12 pm |
|
|
redball
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6850
Location: Northern New Jersey |
Mark in Minnesota wrote:
My guess is that this is a deal where Olbermann, intentionally or otherwise, gave cost-conscious executives an opportunity to get an expensive contract off the books prior to an impending merger, and the executives took it.
Wait, what? How does suspending him translate into an expensive contract let alone help the sale to comcast? Never mind that I have doubts the deal with comcast will ever come to fruition. |
|
Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:40 pm |
|
|
phataccino
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 4769
|
Griffin's excuse is flimsy as fuck, but I'm begrudgingly accepting it. As long as they are going to pretend Olbermann is a news anchor and not a commentator, they have to treat him like one in matters like this. It's ridiculous of them to even keep up that illusion, but as long as it's there I guess you have to abide by it. |
|
Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:10 pm |
|
|
Rob-Raz
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 151
Location: Cincinnati Ohio |
Rachel Maddow did a nice piece on this, along with a rundown on dollars that Fox hosts contributed to different politicians.
I was toying with the idea that this was all orchestrated. Knowing the media would be all over reporting this, it would also shed some light on just how much money other "news journalists" donate to their side. Maybe open up some more peoples eyes as to how in the bag Fox is for the Repubs, not that it isn't already obvious. Maybe even making MSNBC look more unbiased for handing out the suspension. |
|
Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:48 pm |
|
|
Mark in Minnesota
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 1900
Location: Saint Louis Park, MN |
|
|
|
redball wrote:
Mark in Minnesota wrote:
My guess is that this is a deal where Olbermann, intentionally or otherwise, gave cost-conscious executives an opportunity to get an expensive contract off the books prior to an impending merger, and the executives took it.
Wait, what? How does suspending him translate into an expensive contract let alone help the sale to comcast? Never mind that I have doubts the deal with comcast will ever come to fruition.
If Olbermann's strident and partisan tone isn't part of Comcast's long-term plan for MSNBC, firing him for cause almost certainly saves the network whatever money they would have had to pay to him to either wait out his contract or terminate it early by taking his show off the air as a cancellation -- as well as giving Comcast more flexibility to change the content on the channel if they decide to go in less of an editorial direction.
Olbermann is two years into a four-year contract reportedly worth about $30M--presumably that means they stand to save millions or even tens of millions of dollars by taking him off the air if they do it for cause. His ratings have fallen considerably since 2008 and it might make business sense to either replace him with a cheaper personality or to just shuffle time-slots and add an hour of re-runs until Comcast decides what it wants to do with the channel.
On the other hand, perhaps this will be one of those things like Glenn Beck's "suspension" in August of '09, back after a week to higher ratings than ever.
Why don't you think the purchase of NBCU by Comcast is going to conclude? |
|
Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:04 am |
|
|
Bob_ptmfus
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 740
|
the mean wrote:
Phil Griffin is a fuck.
Scarborough (who he loves) has donated more $$$ to Republicans than Olbermann has to the Dems. He's not suspended.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/11/5/917970/-Griffins-defense-of-suspension-makes-no-sense
According to Maddow, Scarbrough followed the rules/procedure/forms/whatever that need to be cleared before donating, whereas Olbermann didn't. That's the official line on why Keith was suspended, not because he donated, but because he didn't go through proper procedure first. |
|
Sat Nov 06, 2010 6:28 am |
|
|
Jared Paul
Joined: 15 Jul 2002
Posts: 3718
Location: www.PrayersForAtheists.org |
I signed the internet petition from Bold Progressives to Phil Griffin in support of Olbermann. hahhahahahah. Yes, the ruling class is trembling at boldness now!
Never the less, they claim to have gotten almost 175,000 on-line petitions for Keith in less than 24hrs. And it's at least something:
http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/petition_olbermann/?source=bp
I'm going to email MSNBC now.
Maybe now the Dem's will bump some Twisted Sister and get sirrrrius...
|
|
Sat Nov 06, 2010 8:36 am |
|
|
Ardamus315
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Posts: 490
|
First NPR gets nervous about their employees attending the Rally To Restore Sanity, now this shit. Out of the few times, I've heard him talk, I've always fucked with Olbermann's point of view. Signing that petition...... |
|
Sat Nov 06, 2010 9:03 am |
|
|
FranktheP
Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 1343
Location: East Coast, Fuck You! |
It seems pretty simple to me: He broke a rule he knew about and they suspended him for it. Where are they wrong? Too harsh-ok. But they are not wrong. He knew the rules and he broke them. He has to pay the price. |
|
Sat Nov 06, 2010 10:22 am |
|
|
al(phonic)
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 769
Location: maine |
Plum Puddin' wrote:
if only he was a 'real' newsman...
scoff scoff |
|
Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:16 am |
|
|
Nahgied
Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 376
Location: Ontario |
msnbc should never have gotten rid of tucker. there, i said it.
seriously though, seems a bit strange to hide behind policy on this one. everyone knew olbermann's politics, c'mon.
however, you could see this as part of an attempt to put the breaks on a network that has gotten pretty rediculous of late. |
|
Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:51 am |
|
|
redball
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6850
Location: Northern New Jersey |
|
|
|
Mark in Minnesota wrote:
redball wrote:
Mark in Minnesota wrote:
My guess is that this is a deal where Olbermann, intentionally or otherwise, gave cost-conscious executives an opportunity to get an expensive contract off the books prior to an impending merger, and the executives took it.
Wait, what? How does suspending him translate into an expensive contract let alone help the sale to comcast? Never mind that I have doubts the deal with comcast will ever come to fruition.
If Olbermann's strident and partisan tone isn't part of Comcast's long-term plan for MSNBC, firing him for cause almost certainly saves the network whatever money they would have had to pay to him to either wait out his contract or terminate it early by taking his show off the air as a cancellation -- as well as giving Comcast more flexibility to change the content on the channel if they decide to go in less of an editorial direction.
Olbermann is two years into a four-year contract reportedly worth about $30M--presumably that means they stand to save millions or even tens of millions of dollars by taking him off the air if they do it for cause. His ratings have fallen considerably since 2008 and it might make business sense to either replace him with a cheaper personality or to just shuffle time-slots and add an hour of re-runs until Comcast decides what it wants to do with the channel.
On the other hand, perhaps this will be one of those things like Glenn Beck's "suspension" in August of '09, back after a week to higher ratings than ever.
Why don't you think the purchase of NBCU by Comcast is going to conclude?
I see your point though my gut tells me it's wrong. I can't really refute it though. As for the Comcast deal... I think there's too much in the way and one of these loopholes will keep things up in the air until one or both sides decide to back out. That one I could argue out more and there's a reasonable amount of evidence to support it, but I'm really not in the mood and I've been regretting posting that ever since I saw your reply. Sorry to be so dispassionate and non-compelling but I'm just kind of meh about the whole thing.The idiocy over Fox5 has sapped my ability to care about the entertainment industry. |
|
Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:37 pm |
|
|
 
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours. The time now is Wed Jun 19, 2013 8:41 pm
|
|
|
|
| |
