Keith Olbermann Implodes
by Eric Golub on November 16, 2010 at 5:01 PM
Some time a few decades ago, Rosie O’Donnell, Roseanne Barr, and Joy Behar had an angry, hefty three-some. Science has yet to determine which of these people played the role of the woman.
(Rachel Madcow did not participate because Maddow is downright feminine compared to the others, almost to the point of actually being female.)
Anyway, their rotund rendezvous produced a cauldron of male rage in the spawn of Keith Olbermann.
Just to recap, the worst excuse for a person in the world got suspended from MSNBC for making political contributions, a violation of company policy.
Liberals were quick to point out that Fox News does not have a similar policy, as if that was remotely relevant. Burger King has policies regarding the making of onion rings and McDonalds does not. So what?
As much as the left wants to make every negative occurrence in their miserable lives a product of conservative malfeasance, the Keith Olbermann imbroglio has nothing to do with conservatives or Republicans. In fact, it has nothing to do with politics.
Keith Olbermann is a left-wing anchorman on a left-wing network. NBC President Jeff Zucker is also on the left. The parent company General Electric is run by CEO and lover of Iran Jeffrey Immelt, another leftist. Olbermann is as sympatico to Immelt as Beck, O’Reilly, and Hannity are to Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch, only Olbermann has far fewer viewers and ratings.
This really is a case of a worker violating a policy. Personally, I think it is a stupid policy, but that is not his decision or mine. I think Mr. Olbermann should have every right to donate to whoever he pleases, but the company decides that and feel differently.
Where I would draw the line is if Olbermann were to interview somebody he has donated to or attack an interviewee running against somebody he has donated to. He could even get around this by fully disclosing his potential conflict of interest at the beginning of the interview. In the financial services industry for example, potential conflicts of interests are not illegal per se. They just have to be disclosed.
Olbermann threatened to go public with his version of events, but the head honcho at the network was prepared to fire him if he did. Olbermann backed down.
Liberals will insist that this is a non-story, because they will always say that when one of their own implodes. They will blame hateful right-wingers for focusing on the story when the right has nothing to do with this.
(If it was a conservative in this meltdown, the left would be howling with glee like Maddow on a full moon night.)
So why does any of this matter?
The issue is professionalism, in this case a lack of it.
Keith Olbermann has a lengthy history of unprofessional behavior. He now works for a network that is totally lacking in any semblance of professionalism. The people there belong to an ideology that takes pride in lacking any professionalism.
Take Olbermann (please…no, you take him).
He was very good as an ESPN announcer. He was funny. He did a good job with the highlights on Sportscenter. Yet in what became a sad tradition, he felt the need to light himself on fire. He remarked in one of his amateur hour tirades that “there was not a more godforsaken place on Earth than Bristol, Connecticut (ESPN’s headquarters).
He has always been a malcontent, despite achieving wealth and fame that most people never see.
Despite writing his ticket out of ESPN, he landed on his feet. His hateful attitude toward anybody who disagreed with him fit in perfectly at the culture of hate speech known as MSNBC.
(It is not the liberalism. It is the hatred. It is possible to be liberal without being hateful. MSNBC refuses to consider this.)
MSNBC does not even pretend to be an actual news network. It is simply liberal opinion all the time. Quality is replaced with shock value. The behavior of the “analysts” on election night was atrocious. They were like kids in junior high school engaging in rank-out contests to impress each other. The concept of treating elected officials they disagreed with in a dignified manner was lost on them.