Olbermania

Not sure I have that much to say about it, but I’ve been intrigued by Keith Olbermann’s recent diary posts to Daily Kos. Both posts address some of the online debates and critiques of his show and demonstrate a willingness to engage with those audiences, a valuable gesture during a volatile election season in which many voters are becoming increasingly impatient with the election coverage provided by television and print journalists.

In his most recent post, he even admits that he “screwed up” when he failed to point out that recent guest Lawrence O’Donnell had written a post on The Huffington Post declaring that “John Edwards is a Loser.” Obviously, such a post might call into question O’Donnell’s ability to discuss Edwards fairly, and it’s probably something that should have been disclosed during the show. I’ve been a fan of Countdown with Keith Olbermann since I started subscribing to cable a couple of years ago (after a nearly eight year break), but I think Greg Sargent is correct to assert that Olbermann’s honesty, his willingness to engage with his audiences, only adds to his credibility.

Now if only we could convince MSNBC to get rid of Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson.

3 Comments »

  1. Antony Said,

    January 20, 2008 @ 8:13 pm

    I’ve found that several mediums of the media are destroying John Edwards’ credibility months before the elections take place. Recently on my blog, I linked a video showing a collage of Edwards being slanted in the news. Although the editing clearly predicts the intent of the video, all information within it is true. I’ve also linked a video where Edwards asks Obama about him becoming the top receiver of campaign contributions, dem or rep, in history from corporations.

  2. Chuck Said,

    January 20, 2008 @ 8:55 pm

    I noticed that video when I was reading your blog, and I think it does a good job of attacking how the campaign has been framed, but almost inadvertently, it also illustrates the frame that Hillary and Obama are “feuding” or at war (“a truce”), in a sense creating a gender-race war where one doesn’t really exist.

    I’m all for eliminating corporate donations from campaigns, but until they are eliminated, I sort of regard them as a necessary evil this time around, so it’s hard to blame Obama for taking that much “corporate” money. I’d also suggest that Edwards’ own campaign has done a somewhat disappointing job of framing his campaign’s narrative, in that he can’t escape the language of the trial lawyer (“I’ll fight for you”). Obama, in particular, has been effective in imparting some agency onto the voting public (“We will fight together”). Whether he’s actually providing voters with genuine agency is open for debate, but his rhetoric is more empowering, and I think that’s a huge difference between the two of them right now.

    That being said, I give Olbermann some credit for admitting that he failed to call O’Donnell on his earlier anti-Edwards statements.

  3. The Chutry Experiment » Mad for Maddow Said,

    May 25, 2008 @ 12:59 pm

    [...] found myself watching MSNBC more than any other network, despite my aversion to Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson, primarily because of Rachel Maddow, who has proved to be one of the most engaging pundits out [...]

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting