Cable host Keith Olbermann and news channel MSNBC abruptly parted ways Friday night, as the network announced that his contract had ended and the last installment of his show would air that evening. The surprise announcement strips MSNBC of its most-watched evening anchor after an increasingly tempestuous relationship, coming less than three months after the network briefly suspended the fiery host.
But why, given his high ratings which equals money to NBC?
We already know that MSNBC president Phil Griffin had been gunning for Olbermann for some time now. MSNBC was reportedly close to firing Olbermann on several occasions. Recall that during the ridiculous flap over Olbermann’s political donations, in which he responded to his suspension with a show of public defiance, Griffin flatly told Olbermann’s representative: “We are at war.”
Personal differences trumps money in a business where news has become profitable reality show entertainment? Really? It couldn’t possibly be for this reason:
“He’s been very problematic,” an NBCU source told Deadline about Comcast’s attitude to Olbermann. Officially, the Comcast takeover is next week. But word has been circulating for months now that the new owners have wanted to “tinker” with MSNBC and had many changes in store, including a right turn for the left-wing cable channel.
Do we really need another Fox News?
I see the Olberman widows are still crying and making excuses to shut the comments all the people who see them for who he is make at you. I know is kinda hard to mourn in that environment.
#76 I don’t reember me looking for anything for you to point out that I got nothing.
I’ll give you this, KO is different from GB: the latter is a crying clown, the former is a screaming diva. The latter bsae his arguments on “history”, the former (as per your word) on facts.
Yet, with even those differences I concede you, I can describe them both with one word: shill
So much for the threat of the left wing liberal press. When its very life is always, ALWAYS, hanging in the balance, over how it offends huge corporate interests. Brain dead chattering morons, like Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, continue to spew their nonsense. Because the big money loves their knack of putting everyone to sleep, or totally confusing the issue with GOP rhetoric. Why don’t these networks just pee into our brains, and call it Manna from heaven?
Some day, hopefully not too distantly, we’ll be looking back on all this crap with the same enlightened hindsight as McCarthyism and the Red Channel scare years. You know? Those early Ronald Reagan years.
Every year, it makes me happier and happier that I don’t have cable or dish. Because I don’t have to pay either Comcast or for Fox News and MSNBC. Why pay to be lied to, when you can get far more truth, from Blogs like this? And for far less cost? Take the money you waste for one month of cable, and send it to Dvorak. It’s money far better spent.
Glenn–its called infotainment for a reason. Silly “anti-tv” snobbery. So 1970.
Pedro for brains–can’t you read what even you write? You equate “history” in quotes because you even see it for the made up BS that it is, with facts.
Yes, Beck and Olbermann are as similar as BS versus facts.
Kinda the same as you versus your donkey.
#45 MikeN:
“Didn’t Obama say that at some point you just have enough money, and the rest should go to the government so they can spread the wealth around?”
Actually, I think it was Jesus.
= = = = = = = = = = = =
# 81 pedro said:
“I see the Olberman widows are still crying and making excuses to shut the comments all the people who see them for who he is make at you.”
OMG, what language is that?!
pedro, I’ll go along with that description of Beck and “history.” Beck’s “history” has been roundly debunked by real historians, so putting the word in quotes is completely appropriate. If you find anyone who can challenge Olbermann’s facts, let me know.
bobbo: the difference between having a point of view and being a partisan…a partisan always blames everything on his opposition.
#84 I said it was Oleo’s word that KO used facts. I don’t think so. Maybe bent facts, if any.
But keep playing the widow part.Too bad you and Oleo are the kind that get stuck in the denial phase never to go past it.
It’s bad for us that have to suffer your denial.
pedro, so you don’t really know about Olbermann. Yet you equate him with a lunatic.
Olbermann, being a trained and experienced journalist, checks his facts and gets them right. Then he lays opinions on top of a solid foundation…like a real opinion journalist will do.
Beck, who has no degree or training of any sort, has stated that he does not check facts while a guest on The View. He’s said numerous times on-air that he’s a rodeo clown. Every time he’s challenged on something by a real journalist, such as with Meredith Vieira recently, he pretends his entire show is a big joke.
You just keep on with your partisan sniping.
#88 Quite an effort to show your denial. Poor gullible hobbit. Yet like any hobbit, such a entertaining being.
pedro, you’re a troll.
#90 The same case could be made against you. Your denial is borderline trolling.
I don’t know why that tickles me so: Pedro for Brains. Ha, ha, hee, hee.
thanks for giving the quote again Olo–copied and stored this time because you caught Pedro and his partisan ilk just so.
“Point of view” vs “Partisan” not bias vs dogma? The dynamic is the same but your version has more poetry to it I think.
….the difference between having a bias and being dogmatic…a dog always blames everything on his opposition. Needs a little work–but I’ll get it.
That’s all I could find. I go through so many words in my life that I forget what I’ve written just weeks ago. Whatever it was came to me after watching the Stewart/O’Reilly interview.
November was Kirchoff’s Law. This month is solar power.
#92 Dogma is what people in denial have. Like religious people & and those that think KO is not the lefty loon GB.
Don’t know why your defense of KO reminds me of jehova’s witness discussing with a doctor why they won’t allow a blood transfusion to their relatives.