MSNBC Reprimands Olbermann For Palin "Cheap Shot"?

[DToTheJ]

According to a blurb in today's Chicago Sun-Times suggests that Keith Olbermann, in the wake of naming Bristol Palin the "(Not Really) Worst Person In The World" (remember, the bit was recently honed and refined) for appearing in a public service ad for abstinence, was "called on the carpet" by network bosses, who declared Olbermann's decision "a cheap shot that was uncalled for":
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/keith-olbermann-called-on-carpet-by-bosses-for-bashing-bristol-palin/

 

[Irishfl]

He kind of deserved it. I mean what was Keith trying to say that people who have made certain decisions in their past can't advise others not to do that same.

'Well son 20 years ago I struggled with a crack addiction that almost destroyed my life. However I don't want to be a hypocrite in the eyes of Keith Olbermann, so I won't advise you not to do crack'

Seriously, who better to give advice then a person who has made the mistake? Going back to my school days whenever we had assemblies on driving drunk, doing drugs, crime, ext the speaker was always a former person of the subject, who would share his/her experiences.

 

[Laurence Glavin]

I think that K.O. was also trying to make the point that "abstinence education" doesn't work. There are studies that back him up, although there are studies on every conceivable subject that contradict each other. The libtalk station in Boston (WWZN-AM 1510) frequently runs PSAs urging teenagers to speak out about other teenagers' bad driving habits. First, there are no teenagers listening to a talk station on AM, and the typical teenager is so paralyzed with fear about what other teenagers' opinion of him or her that such a situation can't happen.

 

[Ultimajock]

...the Mediaite post linked above also has an MSNBC spokesman flatly denying the Sun-Times story. Sounds like the Sun-Times has slid back into Gary Deeb mode after Robert Feder left ;-) ...

 

[TheBigA]

In another thread, someone was asking why there's no "liberal lion:"

http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=180323.0

I suggested that a liberal can't use tactics that are popular among conservative talk hosts, because (1) liberals don't enjoy or support that approach as much as conservatives, and (2) they come off like cheap shots, attack dogs, and their companies have to apologize or repremand them. You don't see that on Fox. I think that's the case here. Olbermann is trying to play the liberal Glen Beck, and he keeps getting slapped down by his own people. And it wouldn't surprise me if his statements aren't getting support from the liberals who listen.

 

[LKellerIII]

In another thread, someone was asking why there's no "liberal lion:"

http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=180323.0

I suggested that a liberal can't use tactics that are popular among conservative talk hosts, because (1) liberals don't enjoy or support that approach as much as conservatives, and (2) they come off like cheap shots, attack dogs, and their companies have to apologize or repremand them. You don't see that on Fox. I think that's the case here. Olbermann is trying to play the liberal Glen Beck, and he keeps getting slapped down by his own people. And it wouldn't surprise me if his statements aren't getting support from the liberals who listen.

That's a good analysis, Big A. I've been paying attention since the early days of talk radio in the 1960s - way before Hannity and Limbaugh (Joe Pyne, Ray Briem), and have observed that conservatives generally dominate the debate. For one thing, conservatives are much more adept at getting people upset. Let's face it - Americans are generally right-wing, and prefer the Republicans, no matter how much they are screwed by them....just give me my guns and pay lip-service to my religion, and I don't care how much how much you screw me over to make rich people richer.

 

[formeraa]

I think that K.O. was also trying to make the point that "abstinence education" doesn't work. There are studies that back him up, although there are studies on every conceivable subject that contradict each other. The libtalk station in Boston (WWZN-AM 1510) frequently runs PSAs urging teenagers to speak out about other teenagers' bad driving habits. First, there are no teenagers listening to a talk station on AM, and the typical teenager is so paralyzed with fear about what other teenagers' opinion of him or her that such a situation can't happen.

Well, I generally think that progressives like to "discuss" things and try to come to a consensus. OTOH, conservatives like to pronounce things "good" or "bad" with loud voices. Coming from a progressive worldview, Keith Olbermann is trying to say that we need to do more than put out the message that "premarital sex is bad".

 

[quadraphonic]

Coming from a progressive worldview, Keith Olbermann is trying to say that we need to do more than put out the message that "premarital sex is bad".

But why would he single out Briston Palin for that "honor" then?
That sounds like a pretty comprehensive implication to be derived from a fairly specific statement.

 

[TheBigA]

Coming from a progressive worldview, Keith Olbermann is trying to say that we need to do more than put out the message that "premarital sex is bad".

But the personification of it is using a tactic that, in my opinion, is foreign and distasteful to progressives. Which, getting back to my earlier point, may be why progressives are finding it harder to have the kind of ratings success with what they do than conservatives. The conservative tactic works better in the competitive, reality TV, kick 'em off the island approach that attracts ratings.

But why would he single out Briston Palin for that "honor" then?

She just happens to be in the news because of Dancing With the Stars. That allows her to be a target, and if she was a liberal, and Keith was conservative, it would have been fine. But it's seen as bad form for a progressive to use a personal attack.

 

[quadraphonic]

She just happens to be in the news because of Dancing With the Stars. That allows her to be a target, and if she was a liberal, and Keith was conservative, it would have been fine. But it's seen as bad form for a progressive to use a personal attack.

But the "honor" wasn't about a reality show. It was based on a PSA she read. Her dancing on a tv show might be "entertainment news" but she's not making political statements.

Progressives use personal attacks against conservatives all the time, and it's overlooked. "Racist," "hater," "homophobe," "bible thumper," "hypocrite," you name it, it's been used against conservatives. It goes in cycles. For a while there, "troglodytic" was in fashion as a repeated slam.
They just don't do it often against young women, when they aren't really making a political statement. As a 55-year-old man picking on a 20-year-old girl woman (like Letterman did with the joke about her sister, was it?) he's never going to get "attaboys" for it.

 

[TheBigA]

They just don't do it often against young women, when they aren't really making a political statement. As a 55-year-old man picking on a 20-year-old girl woman (like Letterman did with the joke about her sister, was it?) he's never going to get "attaboys" for it.

As I said, it's not proper for a liberal to take that approach. But conservatives make personal judgements against much younger women all the time. Bill O'Reilly slammed Jennifer Anniston about fatherhood, and she wasn't even a mother. She just plays one in the movies.

 

[quadraphonic]

They just don't do it often against young women, when they aren't really making a political statement. As a 55-year-old man picking on a 20-year-old girl woman (like Letterman did with the joke about her sister, was it?) he's never going to get "attaboys" for it.

As I said, it's not proper for a liberal to take that approach. But conservatives make personal judgements against much younger women all the time. Bill O'Reilly slammed Jennifer Anniston about fatherhood, and she wasn't even a mother. She just plays one in the movies.

It's not proper for either side to take that approach.
Progressives make personal judgments against lots of people all the time, too.
But in fairness to O'Reilly, Jennifer Aniston is in her 40s and not 20. I said "young women" not "younger women." If it were only about slamming "younger" women, nobody would ever bring down Helen Thomas.

 

[TheBigA]

It's not proper for either side to take that approach.

I agree, but progressives feel bad after they do it. That's what liberals do.

But in fairness to O'Reilly, Jennifer Aniston is in her 40s and not 20.

But she was promoting a fictional movie, not making a real PSA.

 

[FreddyE1977]

I am no fan of Keith Olbermann, but it seems to me that taking cheap shots at Sarah Palin
has replaced baseball as our national pastime.

Penalizing Olbermann for doing what everyone else in mainstream media is doing is sort
of like penalizing only James Harrison for helmet-to-helmet shots in the NFL.

 

[FreddyE1977]

They just don't do it often against young women, when they aren't really making a political statement. As a 55-year-old man picking on a 20-year-old girl woman (like Letterman did with the joke about her sister, was it?) he's never going to get "attaboys" for it.

As I said, it's not proper for a liberal to take that approach. But conservatives make personal judgements against much younger women all the time. Bill O'Reilly slammed Jennifer Anniston about fatherhood, and she wasn't even a mother. She just plays one in the movies.

It's not proper for either side to take that approach.
Progressives make personal judgments against lots of people all the time, too.
But in fairness to O'Reilly, Jennifer Aniston is in her 40s and not 20. I said "young women" not "younger women." If it were only about slamming "younger" women, nobody would ever bring down Helen Thomas.

in fairness to Jennifer Anniston, she looks extremely young and fit for a woman
in her 40's. ;D