That lefty loser Olberman gets fired.

[Matt1970]

and to clarify - Olberman is no doubt an ass, but he doesn't rely on known fabrications to enforce his points, which to me puts him on a level higher than the Rush's and Hannity's of the world.

I had a lot of fun listening to Olbermann debunk lie after lie after lie after lie after lie after lie after lie....ad infinitum from FOX and Limbaugh. Hey, I guess that's another reason why the righties hate him so much.

It was MSNBC's mission to try and cherry pick any kind of news it could to contradict what Fox news did. Fox news rarely even mentioned Olberman and the others. Why bother with someone who can't even get 1/3rd of the rating your re-runs get?

 

[dmcowen674]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/contributors/howard-kurtz.html

Rush is in denial.

His contract with the National Distributor will not be renewed.

It's about time.

 

[fskimospy]

You can tell just how influential he is...........err was.... he is influential right?

Clearly he was influential enough for you to make a thread about him.

I'm not sorry to see him go, he didn't contribute anything. The only sad part about this is that it reminds me that Sean Hannity and Rush haven't been fired yet.

 

[Double Trouble]

Clearly he was influential enough for you to make a thread about him.

I'm not sorry to see him go, he didn't contribute anything. The only sad part about this is that it reminds me that Sean Hannity and Rush haven't been fired yet.

I don't see why those guys have to be fired. They bring in ratings, and that's their job. If Olbermann delivered great ratings, jackass or not, he'd still be on the air. It's a business, and guys like Rush and Hannity undeniably deliver the goods for their employers, like'em or hate'em.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't see why those guys have to be fired. They bring in ratings, and that's their job. If Olbermann delivered great ratings, jackass or not, he'd still be on the air. It's a business, and guys like Rush and Hannity undeniably deliver the goods for their employers, like'em or hate'em.

Clearly they don't have to be fired, as that's nobody's business but their employer's. They are still vile individuals who I believe act in a way that's destructive to America, so I wish they weren't on the air.

 

[Zebo]

Got fired for being a dick not poltics. His show was one marketable compared to most on his station.

 

[Double Trouble]

Clearly they don't have to be fired, as that's nobody's business but their employer's. They are still vile individuals who I believe act in a way that's destructive to America, so I wish they weren't on the air.

I agree they are generally vile, they appeal to the base emotions and further polarize the populace. I do want people from all parts of the political spectrum "on the air" or internet though. Those guys saw a segment of the population that felt their views were not represented on the main stream news, and they took advantage of it, and provided that representation.

I wish our country had not devolved to the point where people like Maddow, Olberman, Hannity and Rush have such a following.

 

[Rainsford]

I don't see why those guys have to be fired. They bring in ratings, and that's their job. If Olbermann delivered great ratings, jackass or not, he'd still be on the air. It's a business, and guys like Rush and Hannity undeniably deliver the goods for their employers, like'em or hate'em.

For some reason there is clearly more of a market for abrasive right-wing jackasses than abrasive left-wing jackasses. Not sure why that is, but there is definitely a trend there.

Although it does seem like this particular case was more about Olberman just being terrible to work with. I wonder if folks like Rush and Hannity play assholes on TV/radio, but are fine off camera, while Olberman really IS a jackwagon.

 

[cybrsage]

That is how I understand it. Off air, the guys are nice people you would grab a beer with...but Olberman is not. His off air personality is what you see on air.

 

[Rainsford]

I agree they are generally vile, they appeal to the base emotions and further polarize the populace. I do want people from all parts of the political spectrum "on the air" or internet though. Those guys saw a segment of the population that felt their views were not represented on the main stream news, and they took advantage of it, and provided that representation.

I wish our country had not devolved to the point where people like Maddow, Olberman, Hannity and Rush have such a following.

I think the real brilliance was in selling the idea that media can, and should, be about reflecting your political views. Somehow they managed to convince people that the solution to being dissatisfied with the quality of news coverage was not to seek out better news but to replace it with something that didn't even pretend to be complete, unbiased coverage. Instead of Edward R. Murrow, we have assholes shouting at each other. Not exactly a step forward, in my mind, but people have bought the idea that this is PROGRESS in the media.

 

[cybrsage]

The population of a nation eventually mirrors those they elect to rule them. We are now seeing the fruits of the decades of our government spending far more than it earns (the general population does that now too) and the government being highly partisan.

 

[Rainsford]

That is how I understand it. Off air, the guys are nice people you would grab a beer with...but Olberman is not. His off air personality is what you see on air.

I could see that for some of them, definitely. Some of them, not so much though. O'Reilly, for example, genuinely seems like a bully. Olberman is definitely another one.

 

[Rainsford]

The population of a nation eventually mirrors those they elect to rule them. We are now seeing the fruits of the decades of our government spending far more than it earns (the general population does that now too) and the government being highly partisan.

I think that could be backwards. It's tempting to absolve ourselves of responsibility, but I think our views and ideas shape the government rather than the other way around. If people didn't believe in something for nothing, how did anyone ever get elected by promising it, for example? If people REALLY wanted political cooperation, why did they start electing people who thought the other side was the enemy?

In my mind, we've got exactly the government and the political circus that we deserve.

 

[monovillage]

We get to see all the left-wing jackasses every day on NBC, CBS, ABC etc. Olberman was just in a saturated market.

 

[cybrsage]

I think that could be backwards. It's tempting to absolve ourselves of responsibility, but I think our views and ideas shape the government rather than the other way around. If people didn't believe in something for nothing, how did anyone ever get elected by promising it, for example? If people REALLY wanted political cooperation, why did they start electing people who thought the other side was the enemy?

In my mind, we've got exactly the government and the political circus that we deserve.

I think it is a positive feedback loop. We elect what we want, but are unwilling to do ourselves...then when we see it happening in those we are suppost to trust, we become emboldened and then start doing it ourselves...which then causes us to elect more people who do it...

 

[Rainsford]

I think it is a positive feedback loop. We elect what we want, but are unwilling to do ourselves...then when we see it happening in those we are suppost to trust, we become emboldened and then start doing it ourselves...which then causes us to elect more people who do it...

I can definitely see that being a big part of the problem.

 

[Hugo Drax]

The issue with him also was he would fail to show up for work and he did it even during key ratings events which technically invalidated his contract.

 

[thraashman]

And funny, he was still less of a dick and a better person than ... well pretty much anyone that's ever been on Fox News. Guess that just goes to show that the left is less willing to tolerate bad behavior than the right. Hell, the right champions that bad behavior in their mouthpieces.

 

[Craig234]

I think Olbermann was one of the better commentators on the air, with an honest and useful show. I disagree with some of the 'liberal' posters here who say he was 'useless'.

This does seem about issues of him being difficult off the air.

His show was the same basically from MSNBC, when he was hired to Current TV, as it was on Current TV. I haven't checked the ratings but they don't seem to be a problem.

 

[Craig234]

And funny, he was still less of a dick and a better person than ... well pretty much anyone that's ever been on Fox News. Guess that just goes to show that the left is less willing to tolerate bad behavior than the right. Hell, the right champions that bad behavior in their mouthpieces.

It's amazing, Fox has realized you can give poisonous lies to a pretty blonde women to read off a teleprompter and some people eat up the lies.

It's a bit like having the pretty models hold the beer in a commercial and guys then buy the beer, except it's propaganda on a political network.

 

[cybrsage]

It's amazing, Fox has realized you can give poisonous lies to a pretty blonde women to read off a teleprompter and some people eat up the lies.

It's a bit like having the pretty models hold the beer in a commercial and guys then buy the beer, except it's propaganda on a political network.

When given the choice of watching a pretty blonde woman (on fox) read lies or an ugly woman (on most other channels) read lies, which would you rather do?

They all lie, so you might as well watch a pretty woman do it.

 

[TalonStrike]

lol he gets fired where ever he goes.

 

[cybrsage]

lol he gets fired where ever he goes.

They found out Craig liked him and realized that made him a huge liability.

 

[marincounty]

Yeah, what a loser, a year into his 5year-50 million dollar contract getting fired. Only on Anandtech PN is a guy worth millions a loser.
I sort of liked him on MSNBC. Most of what he said was absolutely true, unlike Fox news and Rush. Maybe all of the right wing hate for him is because the right doesn't want to hear the truth?

 

[Rainsford]

When given the choice of watching a pretty blonde woman (on fox) read lies or an ugly woman (on most other channels) read lies, which would you rather do?

They all lie, so you might as well watch a pretty woman do it.

Convincing people of that was one of the best piece of political marketing I could imagine. Oh sure, everyone "lies" to some extent...either because they're honestly mistaken or because they're actually lying. But the clever trick was convincing people that everyone lies EQUALLY and that everything is a lie, so you might as well just pick the most attractive lie. To make sure nobody missed the point, some folks selling this message used attractive people so the lies weren't just intellectually appealing.