Keith Olbermann's New Network: Current TV

[KTU_Fan]

I used to watch before they switched formats, but not much since they've wanted to become a "real" network

 

[Irishfl]

Apparently he is.

Interesting. I guess not surprising, since like I said before current is like a community access channel. Still I doubt he will have as large of a staff as he did with MSNBC.

 

[FightingIrish]

My theory is that Olbermann wants a place free from corporate meddling, where he can do whatever the hell he wants. He's already worked for ESPN, FOX, CNN and NBC, and left them all after getting into conflicts with the big bosses. Similar to what Howard Stern did when he went to Sirius. He knew his audience would dwindle, but it allowed him creative freedom. After a while, gaining an extra ratings point or two only satisfies so much.

Before this announcement, my guess was that he would do a multimedia web venture, and forsake TV altogether. Guess I got it part right, as the web will play a big part of all this.

 

[DToTheJ]

... KO is funding the show himself.

Apparently he is.

I read that he will be owning stock in the channel as part of the deal.

Meanwhile, I am aware of only one program on Current that exists: "Supernews" - and that's only because a bit on that show about Twitter - as you would expect - happened to go viral.

Also, aren't the folks at Current behind that clever "Truth" anti-advertising campaign?

 

[DToTheJ]

Keith Olbermann was quoted in the New York Post regarding why he is no longer at MSNBC: "I don't really know why."

He also comments on his role at Current TV, stating that he will be paid the same amount that he used to get from MSNBC, and he will be the "news director" of the network, and not "chief news officer," as reporter earlier.

 

[MattParker]

Keith Olbermann was quoted in the New York Post regarding why he is no longer at MSNBC: "I don't really know why."

He also comments on his role at Current TV, stating that he will be paid the same amount that he used to get from MSNBC, and he will be the "news director" of the network, and not "chief news officer," as reporter earlier.

Broadcasters just love meaningless titles - often given in lieu of more money or to suggest the illusion of authority (like "managing editor" of a network newscast). Is Keith really going to perform any of the duties or functions normally associated with the title (a title normally used at local stations, not networks or cable channels)? Does a guy who has spent most of his career doing sports with a recent detour into talk show hosting really have the credentials, education or experience to manage a legitimate news operation?

I believe this one about as much as I believe "chief meteorologist" Al Gore when my back is sore from the snow I've been shoveling. Maybe Al's back is sore, too, from what he's been shoveling.