First Phil Donohue, then Keith Olbermann

by: Paul Rosenberg

Fri Jan 21, 2011 at 23:30


Anyone else noticing a pattern here?

What other network has ever done this sort of thing once, much less twice?

p.s.  Is running a cable news network actually a real job?  The shows, obviously, don't just run themselves.  There are plenty of real jobs there.  But the network?  What is there to that job, other than just screwing things up? Letting fools, knaves and psychopaths yammer on without end, or firing people who make too much sense when they're really not supposed to?

What else is there to the job?  And why can't it be done by a temp?

Paul Rosenberg :: First Phil Donohue, then Keith Olbermann

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

First Phil Donohue, then Keith Olbermann | 31 comments
Yeah (4.00 / 2)
It's like a small version of the Conan/Leno fuck-up.  I am not a fan of Conan, and I don't really watch Leno, so I was something of a neutral observer to that debacle.  My conclusion was that, ultimately, NBC fucked it up.

They've done it again.

spelled Keith n/t (0.00 / 0)

Fixed, Thanks. (0.00 / 0)
I do that all the time. The subroutine in my brain that says "i before e..." kicks in automatically.  I usually remember right away that "Keith" is one of the exceptions.  This time, though, I was half asleep when I typed it in.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
precisely why (0.00 / 0)
some grammarians (the smart ones) don't think that particular rule (i before e except after c) should be taught anymore - too many exceptions.  A rule with that many exceptions isn't really a rule.
[ Parent ]
Keith would love the fact (0.00 / 0)
that there's a grammar discussion in a diary about his firing.  
[ Parent ]
Sports? (0.00 / 0)
I've been assuming this was a Comcast political thing all evening.  However, there is a post at Kos that suggests it might really be mutual, in a not-bad sort of way.

So take what you're about to read with at least a grain of salt, since I can't tell you how I know what I know.

It will happen (so I'm told) on the channel now known as Versus. It's a sports channel owned by Comcast, and the story I'm hearing is that it will be rebranded as NBC Sportschannel once the takeover is complete, with Keith as its star personality.

If you were watching David Shuster's guest appearance on CNN tonight, you heard him make a key observation: for Keith, it's not about money right now. He has as much money as he'll ever need, so he can do what he wants. And apparently what he really wants is to exact some long-delayed revenge on his bosses at ESPN. (Did you notice the shiv he stuck in their backs yet again in his farewell tonight? Note it carefully. I don't think it was there by accident.)

Of course, this could be true and it could still be partially politically motivated.  I think questions will outweigh answers for a while.  

I don't know if it makes a difference for us one way or another, but I hope for Keith this rumor is true.

Sports & Politics just aren't even in the same ballfield (4.00 / 1)
I can't believe that Olbermann will go back to sports, no matter where it is.

Why would you hope for Keith's sake this rumor is true?

Somebody commented below that Keith doesn't need money. Whether or not that's true, I think if he goes back to sports it's a profound capitulation to the powers that be. Despite his faults (I think he was consistently overboard and off the mark with his Fox News joke segments), I think he's better than that.

I would like to see him make the rounds of network and cable news shows as a commenter/consultant -- you know appearing on CNN or the network Sunday morning news shows - Meet the Press, etc., which might make me, for one, start watching them again. He could be the view from the Left.

Of course that would be assuming the corporate media power in the sky didn't cancel this show for political reasons.

[ Parent ]
His sake (4.00 / 1)
I hoped for Keith's sake it was true because it means (or implies) he wanted this; it was his choice.  That is much better than just being kicked out.

But alas, this doesn't seem to be correct.  Last night I joined the facebook group Bring Keith Olbermann Back.  As pointed out in the QH, this group was started by Keith himself -- something I didn't realize last night.  So much for this breakup being truly mutual.

[ Parent ]
Oh, and Interesting - (0.00 / 0)
I didn't see the FB page. I'll go check it out. thanks!
[ Parent ]
Several thoughts: (4.00 / 1)
since I can't tell you how I know what I know...

uh.. OK: excuse me while I ignore your super-secrit-secrit "secrets".

That said, Versus is a third- or fourth-tier sports channel that has going for it -- at best -- NHL hockey. After that it's the Tour de France (highly recommended) in July, and the America's Cup -- which takes some political blinders to watch, given that it's arguably the most oligarch-driven sports event that I can think of.

After that it's a patchwork of dregs: cage fighting pornography, odd-ball hunting syndications, the "T-Ocho Show" etc etc etc...

If Olbermann goes back to sports on Versus -- no matter how Versus is re-branded -- it'll be a career regression from which he'll never recover.

Face it: political commentary (Maddow excepted, and it'll be interesting to see how high she jumps over the shark to keep her present gig -- Tweety is a total joke -- O'Donnell seems to be working on an "angry-at-my-guest-and-everything-else" schtick just as Tweety has perfected relentless interuptions and digressions back into the '60's as his) on cable is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the corporate oligarchs in general, and the right wing of American politics in particular.

Comcast now owning (MS)NBC will not be a Good Thing(tm).

And to think that Olbermann's "departure" from ComcastNBC is not political -- now matter how "mutual" it's being played at the moment by the immediate participants -- is to be highly naive.

[ Parent ]
*IT'S COMCAST* (0.00 / 0)
And we ALL know it.  First, David Shuster, then the dumbing down of their daytime programming, and now Keith.  It started about a year ago, and it could be seen coming with the Comcast take-over.  Anyone who denies it is either in denial, an idiot, or a ReThug.
[ Parent ]
WTF??? (0.00 / 0)
OK, it's 12:26 am Pac time. I just got home from work and turned on the computer too check out what's been going on. The first thing I see is Phil Donahue and Keith Olbermann in the same sentence. Not good...at least not in the cable TV sense of things. Yes Virginia, I do see a pattern here. Damn, damn, and damn.

I don't know any of the details yet, but I do know that Comcast refuses to put MSNBC in their basic (least expensive) cable package, but routinely puts Faux News in there. And if this was really about sports, why did Keith leave NBC's Sunday Night Football pregame show?

Reportedly (0.00 / 0)
Olbermann leaving Sunday Night Football was due to people at MSNBC being unhappy that Olbermann would sometimes take Fridays off to prep for football.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both
[ Parent ]
we all know what this is.... (4.00 / 1)
"In times of universal deceit speaking truth is a revolutionary act". Note; although this quote may not be exactly word for word, I'm sure you get the drift.

Government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob..... FDR
Wasn't Obermann was getting the highest ratings on the network? (4.00 / 2)
Since ratings weren't the motivation, as it was with replacing Conan, this will send a chill through all the other shows. Expect Maddow and the others to tone it down and hold back on the criticism. BTW, if you use Comcast for anything, consider switching services.
I give Maddow at most a year before she is gone (0.00 / 0)
This was another salvo in the right-wing consolidation of the propaganda medium that is TV. Olberman with his high ratings was Maddow's protector and now that he is gone the powers will clean out everything connected to him.  
[ Parent ]
Why would you be sure that ratings weren't the motivation? (0.00 / 0)
They need a headlining star for their new channel. That much is indisputable. You can speculate about other possibilities, but, as of now, it would be strictly speculation. And you're taking the one self-evident fact here- that they are going to want a star name for their new channel- and erasing it from consideration.

Jay Leno had the highest ratings of all the networks, too. Paul's right, entertainment exec positions ain't necessarily the confines of geniuses. Did anyone catch how horrifically arrogant and off-putting the head of Time Warner was when talking about Netflix: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12...
Exactly what kind of moron goes out of his way to sound that alienating as they are, in essence, marketing their product? The NYT is not an obscure trade publication, Mr. Genius Executive. Entertainment execs are, by and large, arrogant douchebags, and, as such, they aren't required to make sense. And they're very, very insecure because the entertainment industry is fundamentally highly unstable- all it takes is a couple of shows or a couple of show retirements- to radically change a network's fate- so they make reactive, ill-considered decisions based on dubious conventional wisdom. I don't see any way around the fact that this much is an industry pattern, whatever the specifics of this incident may be.

[ Parent ]
Netflix (0.00 / 0)
Funny.  It has been obvious to anyone with a brain that the future of television was to be able to watch whatever you want, whenever you wanted to, via the internet (or similar).  The question was who would get there first.  AppleTV never got it to work right.  Others never got it all going.  It has seemed clear for a while that Netflix would be the first winner in that space.
[ Parent ]
I know, right? It was absurdly hyped in the dot com era, and then, what? (0.00 / 0)
Everyone forgot?

Back to Olbermann, Sharon Waxman at the Wrap reports that,

"The gadfly commentator first told the network last April that he wanted to leave and began negotiating his exit then, according to an individual with knowledge of the situation.

Olbermann abandoned the notion of leaving at that time but revived his plans in recent weeks with new representation from the talent agency ICM.

With two years left on his $7 million a year contract, Olbermann was seeking a full exit package but he really has his eye on creating his own media empire in the style of Huffington Post, according to the individual. That way, Olbermann would control his own brand and, in his view, potentially earn far more as an owner."


http://www.thewrap.com/televis...

Yeah, I'm probably biased that I find the dude intolerable and problematic, but I certainly wouldn't assume that politics is the ONLY explanation here. I mean, why choose Cenk as a replacement then?

[ Parent ]
Of course I'm not 'sure' that ratings weren't the motivation, (0.00 / 0)
but I assume they weren't since usually, the shows with the low ratings get axed, not the show with the highest on the network. Leno was a special case. He had planned retirement, and the network promised the show to Conan. Leno was on top, but failing badly with young viewers, which Conan attracted. When Leno had second thoughts, the network, not wanting to lose Conan, pushed him out anyway. The reason why Leno lost his spot is the same reason why Toyota, the largest car brand in the world, started something called "Scion."
[ Parent ]
rumor has it.... (0.00 / 0)
he's going to FOX.....just kidding.....I think
I doubt it's the same situation as Donohue (0.00 / 0)
if that were the case, did the same people who fired Keith put Cenk on at 6 PM?  because as good as Keith is, Cenk is a million times better
if only hayes could replace o'donnell (4.00 / 1)
o'donnell is awful
[ Parent ]
Chris Hayes? (0.00 / 0)
jesus christ no

that guy sucks on ice

I think you meant Chris Hedges
or Chrissy Everett

anyone but fucking Chris Hayes

[ Parent ]
no, I meant hayes (0.00 / 0)
what's the problem with hayes? the few times I have seen him subbing for maddow the guy was good

I haven't seen hedges on tv

[ Parent ]
screwed up the title, should have been: (0.00 / 0)

yes, I meant Chris Hayes

what's the problem with hayes? the few times I have seen him subbing for maddow the guy was good

I haven't seen hedges on tv

[ Parent ]
Hayes is Ezra Klein with less charisma (0.00 / 0)
staunch defender of all things Obama
[ Parent ]
from what I've seen Hayes is not even close to Ezra (0.00 / 0)
I agree about Ezra. And if Hayes is an Ezra type, I'd agree again. I haven't seen that though.
[ Parent ]
every time he's filled in for Maddow I felt like I was watching Chris Matthews (0.00 / 0)
also, the Nation has been just awful lately
[ Parent ]
The Nation has been bad since Obama entered office; (0.00 / 0)
it was great during the Bush years, but they lost their voice with a Dem in the White House.
[ Parent ]
RE: What else is there to the job? (0.00 / 0)
Creating the myths. As in "fair and balanced"!
First Phil Donohue, then Keith Olbermann | 31 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox