LOL!!! Great fiction writing.

It's Bullshit. This person admits to starting a fake blog about her "encounter."

Go down to the comments section.

http://www.radaronline.com/features/2006/12/olbermann.php

That's one of the funniest damn things i've read in awhile.

"He was helping an elderly blind woman cross the street..."

Umm, this IS satire. Right?

Love it! I wouldn't even doubt it if the whacko/alleged romeo Keith wrote it himself. He's just twisted enough to think that a impromptu blog like that would repair the damage done by the writing of his real regretting conquests. Now going to see if "ididntevenknowhewasinme.com" is taken to start my own response blog.

PS- Kudos J$. The legwork and research you do to find this krud is commendable. Keep exposing!

It wasn't me, it was Mr Cox. But I'm sure he appreciates the kudos.

I see KO's PR agent is hard at work again.

This isn't even good fiction writing:

"Several days later, with many tears shed by both, we were forced by work and social obligations to bid farewell to the unfettered pleasures of the boudoir, which we’d enjoyed with such animal abandon, and reenter the world."

Maybe Emily Zola is a former writer for Sex and the City? If I were Ems, I'd be embarrassed not only for exposing her obvious shortcomings as a writer, but for admitting to a liason with a creep like Orange Boy. She could have at least provided some interesting factoid such as whether or not he glows in the dark with his orange tinted fake and bake tan.

This is too good to be true. It looks like written by a soap opera script-writer. My guess this could be written by his girl-friend employee. KO mentioned one time on his show that he hates dogs for they are smelly and dirty. However, I do agree that KO will do something like this to please a woman. We all know why.

I can tell something is going on. Is the karmabites thing getting ugly? KO is doing this, same as disclosing his live-in girl-friend when New York Post disclosed those emails between KO and karmabites.

Thought you guys would appreciate these ratings numbers... straight from Nielson looking at percentage change of viewershipfor November from 05 to 06.

Primetime Mon-Fri (Overall Viewership)
--------------------------------------

FNC -17%
MSNBC +47%

Primetime Mon-Fri (25-54 Viewership)
------------------------------------

FNC +12%
MSNBC +70%

8PM Olbermann vs. O'Reilly (Overall)
------------------------------------

O'Reilly -18%
Olbermann +54

8PM Olbermann vs. O'Reilly (25-54)
----------------------------------

O'Reilly 0% (no change)
Olbermann +76%

And just in case you thought I was making these up...

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/original/nov06vs05.pdf

Interesting read. Good to see people are realizing what a sham of an operation FNC is.

James,

How come you didn't provide any raw numbers, hmmm? Because the numbers would have shown that instead of MSLSD's numbers being extremely shitty, they are now merely shitty, while Fox's numbers continue to grind MSLSD into the ground by a 2x and 3x margin on a nightly basis.

hank, hank, hank.

I'm not denying FNC is still getting more viewers total. But, you're ingnoring the TREND, friend. It's the TREND. People are turning the channel. MSNBC's viewership is growing a hell of a lot faster than FNC's (which, in some cases is declining).

You can look at totals all you want. Enjoy them. But, you can't argue that the pendulum is swinging away from FOX and towards MSNBC.

And of course, those are the numbers that inflate Krazy Keith's audience--nonstandard ratings that are not used by any other network or by advertisers. And just by coincidence, they're the ones used by TVN. Hmmm.

James,

I took a moment to look at the link was not surprised to find it was the typically shoddy work that's usually served up by TVNewser. I will have more in a post a little later.

johnny said, "those are the numbers that inflate Krazy Keith's audience"

- Johnny, you seem confused... numbers don't MAKE people watch. Numbers MEAN people ARE watching.

Robert said, "typically shoddy work that's usually served up by TVNewser"

- I love how numbers you don't agree with are just dismissed outright. Oh, well. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything. You couldn't be convinced the sky is blue if you thought it was green.

To use a baseball analogy, if Bob Uecker (MSNBC) is batting .200 and has a few good games, his avergae goes to, say, .225. If Joe DiMaggio (FOX) is hitting .350 and cools down a bit, his average goes to .325.

The point is, MSNBC had nowhere to go but up, while FOX couldn't have been any more dominant than they were. DiMaggio is still far and away the better player, and Uecker may have improved a little, but by no means would you put the two in the same class.

Olbermann has insulted every employer he's ever had, makes an absolute fool of himself every time he attacks O'Reilly, and has easily topped out in terms of viewers because his format only is entertaining to one crowd: The Extreme Left. Do you honestly think that Olbermann will be able to attract moderates or conservatives by offering the same dribble from the same guests night after night?

If Abrams (who apparently has nothing to do with MSNBC's improvement) is satisfied with 3rd or 4th place almost every night, then give Olbermann all the money he wants, but when all is said and done, I would think Brian Williams, Tim Russert or someone with the integrity of NBC News in mind at the top will do the right thing to protect it by not allowing Olbermann to work without checks and balances what is presented as a news program.

RedState, your analagy doesn't fit. A baseball hitter could get hot for a few games over a week or so, yes. But, we're talking a trend that's a year-long in the making. Mendoza may have had an extra hit here or there... but, that's a far cry from putting together a year long improvement trend like MSNBC is doing. Face it, people are running from FNC.

Actually, it does fit. It takes alot to move a lifetime average 25 points. FOX is still dominating MSNBC, O'Reilly still beats Olbermann in after-midnight repeats and beats him 3-to-1 on a nightly basis live.

The trend for MSNBC has topped out. If you honestly think they will continue to move up at this clip and FOX will move down at the same clip, you're dilusional.

RedState said, "If you honestly think they will continue to move up at this clip and FOX will move down at the same clip, you're dilusional."

- Whatever. This is exactly what you and your ilk were saying when Olbermann's viewers were at 200k... then at 250k... then at 300k... and on and on. You just ignore reality. Enjoy your oblivious existence.

Here's reality: O'Reilly averages over two million viewers a night, and Olbermann averages under 700,000.

How is that oblivious, exactly?

Because... O'Reilly used to be close to 3 million... and KO used to be around 200k. See, sunshin??? T-R-E-N-D-S. How you can't grasp that is beyond understanding.

So, what, you're saying that Olbermann will continue a 70% increase and O'Reilly will continue to drop 17% when this topic is broached in November of 2007? If that's the case, Olbermann will have 1.25 million viewers per night next year, and O'Reilly will have about 1.7 million viewers.

OK, I'll be happy to revisit this in a year. I think you'll see that Olbermann will stay at around 700,000 and O'Reilly will still be at two million or so in the BEST CASE scenario for "you and your ilk."

Deal! I'll see you when the gap is closed even further!

So just out of curiosity, do you think that Olbermann's approach night-after-night is acceptable journalism? Never presenting both sides of a debate (or at least trying to once in awhile), lying about having no political affiliation and playing fast and loose with the facts (as documented on this site thousands of times)? If that's your idea of integrity, then you truly are delusional...Sunshine.

Back to the original topic.

This is apparently an attempt by a KO fan to dismiss Karmabites1's blog by showing that anyone can post a blog. But if we're to take it seriously, Emily reinforces KB's story that he exchanges emails with fans and ends up with a sex partner. Not very redeeming, is it? However, she does stress his generosity. Were any STDs among his many gifts? Gotta wonder.

Back to the original topic.

This is apparently an attempt by a KO fan to dismiss Karmabites1's blog by showing that anyone can post a blog. But if we're to take it seriously, Emily reinforces KB's story that he exchanges emails with fans and ends up with a sex partner. Not very redeeming, is it? However, she does stress his generosity. Were any STDs among his many gifts? Gotta wonder.

She claims she ate a puppy he sent her. Well I don't know about eating a dog but we all know she f---ed one if she slept with Olbermann.

I am thinking this is a joke teasing those lady fans who are "in love" with him. Did anyone notice the last word, is the only one, is in italic "delicious".

Did Katie get any tulips and a puppy?

Patience, folks, patience. We shall see in the long run how many viewers Olbermann retains. A one or two ratings period increases/decreases doesn't make a "trend." I've worked long enough in television to know that a 500,000 increase in nationwide viewership doesn't even rate a major victory. It may be a start for MSNBC but let's see if it is sustainable or not in the long run. I, for one, don't see it as any indication of KO & MSNBC overtaking O'Reilly & Fox anytime in the near future.

the Olybloons are unique in their delusions. Right now I'm fighting a battle in the Radar article comments thread where they are insisting that he never admitted to screwing a fan and that he didn't insult Dan Abrams in that interview, although every other media blog, including ICN, TVN, and FTVLive, not to mention Huffington Post, thinks he did too. Only in their unique and sheltered universe was that interview not an insult to Abrams. Then again they seem to think that there is one and only one person who doesn't like Olbermann and that they just use a variety of names to post here and elsewhere about what an ass he is. Never mind that Bob has reported how this site is the number one Olbermann-related site on the internet, I guess it's only one of us posting here! Seriously, you cannot make up the delusion of his fans, they're even crazier than he is!

I can't believe some people are actually taking this seriously. This is a perfectly satirical parody of a female Olbyloon.

And I can't believe the Olbyloons refuse to realize that Olbermann was absolutely insulting Dan Abrams in that Radar interview.

James wrote "we're talking a trend that's a year-long in the making"

Countdown's ratings ARE up and I have reported on that here for the past couple of months. That's not the issue that we cover her at Olbermann Watch. What we focus on is the constant attempt by the media, blue blogs and OlbyLoons to cherry-pick the data, ignore any contrarian information and see patterns where none exist.

In this case, you say that there is a year-long trend because of a comparison from some unidentified form of monthly ratings between 2005 and 2006. In other words, from TWO datapoints you claim there is a year-long trends. You then attempt to extrapolate this "trend" in perpetuity and draw conclusions. Newsflash Einstein, you can't do trend analysis from TWO frickin' datapoints and then do projections to reach meaningful conclusions.

During that same year-long period Keith's audience has ebbed and flowed. If you took two other datapoints from the same period you will find "trends" where Keith's ratings have been up more than the year-on-year data and less and, in some cases, DOWN.

Again, the issue OlbyWatch cares about is not Keith's ACTUAL ratings (they HAVE grown over the past two years) but the constant manipulation and fabrications from the media, the blue blogs and the OlbyLoons.

In case you missed it, the issue I had with the link provided to TVN is in the context of his flip-flopping between "Live" and "Live Plus" data. I am not going to bother looking into (maybe someone else can) but my suspicion is that he Brian is comparing Live data from 2005 to Live Plus data from 2006 which has the effect of artificially inflating ALL of the ratings data but MORE for Keith becuase a greater percentage of his audience is "younger" viewers who are more likely to "time-shift" their viewing with a DVR (i.e. Tivo). The alternative is just as bad. That he using the Live data for 2006 even though he has been using the Live Plus data since 1Q06. I said this was typically sloppy because Brian has a track record of manufacturing conclusions from whatever data best suits his editorial objective without explaining to readers what he is doing with the data and why.