Olby is the Bozo the Clown of journalism. If he's the future of journalism, then the future is not looking very bright.

Stelter's site ran an ad from MSNBC the other day. Nuff said.

Well, let's hope Olbermann is not this generation's Winchell because Winchell was probably the most influential and most powerful journalist/commentator in the history of the country.

Amazing influence.

I would like to know what type of checking or sourcing Olbermann's staff does with his news stories. It sure seems that they just rip-and-read whatever blog has that is critical of the Bush Administration and/or conservatives. Do they check sources? Make phone calls? Contact the people involved in the item?

Walter,

they just rip-and-read whatever blog has that is critical of the Bush Administration and/or conservatives. - YES

Do they check sources? - NO

Make phone calls? - NO

Contact the people involved in the item? - NO

A haunting, almost Apocalyptic message at a time in which Olbermann Watch.com is being attacked by a foreign and unknown combatant!!!

Offer anyone with a differing opinion than the Olbymonster? Nope. That's not journalism.

Brian Stelter got put in a corner and is now out in the open as a true "Olbyloon." While it would be fitting for him to graduate and May and go straight to MSNBC, I have a feeling he won't even land at the national level.

Notice how Olbermann refused to be interviewed for this article. I guess he knew it wouldn't be the usual ass-kissing fest and he had no interest in anything less than worship. Also, his agent, still trying to negotiate his contract has got to be terrifed he'll open his mouth again and insult someone else or get caught in yet another lie.

I also think that Keith Olbermann would never come on a cha with us ...

Me thinks the Walter Winchell comparison is darn acurate. Here's some bio trivia on Winchell:

His daughter, Walda, was mentally unbalanced and was the only person at his graveside when he died.
Winchell announced his retirement on February 5, 1969, citing the tragedy of his son Walter Jr.'s suicide as a major factor, while also noting the delicate health of his wife. Exactly one year later, she died at a Phoenix hospital while undergoing treatment for a heart condition.

Winchell's final two years were spent as a recluse at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, California. He died of prostate cancer at the age of 74.

Robert A. Heinlein coined the term "winchell" as a generic description for a politically active gossip columnist. His 1961 novel Stranger in a Strange Land features a major character who is a winchell.

Tommorow is Friday ... can we keep the depressing stuff to a minimum ? Those weird Cartoon Network people are definately frightening to the point of nightmare, so I do not know how I am even going to be able to sleep, either !

Winchell was also taken down from his high perch in the 1950s by one of Keith's current bete noirs, the New York Post (of course, back then The Post was almost as liberal as Olbermann is today, while Winchell had jumped on the anti-communist bandwagon, so that's a bit of a switch from 55 years ago).

with Winchell, it was the people around him who were mentally ill. With Olbermann, it's he himself. And okay, his seriously mentally ill Mom.

My point about Winchell was that he was not a journalist but a irresponsible politcal hack, a demagogue who used his position of influence to attack his enemies - real or imagined - and ultimately self-destructed in spectacular fashion.

Consider it a prediction.

Robert,

Olberman is well on the way to self destructing. He is already a laughing stock amoung most perfessional joutnalists.

Countdown is as accurate as anything on Faux news.

My point about Hannity was that he is not a journalist but a irresponsible politcal hack, a demagogue who used his position of influence to attack his enemies - real or imagined - and ultimately self-destructed in spectacular fashion.

Uh, Hannity is a self-described conservative who is a "commentator" not a "journalist". His show both on radio and TV is to comment his opinion on issues from a conservative point of view. None of this is a secret to the audience.

Keith Olbermann calls himself objective and a journalist, neither of which applies with any degree of accuracy. He and his show are an insult and affront to everyone's intelligence, especially his audience - for those too unwitting and ignorant to understand this guy's got serious personal demons.

Laughable really.

I found the article very interesting and enlightening. I liked Keith in the past, but he has rubbed me the wrong way the last few years. It's not that I disagree with him, because I don't always disagree with him, but I object to how we plays loose with facts, refuses to ever hear a dissenting opinion but holds himself out as a hard-news, objective, commentator.

The piece is enlightening because it shows biases. Brian Stelter thinks KO's ratings are higher, because of his name recognition. Huh? No explanation, no details, just a general comment with no facts to support it (sounds like a KO special comment.) Give me a break.

If the future of news is the childish "worst person in the world" attacks and puppet theater, I would just as soon go back to the old news.

Countdown may be part of new media, but it represents the very worst of it.

WASHINGTON - Iraqi leaders will be hard pressed to achieve sustained political reconciliation in the next 12 to 18 months, a collaborative report by 16 U.S. spy agencies says, raising uncertainty about the prospect for withdrawing American troops that are shoring up the government.

PARIS - A panel of international scientists predicted Friday that global warming will continue for centuries no matter how much people control pollution, in a bleak report that blamed humans for killer heat waves, devastating droughts and stronger storms.

War going poorly, Global Warming real, Olbermann keeps issuing Special Comments to his audience...NeoCons just can't catch a break!

I'm guessing Gray Matter, that the war going poorly and global warming must mean that your side is catching all the breaks... niiiiice.

Keep rooting for a US failure and for global warming to get worse! It must suck to be you :)

Did anyone see Chuck Norris standing in for Hannitylast week? HA HA.

Stupid f---ing Republicans: You vote for full-of-shit actors and see a filmography of nationalist/macho B-movie roles as a valid resume as a political commentator/journalist. You should really try reality - it actually works.

"You vote for full-of-shit actors"

Like Ahhhhnold in the most Democratic State of the union,
Shaddup Grissle boy!

(Good to have you back)

I'm sure you full-of-shit democrats will line up to vote for that failed comedy writer/radio host Al Franken for US Senate. You should really try reality - it actually works.

We like his Stuart Smalley skits....
Maybe he can resurrect the character in front of the state senate for motivation.

Sir Loin writes "Did anyone see Chuck Norris standing in for Hannitylast week? HA HA.

Stupid f---ing Republicans: You vote for full-of-shit actors and see a filmography of nationalist/macho B-movie roles as a valid resume as a political commentator/journalist. You should really try reality - it actually works."

Actually, neither Hannity or his audience see him as a jounalist.

And Sir Loin, if former Saturday Night Live writers, tv sports casters, comics, and weather girls can morph into political commentators, surely there's hope for Norris...in the "Land of Opportunity".

I would not support Franken. His brain is excruciatingly slow and his opinion is clearly in thrall to Joe Biden and the mercenary DLC. I am happy, however, that his political aspirations have caused him to leave AirAmerica and that Thom Hartman, an articulate and knowledgable patriot, will be taking his place on the airwaves.

Outside of Zelda Gilroy from Dobie Gillis, has there even been a liberal Democrat actor/actress who's managed to get elected to office in recent years (and Shelia Kuehl doing it in Santa Monica isn't exactly battling against a tough crowd of non-believers).

Given the way Olbermann's show has gone over the past few years, and especially with the "Special Comments" since last fall, it will be interesting to see if any shareholders attend the GE Stockholders meeting on April 26 with audio/video of some of Keith's greatest hits of the past year, the same way Charlton Heston shamed the Time-Warner board of directors a decade ago by reading out the lyrics to Body Count's "Cop Killer" during their shareholders' meeting. If nothing else, it would definitely enliven the proceedings.

So John sees the Republican trend of electing entertainment personalities (Reagan, Gopher, Sonny Bono, Arnold, Fred Thompson, ...) as a plus for his party? I would imagine the Democrats are quite proud of their record of passing over such pretenders in bids for public office . ....but we still hear you all bitch about the "liberal Hollywood elite". Go figure.

So John sees the Republican trend of electing entertainment personalities (Reagan, Gopher, Sonny Bono, Arnold, Fred Thompson, ...) as a plus for his party? I would imagine the Democrats are quite proud of their record of passing over such pretenders in bids for public office . ....but we still hear you all bitch about the "liberal Hollywood elite". Go figure.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at February 2, 2007 2:14 PM

Bet Gopher would just love being equated with "Hollywood elite".

...so you're saying that your side is left with the "conservative Hollywood dregs"?

Point of clarification - Fred Thompson was a politician before he was an actor. In fact, he was an assistant U.S. attorney and co-counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee in the 1970's.

His acting career didn't start until the mid-1980's, and even then it was mostly bit parts or uncredited roles. (Hunt For Red October being the most famously remembered one.)

...so you're saying that your side is left with the "conservative Hollywood dregs"?

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at February 2, 2007 2:43 PM

Aren't they all dregs in your book? Aren't you the one who opened this scintillating topic and who are essentially making a point that assumes actors are too dumb to be pols in the first place?

The future of journalism? Shouldn't they be asking instead if Keith even has a future at MSNBC?

It is still hard to comprehend why this aging boomer sportscaster insists on pretending to be a legitimate journalist.

On a somewhat related topic, is he still dating a woman one-third his age? Maybe that explains his Walter Mitty world of journalism.

***sigh*** Keith Olbermann is the future of American journalism. The only thing is ... he is what Bill O' Reilly started long ago --- way long b4 Keith Olbermann was able to present the news and humorously tinted slander, Bill O' RFeilly was out there attacking making a scene over lots of other people and issues !!!

"pretending to be a legitimate journalist"

The show appears to consist (I watch semi-regularly) of him reading critical material taken from bloggers or websites. And when that material is later shown to be inaccurate or in error, he apparently never corrects his early reports.

Look, I don't care whether he comes from the left or the right of the center or wherever on the politcal specrum, this does not constitute a "news show" by any definition of that term.

This is what irks a number of critics. Or, at least me. That this is somehow legitimate journalism. After all, its actually been praised as "the future of news journalism" by several media critics.

No thanks.

Bring back Dan Rather.

I'll speak slowly so the truly dim-witted among you can understand. Sean Hannity proclaims quite often that he is , yes, a trumpeter for Conservativism and proud of it. He is currently running what he calls the " Stop Hillary Express." The guy is a right winger. He admits it. He doesn't pretend to be otherwise.
Okay, now, very slowly for the likes of sirloin and mike, Keith Olbermann pretends to be a bona-fide newsman. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see that is blatant hypocrisy. When you compare Olby to a Fox Right-winger, you find flip sides of the same coin. The only real difference is OlbyWinchell doesn't have the gonads to admit it.

Yes, that no one has noticed is often the case with Bushkill's assertions.

But crunch all you want. He'll make more.

Posted by: Cecelia at February 2, 2007 12:32 PM

Wonder if Cecilia has the integrity to admit she's wrong on global warming.If not, please show YOUR EVIDENCE OF INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR YOUR VIEWS.

PARIS, Feb. 2 - In a bleak and powerful assessment of the future of the planet, the leading international network of climate change scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is "unequivocal" and that human activity is the main driver, "very likely" causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.

In its fourth assessment of global warming, released Friday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change used its strongest language yet in drawing a link between human activity and recent warming.

They said the world is already committed to centuries of warming, shifting weather patterns and rising seas, resulting from the buildup of gases in the atmosphere that trap heat. But the warming can be substantially blunted by prompt action, the panel of scientists said in a report released here today.

The report summarized the fourth assessment since 1990 by the group, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of the United Nations, sizing up the causes and consequences of climate change. But it is the first in which the group asserts with near certainty " more than 90 percent confidence " that carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases from human activities have been the main causes of warming since 1950.

In its last report, in 2001, the panel, consisting of hundreds of scientists and reviewers, put the confidence level at between 66 and 90 percent. Both reports are online at http://www.ipcc.ch.

If carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere reach twice their pre-industrial levels, the report said, the global climate will probably warm by 3.5 to 8 degrees. But there would be more than a 1-in-10 chance of much greater warming, a situation many earth scientists say poses an unacceptable risk.

Many energy and environment experts see such a doubling as a foregone conclusion sometime after midcentury unless there is a prompt and sustained shift away from the 20th-century pattern of unfettered burning of coal and oil, the main sources of carbon dioxide, and an aggressive quest for expanded and improved nonpolluting energy options.

Even an increased level of warming that falls in the middle of the group's range of projections would likely cause significant stress to ecosystems and alter longstanding climate patterns that shape water supplies and agricultural production, according to many climate experts and biologists.

While the new report projected a modest rise in seas by 2100 "between 7 and 23 inches " it also concluded that seas would continue to rise, and crowded coasts retreat, for at least 1,000 years to come. By comparison, seas rose about 6 to 9 inches in the 20th century.

Cecilia wants out of the global warming debate.I would too if I had her views.

It's usually a matter of mere minutes when, unable to defend the infamous, deplorable one, the OlbyPologists whip out O'Rushitty. Anything to divert.

"Keith Olbermann pretends to be a bona-fide newsman. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see that is blatant hypocrisy"

Good luck getting that message across.

When MSNBC had Phil Donahue in that time slot, I didn't give a hoot about him giving his opinions or his views on the program. He was doing an opinion show. He didn't pretend to be a news anchor doing a news show.

And he wasn't being praised by media critics as being the "future of the news" either.

If Olbermann and MSNBC would stop this baloney that he's a news anchor doing a news show, I'd never visit here to complain ever again.

Pretty simple really.

We are waiting for Keith, Johnny Dollar, not your infantile and inaccurate criticisms of him.

Hey Ohboy, don't you ever get tired of the same lame lines day in and day out ?

"Hey Ohboy, don't you ever get tired of the same lame lines day in and day out ?"

I await your intellectual demolition of my "lame lines".

Well???......

And if you can, try to respond without engaging in ad hominem attacks or name calling.

I'm asking alot, but I know you're up to the task.

A "newscast" is what they will claim
NBC should cower in shame
Why don't they concede
Keith's all lift and read
A jocksniffer without any game

So John sees the Republican trend of electing entertainment personalities (Reagan, Gopher, Sonny Bono, Arnold, Fred Thompson, ...) as a plus for his party? I would imagine the Democrats are quite proud of their record of passing over such pretenders in bids for public office . ....but we still hear you all bitch about the "liberal Hollywood elite". Go figure.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at February 2, 2007 2:14 PM

Well, thanks for playing, Sir Loin, and we have some lovely parting gifts, but the question was "Has there been any other liberal actor/actress besides Shelia Kuehl in recent memory elected to political office?" As far as I can tell the answer is "no", either (in rare cases) because they've been rejected by the voters, but more often than not, because they would rather spout off and tell people how the world should work while not risking their film career incomes by giving those up for a lower-paying political office, or risking actually having to defend their beleifs in a public forum where access and questions aren't controlled by public relations firms and studio handlers (we'll see how Al Franken does in 2008, or if Rob Reiner or Alec Baldwin will ever live up to their threats to run for political office).

Cecilia wants out of the global warming debate.I would too if I had her views.

Posted by: Bushkill Falls, Pa at February 2, 2007 7:44 PM

My bad, I thought we were discussing hollywood actors turned pols. Evidently it was really a global warming debate. That's an easy mistake to make around here.

One must remember, as well, that Dick Cheney is synonymous with all universal energy. The "Chi", as I call him, is in and around and of all things. You can be discussing eyeliner but it's still truly of and around and about the omniscient Chi.

"It's usually a matter of mere minutes when, unable to defend the infamous, deplorable one, the OlbyPologists whip out O'Rushitty. Anything to divert"

As if you are above the same tactic.