Look, I understand why everyone is pouncing on Olby. And given his sanctimony and hypocrisy, not to mention the fact that he seems to have broken the clear rules of his own employer, I have no problem with him getting whipsawed.
But there are two problems with these kinds of journalistic ethics “scandals.”
The first is that they aren’t a scandal. So Olbermann gave money to some Democratic candidates. Ostensibly the rules against this are intended to prevent journalists from giving the appearance of bias. Whether or not such rules make sense for actual reporters, such rules are silly for someone like Olbermann. Does anybody, and I mean anybody, suddenly trust Olbermann’s opinion less because of this news? I’m waiting. Does anyone think he’s less biased? More biased? Un-biased?
Second, the larger problem with these kinds of rules is that they do little to prevent media bias and a great deal to hide an important form of evidence of it. Banning liberal journalists from giving money doesn’t prevent them from being liberal, it just gives them a bit more plausibility when they deny it. Now, I can see the argument that someone who makes a donation would be more interested in protecting their investment, as it were. So I don’t think the policy is completely misguided. But at a certain level banning donations is like NPR barring staff from attending the Jon Stewart rally. It doesn’t fool anyone, but gives the accused a lawyerly rebuttal to accurate accusations.
Agreed. Olby is not a journalist, he's an opinionist and has every right to put his bucks where his opinions lie. When Fox as a corporate news entity makes large donations to the Republican party while continuing to assert itself as an unbiased news source, that's an ethics problem.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOlbermann's real problem is that he treats the people around him quite badly. I suspect that if push comes to shove, he would have very few defenders at NBC. When he was at ESPN, he and Dan Patrick were both despised by everyone there. They are what they appear to be -imperious jerks.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJonah, you are absolutely correct. But Olbermanns 10 or 12 regular viewers DO consider him a journalist!!!! And Olbermann himself believes it too. But what does NBC consider him? That, to me, will be the interesting piece of this. How is NBC going to spin this??
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRupert Murdoch can give his money where he wishes that does not reflect on the fact that FOX news organization is a news organization. Everyone is mad at FOX because it gives air to conservative opinion. It does report the news and tries and get the facts straight. It also likes to give free reign to actual debate between conservatives and liberals. It enjoys that. Something that MSNBC does not like to do. This so called "problem" with Olby is funny it only matters that NBC has rule about it I suppose but the rule should change now that they have MSNBC.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm shocked, shocked to find that Olbermann has contributed to the Democratic Party.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt is the basic silliness of insuring journalistic ethics with mere window dressing that is the point. This was epitomized for me by the Charlotte Observer in the early (mid?) 80's. As I recall, the Editor in Chief came out with some grand statement about the unwavering commitment the paper had to diversity of opinion in the newsroom, and then gave as the best example of this the case of a senior editor that changed his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. But this senior editor did so, not because of some epiphany in his political views, but simply and solely because there were just too many Democrats on the paper's masthead! This is fluff over substance, par excellence.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo make a point that I think Jonah *tried* to make... the best part about Olbermann giving money to Democratic candidates is that such giving *must be disclosed*, i.e. it's a public declaration of political bias.
As it currently stands, the likes of Olbermann can usually profess to be unbiased simply because they don't openly declare themselves for a particular side. They're "just asking questions" and the like.
Thanks to our nation's otherwise-awful campaign finance regulations, we now have Olbermann on the record that he's a Democrat. That's fine, he's an opinionator, not a journalist, entreaties to the mantle of Edward R. Murrow notwithstanding.
He just can't baldly lie about it any longer. That's a public service, I think.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMSNBC? Olbermann? Who are they?
I would be willing to bet that the outstanding (but necessarily niche) Radio Derb has more listeners on just weekends than Olbermann and Matthews have in a whole week.
...Or at least more listeners with a functioning brain.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't think too many people are touting this to criticize Olbermann. As you say, it's not like he goes to any lengths to hide his political persuasion.
However, it *is* valid to criticize NBC for not doing anything about this, since their ethics standards clearly say that this is against the rules, and they've come out and said in the past that these rules also apply to MSNBC commentator staff.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDoes anyone believe Olbermann is really a journalist? Sure, NBC News has its rules, but Olbermann is far from a reporter just trying to get it right. One qualifier before his name I have never heard and you will never read anywhere "the journalist Keith Olbermann..."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHe just can't baldly lie about it any longer?
Watch.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseShouldn't it be illegal to deny an employee, of any organization, the right to make campaign contributions?
What a contribution "buys", mostly, is speech. A contribution allows a candidate to air his case, get his story before the public. A person who supports a candidate, then, is mostly supporting some version of ideas, which is then expressed in "free speech" by their candidate, which they endorse.
So, logically, we all know "time is money". Well then money, logically, equals time. Since, in campaigns, virtually all that is being bought is speech, in one way or another, doesn't any campaign funding equate to an extension of "speech" for the contributor?
Money = Time
Time (in a campaign) = an amount of specific speech that can be aired.
Campaign money = campaign speech.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"An ethics problem"?
Olberman doesn't have an "ethics" problem, he's got a sanity, or rather an insanity problem. He's totally nuts.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOthers have touched on this, but straight out - does he have an opinion show or a news show? I think opinion, right? Opinions by nature can't be unbiased, so I don't get it... If they want an unbiased network, they'd have a right opinionist and a left opinionist. These rules should only apply to the news anchors themselves. I would think. But yeah, he's an ass, so I can't feel the least bit sorry.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWaitaminnit here! Olby works for NBC. NBC is a big multinational corporation! I thought the Dems were all upset about money from big, multinational corporations going into American elections! So considering they tell us they had no problem with the donation, just the way he went about keeping them informed or not....isn't Olby basically acting as a money launderer middleman for NBC?
Maybe Pelosi should call for an investigation!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI hear there's an opening at NPR...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJag, of course you are right from a technical/legal standpoint.
However, the crux of the matter is whether this is yet another piece of evidence *against* the propositions that a) Olbermann's is anything more than an opinion show, that b) Olbermann is "right down the middle" (believe me, there are some who think that), and that c) MSNBC (and NBC by extension) is home of unbiased reporting.
Kind of like looking at the New York Times' history of presidential endorsements. It's not that they don't have a right to endorse, it's their pattern: the last Republican president they have endorsed is Eisenhower in 1956.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseToo bad Olby just dropped his "Worst Persons in the World" bit.
He'd have to add himself.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseConsensus is that Keith is learning the hard way, by cranial trauma, about just who will back him up: the Right that he so reviles? or the Left which seeks to catergorize against all attempts to be free.
he makes about as much sense as my 19 year old soon; but he is entitled to that.
moreover, it's not as though a scandal emerges about his real feelings now.
so, when's he coming over to Fox?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI agree with the firing for two reasons:
1. MSNBC called Olbermann a "newscaster" and promotes his show as news.
2. The rules were crytal clear - he had to have permission to donate, as do all employees at MSNBC, and he didn't get it. He knew the rules, and he thought he was above them.
We may not believe he's a journalist, and we may know of his bias, but MSNBC pushes Countdown as a newscast, not an opinion show. It seems a farce that he would get fired for this when he has so many other egregious "ethics" issues, but I think that directly disobeying an ethics policy when you have no excuse is cause for firing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse