Kurtz on Olbermann piece…
Howard Kurtz responded to questions about his Olbermann piece, among other things, today in his chat…
Nashville, Tenn.: Was your point in writing today’s column that Keith Olbermann is out of place in a conservative media and that he ought to find another line of work or that there ought to be more like him, more balance? For example the Google news robot shows 508 articles covering Sen. McCain’s statements on “Meet the Press” yesterday but only four articles covering General Zinni’s. (Among other things Zinni requested that Rumsfeld resign)
Howard Kurtz: My point was to say that Keith’s show is starting to get much more attention and somewhat better ratings, and that it stands out in a cable universe that has no liberal shows but a number of prominent conservative ones. Olbermann also happens to be a talented broadcaster and a very witty writer, but there’s no other daily cable show that I know of where the anchor gives Bush such a hard time night after night.
Obviously it’s ridiculous to even dignify a question that says the media collectively is conservative, but Kurtz rightfully points out that the most successful cable news OPINION programs have conservative hosts. Olbermann’s opinion show is certainly not successful, finishing 3rd in the 25-54 demographic and last in total viewers is pretty awful. I’m glad that even print press watchdogs aren’t buying Olbermann’s ridiculous “I don’t have an agenda spin” (the NY Times also labeled it an opinion program). The funniest excuse is Olbermann saying he gave Clinton/Lewinsky a lot of play. Kurtz easily shot that down by pointing out that he resigned from the network over it. I really don’t understand why Olbermann doesn’t have the guts to label his show as opinion when it’s completely obvious to everyone. He probably won’t get a chance, the show (or entire network) will likely be cancelled soon if he continues to finish third and fourth - he finished last across the board on Friday.
Comment by benllv — April 3, 2006 @ 6:32 pm
By the way, here are the numbers so nobody can start spinning. Olbermann’s show is in the tank and trailing CNN Headline News (and CNN on many nights) and no MSNBC press releases will change it.
Thursday Total Viewers
O’Reilly: 2.5 million
Zahn: 788,000
Grace: 701,000
Olbermann: 371,000
Thursday 25-54
O’Reilly: 468,000
Grace: 222,000
Olbermann: 204,000
Zahn: 163,000
Friday Total Viewers:
O’Reilly: 1.6 million
Grace: 730,000
Zahn: 536,000
Olbermann: 409,000
Friday 25-54
O’Reilly: 264,000
Grace: 217,000
Zahn: 151,000
Olbermann: 134,000
Comment by benllv — April 3, 2006 @ 6:42 pm
And I believe Tony Snow was in for O’Reilly on Friday. O’Reilly’s numbers would have been much higher.
Comment by Missy — April 3, 2006 @ 7:31 pm
Two days does not a trend make their benlv.
Comment by WestCoastBlogger — April 3, 2006 @ 8:00 pm
And the correct usage of “there” there is “there. Oops.
Comment by WestCoastBlogger — April 3, 2006 @ 8:01 pm
Oh boy, here we go again…someone takes two days’ worth of ratings and tries to make a whole trend out of them. If Olbermann’s fans did this, we’d be accused of being lame and pathetic…and whoever did the accusing would be right.
I also gather that the latest “spin” on the part of the Olbermann haters is to accuse him of having nothing but an “opinion show” rather than a “news show.” Well, monkeys, you can keep trying to fling your excrement at him, but it won’t stick any better than did the other various types you flung.
Olbermann did NOT use his Lewinsky coverage of the past as an “excuse.” That’s nonsense. He said he did a show in which he ended up covering it day after day, and it got too much for him and he had to quit. THAT is all he said.
If he enjoys being anti-Bush (and what is so wrong with criticizing Bush, Mr. Kurtz?), as opposing raking Clinton over the coals, could it be because there’s a big difference between the two men and he doesn’t see that difference the way his enemies do? Could it be that he’s actually doing the moral thing, to criticize a president whose behavior (in my opinion anyway) makes me wish for the Clinton days back (and I’m not really a Clinton fan)? I think that, to him, makes all the difference.
Of course, it will never make a difference to those who think Bush is a genius who can do no wrong. But for them to accuse Olbermann of “spin” and “opinion” is the pot calling the kettle black. The big difference between Olbermann and their heroes: he never tells anyone to shut up. And that’s a BIG difference.
Comment by tanne — April 4, 2006 @ 6:39 am
“But for them to accuse Olbermann of “spin” and “opinion” is the pot calling the kettle black.”
So what if it is, does that make it any less true?
I am so sick of this whole thing already, have been for a long time, but if KO wants to retain ANY credibility, he should just be honest about what his show really is.
I’m sorry, but a show with a “Worst Person” segment can hardly be considered pure news.
Comment by OverHere — April 4, 2006 @ 9:08 am
OverHere, has Keith ever said the show is “pure news”? I think he has denied being the radical leftist Marxist some of his enemies paint him as, but I don’t think he has ever labeled his show with a moniker like “The No Spin Zone,” the way Bill O’
Reilly laughingly does.
The fact that his show expresses any kind of a viewpoint at all doesn’t make him lack credibility. What would make him lack credibility is if he said “Welcome to the No Spin Zone” and then delivered “news” that was obviously biased–and told anyone who disagreed with his viewpoint to “just shut up.” Oh, but then we’d have The O’Reilly Factor. Excuse me…
Comment by tanne — April 5, 2006 @ 6:41 am