NBC News has an ethics policy? Who knew?

Olbermann has dared them before, threatening to quit. They just called him on it.

Absolutely. A few months ago, when I heard some of teh details of the Comcast/NBC deal, my first though was how would they deal with Olberman, Schulz, O'Donnell, maybe Maddow---and get a more balanced (politically and emotionally) organization in place to try and make some money.

$333,333/mo

The question is whether Comcast-owned MSNBC will try to be a serious competitor for FNC with all the editorial redirection that would entail.

OK, Comcast's service areas (overview). Compare to recent red/blue maps.

I've been saying it ever since Rosen still possessed a shred of integrity: Righties won't pay for leftoid propaganda, leftoids don't have to because they get it free. That's what's killing the MSM. The Internet? Gave an extra push -- but the newspapers and networks started out with the advantage of a shoe-leather infrastructure that could have been leveraged, and p*ed it away.

I despise Comcast and all who sail in her, but if their management has figured that out, more power to them. Fortunately I can't get Comcast service where I live.

Regards,
Ric

Ethics Policy, the appendix of the MSNBC operation: you never know it's there until it blows up on you

We are considering dumping our Comcast service for either Dish or Direct. It's too damn expensive. I'm looking into Roku, but still not sure how it works.

He'll take his 15 viewers and go to Public Access!

Olbie is a tool, but I believe that if he is struck down, he will rise up more powerful than MSNBC can imagine.

Yesterday he was just a blowhard doofus with a little watched TV show.

Now, he's the honored dead.

Olbermann is a serious tool, but it was wrong of the network running the "Lean Forward" PSAs, a series of laughably disguised contributions-in-kind, to suddenly develop an isolated case of ethical enforcement.
They would have been better off simply saying that they no longer wished to broadcast him or the horse he rode in on.
Anyway, I am sure that serious journalists Olbermann and Maddow already have corner offices at NPR, just waiting for this day. They can join Nina Totenberg in wishing AIDS on Republicans.
I don't care for Olbermann, but this firing is pathetic.

It would be economically stupid of Comcast to NOT change their editorial policy.

Olbe violating the clearer-than-NPR policy is a great excuse to fire him, really really cheap.

Maybe Griffin will keep his (overpaid?) job.

His ratings on Tuesday night must have been horrendous.

That moron makes around $4,000,000 a year?!?! MSNBC ought to donate $3,999,995 of it to charity. Let him keep the 5 bucks his "commentary" is actually worth.

Liberal news media must support the false distinction between their published opinions (their free speech) and evil political money (the other guy's free speech).

Olby could rant and rave against conservatives (good) but must not give any money, even to the Liberal cause (money is evil). Preserving their political near-monopoly (everyone but Fox), and their view that money is evil (except as a salary) is more important than preserving Olby.

We have a broadcast HD antenna on a mast inside and it gets over 80 digital channels, I'll never pay for TV.
I've never seen Olbermann, and only heard about him from other blogs, I've never actually heard anything about him from anybody walking around and breathing.

Perhaps a lot of those journalists not happy about this should know that most corporations have legal departments that make you pre-clear any donations. This is cleared over rank, over policies that may look as though the employee is paying off the politician who might be partial to their company's business...all sorts of things. Yes, Keith should be suspended or fired. I have to follow rules, so should he.

We have Comcast. We figured out they were overcharging us and after several months of "negotiation" they agreed. We got a month of free service and a discount on an upgraded package. And slowly over the last year our charges rose. Up $15 a month from the renegotiated package.

I guess it is time to look into the bill again. Figure out what "services" they have added and start a new negotiation.

The actual services are not bad. 250 GB per month and 15 Mbs (peak). But they are always changing the deal.

I'm still trying to absorb the pic of Rachel Maddow at the top of the page. Was she separated at birth from "Pat Riley"? You decide.

http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/content/binary/pat.jpg

That moron makes around $4,000,000 a year?!?! MSNBC ought to donate $3,999,995 of it to charity. Let him keep the 5 bucks his "commentary" is actually worth.

Posted by: Pete at November 5, 2010 5:10 PM
---
You really think Olbey's commentary is worth that much?

Dude!

It is fitting that Mr. Olberman be terminated. MSNBC has struggled mightily to develop its sterling reputation for fair and objective reporting. It must not permit that reputation to be unjustly tarnished over a moment of indescretion by such a well-loved television personality.

One thing to keep in mind though is that many of the Comcast execs are big Democrat party contributors. Comcast's David L. Cohen is a big shot in Philadelphia Democrat politics.

re Olberman, in DEUTCH MEINT DAS overman, and whoever gave him that moniker made a serious error. He was born deformed but took the name seriously. He was underrated and still is, and rightfully so, because he has absolutely nothing to back up anything he says. Where will he go? How will he earn a living? Wherever his voice can intimidate, that's how, and where, who knows.

I wonder if they gave any thought to cash value of all the free plugs they give to Democrats and free attacks on Republicans. Fox does much the same in reverse, but they don't have any hypocritical policies over donations by journalists to people they support.

If they really think that Olbermann's contributions really gave away some secret about his political leanings, they must have a lower opinion of their audience than the rest of us do.

This was obviously a pretext for getting rid of an expensive employee who wasn't performing in the ratings. I think there'll be a lawsuit, and jurors will have to weigh the flimsiness of this pretext against how much of the remaining $15 million they think Olbermann's worth. (Just kidding.)

I wonder if any of the other 'talent' was getting paid that much.

Jeez, that Rachel Maddow is an ugly bastard, isn't he?

JWM

Other than a few days around 9/11 I havent watched any TV going back probably into the 80's, and even then not much.
In my travels around the web today I came upon a site that had 10 or more commenters decrying the loss of "the only balanced viewpoint on television".
I've read, on this site and others, about the biased viewpoints that Mr. Olberman espoused (see today's clip about Scott Brown for instance), but are all the other media personnel that much more blatent? Or is it possible that the left wing of American politics today is so delusional that they actually believe he was giving a balanced perspective? I fear that I already know the answer to my own query.
Pray for America.

"He'll take his 15 viewers and go to Public Access!"

Which was what UHF was twenty years ago.

In other words - the only thing left is to go overseas and do a Carradine in a hotel closet. That'll get the ratings spike.

"I don't care for Olbermann, but this firing is pathetic."

No, they fired the pathetic. There is a difference.