False Political Balance Part II
I watched Keith Olbermann on MSNBC last night. Among his targets: Lawrence Lessig, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann. Among his criticisms: Fox News had a producer hype up the footage of one of the contrived made-for-TV "tea parties" and Lawrence Lessig stole parts of his monologue for a political ad.
Olbermann claimed Lawrence Lessig, founder of the Creative Commons (which Olbermann never mentions), used MSNBC footage without his permission. More about this: here. If Olbermann does indeed represent the anti-corporate wing of the anti-conservative party, then I am not sure why Olbermann would be upset at being used in ad where the producers agree with his point of view. In fact, some would view this as promotion. More importantly, if people like Lessig are not allowed to reframe what is broadcast on "news channels" then are we granting a monopoly on "news" to the big networks?
Likewise, in criticizing Fox for having a producer generate applause at the contrived "tea party", Olbermann neglects that his own network did the same at Saint Paul during the Republican convention. Why else did they give me the tee shirt and wave their arms as they went to commercial? Olbermann knows the tactics of the "other side", because they are the same as the tactics of "his side". Olbermann, the former ESPN sports announcer, views politics as purely sport. Ron Santo, the radio announcer who bleeds Cub blue, has the same job as Olbermann feels he has. (Santo brings a good deal more sincerity.)
As far as I could tell, Olbermann had nothing substantive to say. Perhaps, his writer is taking the week off. His job, at least last night, was to provide a naysaying voice. The Harlem Globetrotters can't play without the Washington Generals. It appeared that Keith Olbermann was a Washington General, helping to bring relevance to "Faux News" and the wackiest of made-for-TV conservatives. Perhaps, this explains why corporate America is finally paying a "liberal" voice. The last thing the left needs is an intellectually dishonest face to balance out Fox News right-wing lies.
(Likewise, Sam Donaldson did not represent the left for ABC. Rather, he was a foil for the much more intelligent and much more wrong George Will. If networks truly want to represent "both sides" then why do they seem to have so much trouble putting intelligent liberals on the air? My answer: the purpose of TV is not to be honest, it is to sell tomato soup.)
P.S., if you see one of those "Vote 2012" promotions at the bottom of your TV screen and TV is where you get most of your news, please don't vote.
Olbermann claimed Lawrence Lessig, founder of the Creative Commons (which Olbermann never mentions), used MSNBC footage without his permission. More about this: here. If Olbermann does indeed represent the anti-corporate wing of the anti-conservative party, then I am not sure why Olbermann would be upset at being used in ad where the producers agree with his point of view. In fact, some would view this as promotion. More importantly, if people like Lessig are not allowed to reframe what is broadcast on "news channels" then are we granting a monopoly on "news" to the big networks?
Likewise, in criticizing Fox for having a producer generate applause at the contrived "tea party", Olbermann neglects that his own network did the same at Saint Paul during the Republican convention. Why else did they give me the tee shirt and wave their arms as they went to commercial? Olbermann knows the tactics of the "other side", because they are the same as the tactics of "his side". Olbermann, the former ESPN sports announcer, views politics as purely sport. Ron Santo, the radio announcer who bleeds Cub blue, has the same job as Olbermann feels he has. (Santo brings a good deal more sincerity.)
As far as I could tell, Olbermann had nothing substantive to say. Perhaps, his writer is taking the week off. His job, at least last night, was to provide a naysaying voice. The Harlem Globetrotters can't play without the Washington Generals. It appeared that Keith Olbermann was a Washington General, helping to bring relevance to "Faux News" and the wackiest of made-for-TV conservatives. Perhaps, this explains why corporate America is finally paying a "liberal" voice. The last thing the left needs is an intellectually dishonest face to balance out Fox News right-wing lies.
(Likewise, Sam Donaldson did not represent the left for ABC. Rather, he was a foil for the much more intelligent and much more wrong George Will. If networks truly want to represent "both sides" then why do they seem to have so much trouble putting intelligent liberals on the air? My answer: the purpose of TV is not to be honest, it is to sell tomato soup.)
P.S., if you see one of those "Vote 2012" promotions at the bottom of your TV screen and TV is where you get most of your news, please don't vote.
Labels: Don't Vote 2012
posted by David Rasmussen at 11:53 AM
<< Home