Olbermann Announces Departure

[Pete]

Olbermann's style doesn't sell. No matter who else Msnbc has and how well liked they are, Msnbc has been the channel of Olbermann for years. He was the face of the network.

Honestly, with him gone, it gives Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell a chance to shine. Give it a few months, I think Msnbc will be much better off than they were with Olbermann front and center.

O'Donnell is very intelligent and he very much understands the system and the country. I think if some of you righties gave his show a chance, you'd be surprised. I've always liked Larry but I thought his show was going to be another Olbermann/Schultz/Matthews cluster####. Every day, his show is a surprise. It's actually quite good. More than once, he broke away from Ed/Matthews/Olbermann/Maddow on the issues.

Rachel Maddow is going to become the face of Msnbc. She's definitely far-left but she's much classier than Olbermann and she's very charismatic.

Cenk Uygur is looking destined for his own Msnbc show.

Thomas Roberts is an excellent addition to Msnbc. I absolutely love Tamron Hall and Chris Jansing. Morning Joe is a very good show (though I much prefer to watch Robin Meade).

Long term, getting rid of Olbermann is going to help Msnbc. Overthrow FOX, doubt it. But I think the ratings will go up.

Olbermann's style is classic lefty. You have seen the parade of frothing at the mouth liberals on Maher right? Air Amerika? Mathews? Randi Rhodes? Stuart Smalley? Beyhar? Every liberal media outlet gears up with great joy at the enlightenment they are about to dish out and then fizzles because it is at its core vitriolic nastiness. Did you see Maddow on Maher? The only differences between her and Olbermann is she smiles while being condescending and nasty and she didn't go to Cornell.

 

[DipStick]

Olbermann's style is classic lefty. You have seen the parade of frothing at the mouth liberals on Maher right? Air Amerika? Mathews? Randi Rhodes? Stuart Smalley? Beyhar? Every liberal media outlet gears up with great joy at the enlightenment they are about to dish out and then fizzles because it is at its core vapid nastiness. Did you see Maddow on Maher? The only differences between her and Olbermann is she smiles while being condescending and nasty and she didn't go to Cornell.

I disagree. The lefties who have gotten airtime are like that (but honestly, so are Limbaugh and Beck). That style is NOT popular with the left and that's why their shows go down the tubes.

I'll tell you who the most popular lefties are right now: Maddow, Cenk Uygur, Alyona Minkovski, O'Donnell and Stephanie Miller (who I've never seen or watched). Olbermann's popular with a lot of people on the left, but he's equally unpopular as well. A lot of liberals see him as polarizing, and damaging to our cause (as are Ed Schultz and Rhandi Rhodes).

 

[MMDad]

Rachel Maddow is going to become the face of Msnbc. She's definitely far-left but she's much classier than Olbermann and she's very charismatic.

She's retarded. She says that you can't shoot down missiles with missiles any more than you can shoot bullets with bullets. Since we've been doing both of those things for decades, she is either too stupid to learn the truth before opening her yammerhole, or she is banking on idiots in her audience being too stupid to know the truth. Or both.

Wait a minute. You watch her, don't you Andi? Damn, you fit that mold to a tee!

 

[Pete]

I disagree. The lefties who have gotten airtime are like that (but honestly, so are Limbaugh and Beck). That style is NOT popular with the .

Dude, these people are on lefty shows. The lefties choose who they put on, the lefties run it! These are the people the lefties want to champion their cause or you would have never heard of them before.

Your argument about Limbaugh and Beck is not relevant as they are not hurting for ratings.

 

[Tilted]

The few times I tried, I found Olbermann to be unwatchable. However, it's hard to deny that he helped transform MSNBC into a profitable cable channel and has been a valuable asset to it over the last 5 or so years. It's still not among NBC Universal's most valuable or profitable cable assets (those would be the USA Network and CNBC), but it is a much more significant asset than it used to be and has done fairly well from a business perspective.

People like to compare its ratings to that of FNC, but that's naturally a tough comparison for MSNBC (and CNN). FNC benefits from a significant lack of comparable (or, at least, substitutable) supply. MSNBC has to compete with CNN and, to some extent, the broadcast networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) when it comes to appealing to a largely left-leaning TV audience. On the other hand, FNC doesn't have nearly as much competition when it comes to appealing to a largely right-leaning TV audience. FNC should pummel MSNBC in ratings, just as a single company making cherry pies should pummel each of 5 different companies, considered individually, making blueberry pies, in terms of sales volume. If you compare FNC's ratings to those of the respective broadcast network's evening news programs, it doesn't crush them.

The issue with Olbermann seems to have been his less-than-award-winning personality (as an employee) and his authority defying nature. Eventually and apparently, those characteristics wore thin and overcame his value as an on air personality.

Olbermann Split Came After Years of Tension

 

[Pushrod]

Tilted, I thought that FNC's ratings beat the other cable news networks combined?

CHART OF THE DAY: How Fox Conquered Cable News

Okay, this latest ratings chart has FNC with about 50% of the ratings share compared to the others, so it seems you are correct Tilted.

 

[Tilted]

Tilted, I thought that FNC's ratings beat the other cable news networks combined?

CHART OF THE DAY: How Fox Conquered Cable News

Okay, this latest ratings chart has FNC with about 50% of the ratings share compared to the others, so it seems you are correct Tilted.

Yes, but that doesn't include the broadcast networks - their ratings are better than FNC's (i.e. for their evening news programming - comparing the prime time line-ups (i.e. 8pm - 11pm) wouldn't even be fair, as the networks usually aren't programming news then, and they'd blow FNC away).

FNC doesn't compete with the broadcast networks to the degree that CNN and MSNBC do, as they appeal to a somewhat different audience (as considered ideologically). FNC dominates its marketplace, in large part, because it's the only meaningful player in it.

 

[Gilligan]

FNC doesn't compete with the broadcast networks to the degree that CNN and MSNBC do, as they appeal to a somewhat different audience (as considered ideologically). FNC dominates its marketplace, in large part, because it's the only meaningful player in it.

Have you seen the actual viewer demographic numbers recently? I don't have the link readily to hand, but I remember being somewhat surprised by the number of people who watch that categorized themselves as Dems and independents. Surprised because I had previously taken at face value the oft-repeated canard that 'only conservatives watch Fox News'; I didn't really care whether that was true or not, so I never looked in to it.

 

[Larry Gude]

. MSNBC has to compete with CNN and, to some extent, the broadcast networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) when it comes to appealing to a largely left-leaning TV audience. On the other hand, FNC doesn't have nearly as much competition when it comes to appealing to a largely right-leaning TV audience.

See, there it is. Left wing cable TV and radio has a VERY limited audience. Why compete there? I sit there and watch these people and it's like, do they simply have no clue how big the audience is out there for UN-biased commentary that actually takes both sides to task, makes intelligent argument, intelligent debate?

Of the 50-60% who vote, obviously far less than that actually stay engaged. So, there is 40-50% of adults who don't even watch stuff be it left or right and another 30% or so that are begging to be treated with at least a modicum of intelligence so, the largest market, by far, is out there, waiting to be treated with respect, with some thought and no long spoon fed endless bias masquerading as considered thought.

Or, maybe not.

 

[Otter]

Liberals trying to draft Keith Olbermann for Joe Lieberman's Senate seat

 

[Tilted]

Have you seen the actual viewer demographic numbers recently? I don't have the link readily to hand, but I remember being somewhat surprised by the number of people who watch that categorized themselves as Dems and independents. Surprised because I had previously taken at face value the oft-repeated canard that 'only conservatives watch Fox News'; I didn't really care whether that was true or not, so I never looked in to it.

No, I can't recall seeing (at least, not recently) any information about how the viewers of the respective channels/networks self identify. But, it wouldn't surprise me if a fair number of FNC's viewers self identify as liberal or moderate, or if a fair number of MSNBC's viewers self identify as conservative (uh hum, Larry).

The notion that only conservatives watch FNC, or that only liberals watch MSNBC, seems pretty silly to me. But, I think it's probably fair to say that more conservatives tend to watch FNC and more liberals tend to watch MSNBC (and CNN and likely the alphabet broadcast networks, though perhaps to a lesser degree). The point being that more people that might otherwise get their 'news' from MSNBC, get it from CNN and/or the broadcast networks, than people that might otherwise get their 'news' from FNC.

 

[Tilted]

See, there it is. Left wing cable TV and radio has a VERY limited audience. Why compete there? I sit there and watch these people and it's like, do they simply have no clue how big the audience is out there for UN-biased commentary that actually takes both sides to task, makes intelligent argument, intelligent debate?

Of the 50-60% who vote, obviously far less than that actually stay engaged. So, there is 40-50% of adults who don't even watch stuff be it left or right and another 30% or so that are begging to be treated with at least a modicum of intelligence so, the largest market, by far, is out there, waiting to be treated with respect, with some thought and no long spoon fed endless bias masquerading as considered thought.

Or, maybe not.

I'd tend to agree. But, I also think that there's a strong confirmation bias at play - that is to say, a lot of people give their preferred source of information more credit than it deserves as an honest broker of information because they agree with the general message(s) it supports. We tend to infuse those things, arguments, and positions that we agree with, with inherent credibility, notwithstanding the presence, or lack thereof, of objective reasons why we should.

Also, I think a lot of people just don't have the time, interest, or energy to care that much about big picture news/politics type stuff on a daily basis. A lot of people just want some source that they can pretend to trust that will brush over the basics for them, so that they can move on to fixing dinner, getting the kids ready for bed, and worrying about what's going to go wrong at work tomorrow without having to also worry about whether or not they have a fair understanding of what's going on with issues X, Y, and Z. That's understandable. This stuff is cool, and neat, and interesting, and, yes, even important - but life is also important, and it has the additional characteristic of being there, at all times and in all places, whether we want it to be or not.

 

[Larry Gude]

I'd tend to agree. But, I also think that there's a strong confirmation bias at play - that is to say, a lot of people give their preferred source of information more credit than it deserves as an honest broker of information because they agree with the general message(s) it supports. We tend to infuse those things, arguments, and positions that we agree with, with inherent credibility, notwithstanding the presence, or lack thereof, of objective reasons why we should.

.

Totally agree. However, I would argue that when people see 'my' network constantly being cited for having intelligent debate, insightful (as opposed to inciteful) hosts and guests and, further, points we make proving out over the coming weeks and months that, at some point, audience can't help but grow.

Because OF that tendency you mention, it would take on it's own momentum.

We'd become THE source to turn to.

 

[Larry Gude]

Also, I think a lot of people just don't have the time, interest, or energy to care that much about big picture news/politics type stuff on a daily basis. A lot of people just want some source that they can pretend to trust that will brush over the basics for them, so that they can move on...

And this supports my business model; instead of that sickly sugar high they get from so many of these people, Hannity, Keef, et al, a taste for substance would develop over time as the commentary they absorb from us makes them feel better, whiter teeth, shiner hair.

 

[Tilted]

Totally agree. However, I would argue that when people see 'my' network constantly being cited for having intelligent debate, insightful (as opposed to inciteful) hosts and guests and, further, points we make proving out over the coming weeks and months that, at some point, audience can't help but grow.

Because OF that tendency you mention, it would take on it's own momentum.

We'd become THE source to turn to.

And this supports my business model; instead of that sickly sugar high they get from so many of these people, Hannity, Keef, et al, a taste for substance would develop over time as the commentary they absorb from us makes them feel better, whiter teeth, shiner hair.

Are you looking for investors?

 

[Larry Gude]

Are you looking for investors?

...and hosts. You're doing the legal and market segments. .




And we need someone to review bad music.

 

[Tilted]

And we need someone to review bad music.

That's low. Really low.

Just for that:

 

[chernmax]

 

[Lenny]

Rachel Madcow GUTLESS?

Imus thinks so. That's on the chicks' page.

 

[Tilted]

Imus thinks so. That's on the chicks' page.

I didn't realize Imus was still on TV. I used to listen to (watch) him every now and then. Which channel is that clip from?