# Countdown with Keith Olbermann



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Keith returns Monday June 20th at 7pm on Current TV with "Countdown" the show that was to extreme for NBC/Universal/Comcast.

http://current.com/shows/countdown/


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Davenlr said:


> Keith returns Monday June 20th at 7pm on Current TV with "Countdown" the show that was to extreme for NBC/Universal/Comcast.
> 
> http://current.com/shows/countdown/


:barf:

I'm sorry but Keith Olbermann has rubbed me the wrong way since his days as a sportscaster for KTLA in Los Angeles.


----------



## Karen (Oct 4, 2007)

I'm looking forward to it. I wish it was in HD tho...


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Wait...I thought _Falling Skies_ was debuting on Sunday, not Monday. 

Oops, sorry, wrong invasion by our alien overlords.

j/k 

I'm sure I'll watch Keith's premiere.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

Keith was OK as a sportscaster on ESPN... it went downhill from there.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

n3ntj said:


> Keith was OK as a sportscaster on ESPN... it went downhill from there.


Your post is short and to the point.

It's also right on target.

At the rate his career is sliding....perhaps will see him on QVC some day.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Now I have 2 reasons for not watching Current. I wonder if they will try to get Weiner? Now that would be a pair.


----------



## balboadave (Mar 3, 2010)

I've admired Keith Olbermann since his days as a sports broadcaster at KTLA in Los Angeles. He brought levels of intelligence, insight, and humor into every show, and I had never seen that before in sports. That was what he brought to ESPN, and turned SportsCenter into the preeminent show it is today. That is also what he brought to MSNBC, and on the strength of his show, brought their ratings to the levels they are at today. Not spectacular, but still very respectable. Those were just single shows. At Current TV, he is also in charge of all their new broadcasting, not just Countdown. I expect to see great success, and eagerly welcome him back.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Keith Olbermann - love him or hate him. There doesn't seem to be any neutral ground, since he's an unabashed liberal, almost extremely so. Now we have two cable networks that are unfair and unbalanced: Current and Fox News. :sure: :lol:


----------



## dettxw (Nov 21, 2007)

I'll remove current from my favorites list.


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

I don't hate him, but I never liked him. However, I'm not a fan of any announcer that tries to make themselves bigger or more important than the story they are covering, sports or otherwise.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Actually, he's lost a step. In addition to his tinny-sounding opening music being horrid and drowning out his voice, and the PQ being horrendous even for SD, KO himself seems oddly subdued and a bit off target. Not the focused firebrand he once was. And the quality of his guests has gone way downhill without the NBC pull.

Too bad, he used to be one of the prime Truth-to-Power voices in America. Now it comes off like a homemade videoblog. But of course, Kabletown wasn't going to allow that much truth on their network. Too much money to be made on porn to rock the boat.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Murrow, Mencken, Carson, Clemens, Hersch, Pyle, Izzy Stone, Chomsky, Woodward & Bernstein, etc etc etc, all bigger than their stories. That's what allowed them to tell the truth and get away with it.

What we have left are scared uninformed rabbits way smaller than their stories who are easily cowed into toeing the corporate line. That's the way they like it.

The Right has tons of characters bigger than their stories: Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. That's the corollary: they are allowed to get away with outrageous lies. Same concept, just the flipside of how it's supposed to work.


----------



## balboadave (Mar 3, 2010)

Maruuk said:


> Actually, he's lost a step. In addition to his tinny-sounding opening music being horrid and drowning out his voice, and the PQ being horrendous even for SD, KO himself seems oddly subdued and a bit off target. Not the focused firebrand he once was. And the quality of his guests has gone way downhill without the NBC pull.
> 
> Too bad, he used to be one of the prime Truth-to-Power voices in America. Now it comes off like a homemade videoblog. But of course, Kabletown wasn't going to allow that much truth on their network. Too much money to be made on porn to rock the boat.


Actually, he hasn't. I don't understand what comparing a SD channel to a HD channel has to do the content. His Current ratings are 10 times what the the previous primetime shows were, so improving in-house production values is just a matter of time. The one difference I see in Keith is that he truly seems to be happy these days. Maybe you read that as being less of a firebrand, but I don't. What he's saying hasn't changed. As Keith has mentioned in his twitter feeds, he can't get some of his former guests due to contractual obligations, as a lot of them were NBC and MSNBC reporters, but he will get more guests in time. This show isn't even two weeks old, and it's pulling higher ratings in key demographics in his timeslot than CNN, with 40% fewer stations. Keith is in this for the long term, and everything will improve across the board.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

balboadave said:


> This show isn't even two weeks old, and it's pulling higher ratings in key demographics in his timeslot than CNN, with 40% fewer stations. Keith is in this for the long term, and everything will improve across the board.


Yes, he pulled in higher numbers in a couple of key demographics than CNN's "In the Arena" but I'm not sure how fair those numbers are as Eliot Spitzer was on vacation last week. Yes, Olbermann deserves some kudos but let's see how well he does when Spitzer is back. 
Plus, when all was said in done, CNN did have more overall viewers during the show's time-slot than Olbermann did.


----------



## chick3112215 (Jul 20, 2010)

Keith is ok, a little to the right for my taste but not a Nazi like Beck or Hannity.....


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

I turn the TV off when Spitzer or Nancy Grace are on. Dont like Piers either. They should put Anderson Cooper on at 7.

Keith is doing pretty well, considering its a fuzzy SD channel. Its actually the only SD program I watch on a daily basis.


----------



## balboadave (Mar 3, 2010)

fluffybear said:


> Yes, he pulled in higher numbers in a couple of key demographics than CNN's "In the Arena" but I'm not sure how fair those numbers are as Eliot Spitzer was on vacation last week. Yes, Olbermann deserves some kudos but let's see how well he does when Spitzer is back.
> Plus, when all was said in done, CNN did have more overall viewers during the show's time-slot than Olbermann did.


Way to go, missing the point and all. So what, you're on a campaign of derision by minutiae? 



fluffybear said:


> :barf:
> 
> I'm sorry but Keith Olbermann has rubbed me the wrong way since his days as a sportscaster for KTLA in Los Angeles.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

balboadave said:


> Way to go, missing the point and all. So what, you're on a campaign of derision by minutiae?


I don't believe I missed your point at all but you surely missed mine..


----------



## balboadave (Mar 3, 2010)

fluffybear said:


> I don't believe I missed your point at all but you surely missed mine..


You missed it. Current, by announcing their demographic ratings, was making a shout-out to advertisers: Hey, a new show on a small network is pulling numbers that beat CNN, come spend your money with us. Your point, "Plus, when all was said in done (sic), CNN did have more overall viewers during the show's time-slot than Olbermann did," like that was somehow more important. It's not, since when you factor in that Current is available in 40% fewer homes, it's still a win for Current. But win is my term, not theirs. They know they're in this for the long haul, and it will be many months, if not years, before meaningful comparisons can be made.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

balboadave said:


> You missed it. Current, by announcing their demographic ratings, was making a shout-out to advertisers: Hey, a new show on a small network is pulling numbers that beat CNN, come spend your money with us. Your point, "Plus, when all was said in done (sic), CNN did have more overall viewers during the show's time-slot than Olbermann did," like that was somehow more important. It's not, since when you factor in that Current is available in 40% fewer homes, it's still a win for Current. But win is my term, not theirs. They know they're in this for the long haul, and it will be many months, if not years, before meaningful comparisons can be made.


Again, I did not miss that fact and even said that Olbermann did deserve some kudos for this but again you missed my point that since Olbermann was going up against CNN's second & third string and that it may not be fair to declare it a true victory & would like to see what his numbers look like when he is going head to head with Spitzer.


----------



## balboadave (Mar 3, 2010)

fluffybear said:


> Again, I did not miss that fact and even said that Olbermann did deserve some kudos for this but again you missed my point that since Olbermann was going up against CNN's second & third string and that it may not be fair to declare it a true victory & would like to see what his numbers look like when he is going head to head with Spitzer.


Who called it a "true victory?" Not me, not Olbermann, not Current. Just you. Whether the ratings go up or down when Spitzer comes back DOESN'T MATTER. They're in the ball park, and that's a good start. You continue to either ignore or misread what I've written twice in this thread about your statement, you know, "long term", "in this for the long haul." Let's talk about the ratings during the next presidential election, when they will actually mean something.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

That his voice is still there is a very good thing, no doubt.

But migod, I can't believe he's back reading his idiotic 1950's-think Thurber crap. Fri he read that dead-tired flat as a pancake old "If Grant was Drunk at Appomattox" tome which was lame and unfunny in 1956. It presumes that being drunk is inherently FUNNY, as all comedy shows of the period also presumed.

After hundreds of thousands, even millions of lives have been ruined or ended from drunks, I say to Keith..."Sir, have you no sense of decency?"


----------



## iceturkee (Apr 1, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> I turn the TV off when Spitzer or Nancy Grace are on. Dont like Piers either. They should put Anderson Cooper on at 7.
> 
> Keith is doing pretty well, considering its a fuzzy SD channel. Its actually the only SD program I watch on a daily basis.


me too


----------



## txtommy (Dec 30, 2006)

fluffybear said:


> Again, I did not miss that fact and even said that Olbermann did deserve some kudos for this but again you missed my point that since Olbermann was going up against CNN's second & third string and that it may not be fair to declare it a true victory & would like to see what his numbers look like when he is going head to head with Spitzer.


People actually watch Spitzer? Guess they'll be hiring Weiner next.


----------



## txtommy (Dec 30, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> That his voice is still there is a very good thing, no doubt.
> 
> But migod, I can't believe he's back reading his idiotic 1950's-think Thurber crap. Fri he read that dead-tired flat as a pancake old "If Grant was Drunk at Appomattox" tome which was lame and unfunny in 1956. It presumes that being drunk is inherently FUNNY, as all comedy shows of the period also presumed.
> 
> After hundreds of thousands, even millions of lives have been ruined or ended from drunks, I say to Keith..."Sir, have you no sense of decency?"


I agree. Initially the Thurber readings were ok as honoring his Dad's request but I think he has to let it go asap. It has just become filler and a reason to turn him off early.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

balboadave said:


> Who called it a "true victory?" Not me, not Olbermann, not Current. Just you.





balboadave said:


> *it's still a win for Current.* *But win is my term*, not theirs.





balboadave said:


> Whether the ratings go up or down when Spitzer comes back DOESN'T MATTER.


Ratings for just 1 night (or 1 week) is what DOESN'T MATTER. If Olbermann can continue to beat CNN in a key demographic (overall would be even better for them) once Spitzer is back then that would be a win for Current and show they are really in it for the "long haul".



balboadave said:


> Let's talk about the ratings during the next presidential election, when they will actually mean something.


Sounds like a good idea except for the fact that Current does not subscribe to Nielson Metering and the only way we will see numbers is if they order a special report and choose to release it.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

I used to enjoy catching Olbermann's show on MSNBC. Despite its obvious liberal bias, it was a welcome counterpoint to Fox and much of CNN.
A few days after setting up a "Season Pass" on TiVo to record the new show on Current, I gave up and cancelled it, because every instance of the show, including rebroadcasts, was recorded. Current didn't tag rebroadcasts, so my TiVo couldn't distinguish between new shows and the rebroadcasts. I'm not about to try to record each individual show.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

I just programmed my Tivo for a manual record M-F 7pm to 8:05pm CT and it records the new episode without worrying about the rebroadcasts.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Frankly, I was expecting a content shift towards edgier material on the show since KO was touting all this "the corporate muzzle is off!" routine. Wrong. If anything, the show has dulled a bit. Especially in comparison to Maddow's devastating Truth Attacks against hypocrisy and lies everywhere.

I'd say Maddow now has that "Murrow-esque" mantle, that sense of revelatory drama that Keith used to have at MSNBC.

Keith's still ok, just a little boring now. Perhaps because he no longer has the budget to really go after the crooks and liars the way Maddow went after C Street for example.

Now when pols and fatcats get exposed, the LAST person they want to go near is Maddow. She's got the facts and the steel trap mind to eviscerate the bustards. And everybody knows it. I love her frequent announcements:

"We have repeatedly invited (person X) onto this show to rebut these allegations, but they refuse to return our phone calls."

Dang right. She's a one-woman 60 Minutes. How long can Kabletown allow her to bring Truth to Power? The clock must be ticking...at least they can't accuse her of being a lesbian!

But let's not forget, Maddow is there today because of KO. And she's quite a legacy for him no matter what becomes of his CTV show.


----------



## Glen_D (Oct 21, 2006)

fluffybear said:


> Again, I did not miss that fact and even said that Olbermann did deserve some kudos for this but again you missed my point that since Olbermann was going up against CNN's second & third string and that it may not be fair to declare it a true victory & would like to see what his numbers look like when he is going head to head with Spitzer.





txtommy said:


> People actually watch Spitzer?


Won't be seeing Spitzer on "In the Arena" anymore. CNN has cancelled his show.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/06/us-spitzer-idUSTRE7655ER20110706


----------



## lyradd (Mar 20, 2006)

Countdown With Keith Olbermann has lost nearly 30 percent of his viewers just two weeks into his new broadcast, Business Insider reports. :hurah:


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

lyradd said:


> Countdown With Keith Olbermann has lost nearly 30 percent of his viewers just two weeks into his new broadcast, Business Insider reports. :hurah:


But he's lost 44% of his viewings. His show is now being broadcast only five tmes a day, down from nine times a day when it debuted.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

If you look at an op-ed show like this as episodic storytelling, which it kind of is, reality has given it a major plot problem:

In the Bush era, it was easy: the white hats vs. the black. The perfect storytelling plot: good vs. evil.

Now, Obama has so alienated his lib hosts like KO that there are TWO black hat teams and no white hats. It's the host vs. team A AND team B. That's a real problem for hosts like KO and Ed Schultz and Cenk Ugur who have gone from spinning satisfying horse-opera yarns where the hero always gets the girl to having to present daily dark Kafka-esque horror stories of alienation, humiliation and denigration from all sides with no end in sight, and no hero to win the day. Hard to get ratings when Franz is writing the script.

That's exactly why hosts like Chris Mathews have gone back to this sickly, pandering non-denominational cheerleading pose designed to find silver linings in the darkest places. They're terrified to be stuck in the Kafka Bleakfest.

Fox has no such problems. They basically hand out the white hats and the black hats along with their pages every day and just yell "Action!"


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Keith Olbermann fired from Current TV, replaced by Eliot Spitzer

And now he leaves....


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

phrelin said:


> Keith Olbermann fired from Current TV, replaced by Eliot Spitzer
> 
> And now he leaves....


:allthumbs :dance:

What up until now has been a very crappy few days is starting to improve!


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

fluffybear said:


> :allthumbs :dance:
> 
> What up until now has been a very crappy few days is starting to improve!


I take it you don't like K.O. or his views?

Why would someone be happy a person won't have their show anymore? I don't like most of the talking heads on Fox News or MSNBC, but wouldn't be glad if they were to leave or get fired. I just don't watch.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

I actually liked his style. Just found it hard to watch in SD.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> I take it you don't like K.O. or his views?
> 
> Why would someone be happy a person won't have their show anymore? I don't like most of the talking heads on Fox News or MSNBC, but wouldn't be glad if they were to leave or get fired. I just don't watch.


My not liking Olberman has very little to do with his political views but more with his style of journalism. My displeasure for him began when he was a sports reporter for KTLA nearly 30 years ago.


----------



## Galaxie6411 (Aug 26, 2007)

Guess $10mil a year just wasn't enough for good 'ol Keith. The hypocrisy of multimillionaire lefties never ceases to amaze me. It was always fun to tune in during a Democrat scandal to see how he was completely ignoring it for some other trivial bash on a Republican. So since he always leaves to make more money somewhere else who is going to pay him even more now? I am guessing no one but he should have plenty of cash to afford doing nothing for quite a while. Our capitalist system he supposedly despises treated him very well.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

Maybe he'll follow Glen Beck's lead and try building his own internet-based service, or he could move over to Serius/XM. Ultimately, th move to Current was probably a mistake, the audience just didn't follow him and he's lost a lot of his fan base.


----------



## txtommy (Dec 30, 2006)

mreposter said:


> Maybe he'll follow Glen Beck's lead and try building his own internet-based service, or he could move over to Serius/XM. Ultimately, th move to Current was probably a mistake, the audience just didn't follow him and he's lost a lot of his fan base.


The move to Current was not voluntary. He became too radical for MSNBC and now has done the same for Current. I used to watch him on MSNBC but the production quality, SD picture and poor sound made it less appealing on Current. Bottom line is that like Glen Beck he just went too far to the extreme and couldn't expand his audience. It has a lot to do with their egos becoming larger than their brains. Limbaugh and Hannity will be next. O'Reilly isn't far behind.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

txtommy said:


> The move to Current was not voluntary. He became too radical for MSNBC and now has done the same for Current. I used to watch him on MSNBC but the production quality, SD picture and poor sound made it less appealing on Current. Bottom line is that like Glen Beck he just went too far to the extreme and couldn't expand his audience. It has a lot to do with their egos becoming larger than their brains. Limbaugh and Hannity will be next. O'Reilly isn't far behind.


According to sources, it was Olbermann's work ethic that led to his demise at Current TV. Since I do not have first hand knowledge I can not say this was the reason or not but Olbermann has countered by stating he plans to sue Current TV and Al Gore personally.


----------



## njblackberry (Dec 29, 2007)

OK, who was surprised that it ended this way.
It ALWAYS ends this way with Olbermann. The smartest guy in the room.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

njblackberry said:


> The smartest guy in the room.


not sure if I would go that far. 
I'm thinking the smartest guy in the room is his lawyer.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

lwilli201 said:


> Now I have 2 reasons for not watching Current. I wonder if they will try to get Weiner? Now that would be a pair.


Weiner EWW!!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Davenlr said:


> I turn the TV off when Spitzer or Nancy Grace are on. Dont like Piers either. They should put Anderson Cooper on at 7.
> 
> Keith is doing pretty well, considering its a fuzzy SD channel. Its actually the only SD program I watch on a daily basis.


I can't stand CNN nor Nancy Grace!


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Paul Secic said:


> I can't stand CNN nor Nancy Grace!


Well, I avoid HLN when Nancy Grace is on, MSNBC when Al Sharpton is on (why in the world did they hire that man? He cannot even speak understandable English, and has way to many outside issues I would think, to be able to fulfill his job responsibilities).

I pretty much watch Shepard Smith, then AC360, then Rachel Maddow, and then turn on Al Jazeera to see what is happening outside the US.

Weekends I like HLN with Natasha, and CNN at night with Don Lemon.

Not that I like news or anything 

Wonder where Keith will end up next? Perhaps a Ying/Yang channel with alternating Keith/Glenn Beck


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

txtommy said:


> The move to Current was not voluntary. He became too radical for MSNBC and now has done the same for Current. I used to watch him on MSNBC but the production quality, SD picture and poor sound made it less appealing on Current. Bottom line is that like Glen Beck he just went too far to the extreme and couldn't expand his audience. It has a lot to do with their egos becoming larger than their brains. Limbaugh and Hannity will be next. O'Reilly isn't far behind.


Limbaugh isn't going anywhere. His audience is up in the light of his recent "slut" remark (rather inappropriate but somewhat accurate nonetheless), and he's been doing his thing since the 1980s. Beck was...well...just plain weird.

Obermann is a vile piece of human debris and one of the only "human beings" over whose slow, painful death I would not mourn one bit.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Karen (Oct 4, 2007)

Lord Vader said:


> Limbaugh isn't going anywhere. *His audience is up in the light of his recent "slut" remark (rather inappropriate but somewhat accurate nonetheless), *and he's been doing his thing since the 1980s. Beck was...well...just plain weird.
> 
> Obermann is a vile piece of human debris and one of the only "human beings" over whose slow, painful death I would not mourn one bit.
> 
> Have a nice day.


Accurate? Why makes you think it was somewhat accurate? She was talking about a friend's health problem that in no way concerned birth control...


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

That young gal is a very sexually promiscuous individual who turned out to be a member of the very progressive left and a big time, left-wing activist who was intentionally selected to go before Congress. Her appearing there was no accident. She wants all that free birth control? She wants us to foot the bill for some $3000 or more of her yearly sexcapades? Tell her to go to Planned Barrenhood, where she can get all the freebies she wants.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

If I didnt believe you actually believed that, I would swear you were in England where its already April Fool's Day.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Unreal... but considering the poster, I'm not surprised.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It should be noted that Rush apologized to Sandra Fluke for what he said.

I would ask for proof that Ms. Fluke was "a very sexually promiscuous individual" but I assume that it would be from a website so politically leaning that it could not be linked here. And at the end of the day, Ms. Fluke's life is not the point of this thread, this forum or our site.

In the interest of fairness and to allow her to respond to the assault on her character, here is a link to Ms. Fluke's side of the story ---
Sandra Fluke: Slurs won't silence women

As for Mr Olbermann ... if he finds employment in TV again he will be on topic for this forum. Otherwise it seems that such a person and his former show is just too political to be discussed here.


----------

