# Keith Olbermann out at MSNBC



## Getteau (Dec 20, 2007)

Last night's Countdown was his final episode.

http://www.nbcuniversal.presscentre.com/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=3369&NewsAreaId=2

http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/21/olbermann-announces-last-broadcast-on-msnbc-video/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/21/keith-olbermann-countdown-over_n_812506.html


----------



## njblackberry (Dec 29, 2007)

The Terrell Owens of talk show hosts.
Talented, but toxic and always leaves under unpleasant circumstances.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I saw the "Breaking News" last night on CNN and kept thinking of Rick Sanchez and Aaron Brown. It was probably a bigger news story for those in the business. It isn't the first time Olbermann has left MSNBC ... and whether or not he lands somewhere else he'll do fine.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

:dance01:

I knew something good would have to come out of the Comcrap merger


----------



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

Rick Sanchez is awesome I remember him from his roots at WCKT then WSVN (after a call letter change) Miamis ch 7. Rick has always had a colorful history through out his career. 

I do not believe I have ever watched Olberman. I have heard about him though.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Never watch him. Don't care much for what I have read about him.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him show up on CNN eventually. They seem to be trying to make a name for themselves again.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

klang said:


> Never watch him. Don't care much for what I have read about him.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised to see him show up on CNN eventually. They seem to be trying to make a name for themselves again.


CNN has tried to stay more middle of the road lately and that is one thing Olberman is not. I personally think the best place for Olberman would be satellite radio. He can pretty much say and do what he wants there.


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

Rumour is he's going back to sports for a while


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

fluffybear said:


> CNN has tried to stay more middle of the road lately and that is one thing Olberman is not. I personally think the best place for Olberman would be satellite radio. He can pretty much say and do what he wants there.


Agree, don't know where he'd go on TV but it won't be on CNN. They have made a concerted effort to be the non-partisan network, ie see Lou Dobbs.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

fluffybear said:


> CNN has tried to stay more middle of the road lately and that is one thing Olberman is not. I personally think the best place for Olberman would be satellite radio. He can pretty much say and do what he wants there.


Head of CNN was replaced last fall. So far their ratings have shown no improvement. I think we may see some changes as 'middle of the road' doesn't seem to be attracting the viewers.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Somewhere along the way over the 30 years CNN has been on the air, it has gone from a MOR, news-based channel to a personality-driven news outlet with a decidedly liberal slant. Further, the emphasis on personalities (Katie Couric) by many, if not most news organizations has not, IMO, served television news business very well, nor has it served the viewing public. 

What I want and expect is news of the world, reported straight from the shoulder with no bias, no fluff and no so-called "celebrity" news. Yes, times do change, but human nature doesn't -- just report the news.


----------



## Glen_D (Oct 21, 2006)

Nick said:


> Somewhere along the way over the 30 years CNN has been on the air, it has gone from a MOR, news-based channel to a personality-driven news outlet with a decidedly liberal slant. Further, the emphasis on personalities (Katie Couric) by many, if not most news organizations has not, IMO, served television news business very well, nor has it served the viewing public.
> 
> What I want and expect is news of the world, reported straight from the shoulder with no bias, no fluff and no so-called "celebrity" news. Yes, times do change, but human nature doesn't -- just report the news.


Nick, I couldn't agree with you more!


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

raott said:


> Agree, don't know where he'd go on TV but it won't be on CNN. They have made a concerted effort to be the non-partisan network,* ie see Lou Dobbs.*


You mean the guy on Fox News?


----------



## Jaspear (May 16, 2004)

juan ellitinez said:


> Rumour is he's going back to sports for a while


On the other hand, here's a few reasons why he might have a tough time finding a sports gig.

Ironically, it looks like the only company he hasn't insulted is Comcast!


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

"Herdfan" said:


> You mean the guy on Fox News?


Yes, the guy on fox business. He was dumped by CNN when their philosophy shifted.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Best place for Olbermann is Satellite Radio. There he can offend just about anyone he wants and for the most part get away with it.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

fluffybear said:


> Best place for Olbermann is Satellite Radio. There he can offend just about anyone he wants and for the most part get away with it.


If Rush Limbaugh can be on AM/FM, then Olbermann can. I think they're both way out on each side pretty equally.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

raott said:


> Yes, the guy on fox business. He was dumped by CNN when their philosophy shifted.


I'm not sure why CNN tolerated him (Dobbs) so long ... when he first left that should have been it. But then they let him come back! His show was always a good reason to see what was on other channels.

I would not say his departure was when CNN shifted ... it seems that over the years anytime a newscaster has put themselves ahead of the news and made themselves more important than the story it isn't long until they are escorted off the set. (Of course that doesn't explain Nancy Grace's continued presence on HN. But the strongest personalities find other employment. Some leave for an opportunity to lead, but some seem to have led too firmly and are gone.)

Olbermann on talk radio would probably work well. It seems that he leaves a wake of burned bridges behind him. If he gets a slot it will be only because someone thinks they will make money off of him.


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

sigma1914 said:


> If Rush Limbaugh can be on AM/FM, then Olbermann can. I think they're both way out on each side pretty equally.


cept nobody will listen to Olberman


----------



## lflorack (Dec 16, 2006)

Nick said:


> What I want and expect is news of the world, reported straight from the shoulder with no bias, no fluff and no so-called "celebrity" news. Yes, times do change, but human nature doesn't -- just report the news.


I'm with you Nick. News is supposed to be NEWS. Opinion-based 'reporting' is nothing of the sort. It's not news and it's not reporting. Olbermann and Limbaugh (to name just two of many) do NOT report news. They voice their opinions. Although this is fine if stated as such, many people can't seem to tell the difference between OPINION and NEWS (i.e. FACTS).


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Like others have said, I want news, not commentary or opinion. (Just the facts Ma'am). I don't watch any show on any news channel with anyone's name in the title. I don't care if the name is Meade, Maddow, Couric, Blitzer or anything else. I'm interested in the content, not the presenter.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

Nick said:


> What I want and expect is news of the world, reported straight from the shoulder with no bias, no fluff and no so-called "celebrity" news....


The closest any news channel comes to providing that is Aljazerra. You just have to ignore the British field reporters they use who conclude each otherwise unbiased report with, "It was probably the United States fault..."


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

AntAltMike said:


> The closest any news channel comes to providing that is Aljazerra. You just have to ignore the British field reporters they use who conclude each otherwise unbiased report with, "It was probably the United States fault..."


:eek2: Oh boy!


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

juan ellitinez said:


> cept nobody will listen to Olberman


I would as I've always been a fan.

Loved him when he made Sportscenter must see TV (which it no longer is) and while I rarely watched him on MSNBC, the few times I did, I enjoyed it.

I don't always agree with his politics, but I like his humor, delivery, and intelligence.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> If Rush Limbaugh can be on AM/FM, then Olbermann can. I think they're both way out on each side pretty equally.


Sure he can. My thought though was he has appeared to have 'burned every river' possible and with Satellite he can be his obnoxious self and not have to worry about answering to almost anyone.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> If Rush Limbaugh can be on AM/FM, then Olbermann can. I think they're both way out on each side pretty equally.


But there is no such thing as liberal talk radio. There is no audience for it whatsoever.

I live and work in the Washington, DC metro area. You know, the city where something like 70 or more percent of the electorate vote for the Democratic Party candidate. A year or so ago, we lost our "liberal" talk radio station. I only tuned into it when I missed my "Traffic on the 8s" report on WTOP but needed to get one before the next ":_8" came up. One time, I had heard Bill Press hosting a show. Another time, Alan Colmes. You remember Alan Colmes? He was the human punching bag assigned to, "Hannity and Liberal to be Determined" (the actual working title of that show in its development stages).

That station is now ESPN Radio. A week after the format change was implemented, Mr. Press contributed an op-ed column to the Washington Post, complaining that radio stations "discriminate" against liberal talk shows. I've got news for him. They discriminate against shows that no one listens to.

I don't know why conservative radio audiences will listen to shows in which the host says the same thing, over and over, fifty times an hour, but liberal radio audiences will change the station. Sean Hannity's two hour radio show could be replaced with a two minute tape loop and most of his audience wouldn't know the difference. Olbermann would do no better on the radio than Press and Colmes did, and probably not even as well, because in most markets, there will not be a station carrying politically compatible shows to allow it to develop an identiity.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

You're right about the possible appeal of a liberal talk radio show. Someone has to pay for it and that means a sizable audience has to listen to a radio show. The liberal audience is not drawn to talk radio, at least so far. And I can't really imagine a Rush Limbaugh type of format appealing to the audience even if it is Olbermann.

But maybe there are a bunch of angry left wingers out there who want to hear themselves yell on the radio and I just haven't met them.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Air America was a decent try at "the other voice" on broadcast radio ... but it was not a success in the marketplace. Sirius XM still has their "left" channel the last time I checked.

Liberals listen to conservative talk radio too ... and call in. Some of the people on conservative talk radio owe their careers to the liberals who volunteer to be the other voice on their shows. If Liberals stopped listening and calling conservative talk radio it probably wouldn't be as popular even among conservatives. Part of the draw is to hear their favorite host "win" the battle against an opponent - whether guest or caller. Perhaps liberals listen to be outraged and offended.

At the end of the day it isn't conservative or liberal talk radio (and TV) ... it is controversy radio/TV. People tune in for the fight. Perhaps more shows need liberals in the titles ... but talk radio would not be a success without BOTH sides of the conversation.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

I don't listen to Rush, but I am a long-time ('70s, WRNG Radio) listener of the Neal Boortz program on WSB radio, Atlanta, and syndicated around the country. James, you're right about liberal callers being a foil, but based on years of listening to lib callers' arguments, many (most?) liberals don't go toe-to-toe very well and just don't make their case. IMO, the idealistic philosophies of liberal politics may look good on paper to some, but they don't stand up to the light of logical examination, much less hold their own in a back-and forth debate.

I'm not surprised at all that liberal talk radio hasn't found much of an audience. Other than Rev. Ike, I haven't heard of anyone else who can get people too excited about _'pie-in-the-sky'_.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Olbermann, in his tenure at MSNBC, made no pretense at being a strictly news show. Rather, he dissected the news (particularly as reported by Fox News) and embellished it with his over the top liberal opinion. 
My own views are essentially centrist, occasionally drifting a bit to the left, but not so far as the views held by Chris Matthews, Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. I used to watch their shows off and on, finding them entertaining, but have found better things to watch during the same time periods. 

I grew up in a conservative Republican family (in Democratic Chicago!), and was a staunch Republican, probably until I was in my late 20's. I gradually became disenchanted with much ow what I saw and became more and more of an independent -- voting for the candidate rather than the party. If I were a bird, I'd definitely be a mugwump! :lol:


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Nick said:


> Somewhere along the way over the 30 years CNN has been on the air, it has gone from a MOR, news-based channel to a personality-driven news outlet with a decidedly liberal slant. Further, the emphasis on personalities (Katie Couric) by many, if not most news organizations has not, IMO, served television news business very well, nor has it served the viewing public.
> 
> What I want and expect is news of the world, reported straight from the shoulder with no bias, no fluff and no so-called "celebrity" news. Yes, times do change, but human nature doesn't -- just report the news.


I agree. TV news has to be exciting, junky. Forty years ago network news informed people. Now all we hear about strange people doing stupid things. Sad.....


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

AntAltMike said:


> But there is no such thing as liberal talk radio. There is no audience for it whatsoever.
> 
> I live and work in the Washington, DC metro area. You know, the city where something like 70 or more percent of the electorate vote for the Democratic Party candidate. A year or so ago, we lost our "liberal" talk radio station. I only tuned into it when I missed my "Traffic on the 8s" report on WTOP but needed to get one before the next ":_8" came up. One time, I had heard Bill Press hosting a show. Another time, Alan Colmes. You remember Alan Colmes? He was the human punching bag assigned to, "Hannity and Liberal to be Determined" (the actual working title of that show in its development stages).
> 
> ...


Try http://www.kgoradio.com. Lots of liberals on it.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Paul Secic said:


> Try http://www.kgoradio.com. Lots of liberals on it.


Paul! Don't you know that we in the Bay Area like to keep that secret.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

This thread makes it too tempting for certain members to go over the top with their political views ... so to make it easier to moderate I'll just close it. We don't do political talk here. I hope you enjoyed the momentary exception.


----------

