I told all of our guys, shut up, tone it down, make your argument intellectually. You don’t have to do it with bombast. I hope the other side does that.
It would be really nice if the ramblings of crazy people didn’t in any way resemble how we talk to each other on TV. Let’s at least make troubled individuals easier to spot.
I never learned anything while I was talking. So what they are – are preachers – preachers of their opinion. They’re telling you what they know. They’re not learning. There’s no learning experience from either of those programs… . I want to learn.
On Fox, the news exists in order to generate controversy. And controversy exists in order to generate resentment. And the resentment is what generates ratings. So this is my most concise idea about Fox: we should consider it “resentment news.” I think that’s the genre in which it trades…
This issue of Keith Olbermann being suspended from MSNBC for political donations is well, dumb. In our 21st century society rules such as the one that got him suspended are archaic. It reminds me of NPR’s ban on its employees from attending the Rally to Restore Sanity.
Journalists are supposed to be neutral, yes. I do understand the concept of journalistic integrity, but in almost no instance is an individual whose life and career concerns covering politics in this country going to be politically neutral. There’s a difference between attempting to be subjective in a professional capacity and having an individual opinion.
I think it’s more disingenuous to try and hide journalists’s personal opinions under the guise of neutrality, because if one knows where they stand as an individual, the informed reader or viewer can take that into account instead of just assuming they’re some sort of mythical 100% subjective human being. The best of the best can probably pull off subjectivity pretty well, but for the average Joe Journalist, their biases are going to leak in whether they intend them to or not.
Exactly. I’m no huge fan of Olbermann, but this myth that journalists are unemotional robots, devoid of opinions, feelings, and bias is laughable. Better to know exactly who someone is rather than the outdated, disingenuous idea that someone writing an article or performing a broadcast is a blank slate with zero baggage.
In this case, would MSNBC have been less harsh on Keith if he had disclosed it beforehand? I would hope so. If the problem here is simply disclosure, then I agree with the move. It’s a bit silly though, since anyone with half a brain realizes Keith leans way to the left, and not forward as MSNBC’s new motto would imply.
Page 1 of 2