Opinion: Olbermann calls O’Reilly a “swine” over Arkin segment with former NBC Military analyst…
Tonight on Countdown, Keith Olbermann gave Bill O’Reilly “Worst Person in the World” for putting former NBC Analyst Ken Allard on to talk about William Arkin. Video of the interview is here. Olbermann called O’Reilly a “swine”, apparently for putting Allard on the air. Allard left NBC News after 10 years, partly because he had a stroke.
This gets pretty complicated. Allard wrote a colum in the San Antonio Express News on the Arkin incident a couple of days ago. In the Express News Allard made some comments about NBC News which according to O’Reilly were cut out. It’s not clear to me where the cut was. The online column does contain some criticism about NBC News, so perhaps the edit was to the print edition (Allard suggested it was to save space, which you don’t need to do in an online column but might need to do in a print column). Here is Allard’s criticism from the online column…
But it is becoming increasingly apparent that Arkin won’t be fired despite having gone well beyond those bounds — and not for the first time. In 2003, for example, he tried to blacklist a decorated Green Beret general as a “Christian jihadist.” In 2005, he published an astonishing primer on deciphering American military code names and covert operations.
Naturally, controversy helps boost ratings. But NBC executives now appear determined to avoid any appearance that the public is somehow being stampeded into supporting the war — by troop surges, Iranian aggression or anything else.
When the war had broad popular support, the network relied on commentary by distinguished generals such as Barry McCaffrey, Wayne Downing and Bernard Trainor: Now that it is going badly, they simply find Arkin a convenient receptacle.
The sad irony is that cable news standards are being steadily compromised — by the quest for ratings, by permitting video to trump every lesser concern and, above all, by allowing the sensational to overwhelm the important.
And this at precisely the moment when Americans have never been more in need of in-depth, informed commentary on the great issues of our public life. That includes war, who fights for us and our responsibilities as warrior-citizens.
Allard expanded on his criticism on The Factor by noting MSNBC’s big D-Day 2004 extravaganza that former MSNBC President Rick Kaplan had put together and that he was surprised by how much the network had changed. He specifically mentioned more “crimetime in primetime” and less hard news.
Well I can’t argue with the “more crimetime in primetime”, though I would note that MSNBC has diversified its longform programming since the initial “crimetime in primetime” push just before last year’s Olympics in Torino. But the thrust of Allard’s argument about a move to the sensational on the “network of Tom Brokaw” (which Allard referred to on The Factor) is one that has been heard before and not just from idealogical partisans looking to score points against a “liberal MSM outlet”. However, at the same time, the charge that cable news skews towards the sensational is not a new one and certainly not one solely confined to MSNBC. Natalee Holloway? Britney Spears? Paris Hilton? Brangelina? Anna Nicole Smith? Pick a network. It’s everywhere. But I can certainly sympathize with Allard’s position on this point.
As far as the O’Reilly interview with Allard is concerned, I really don’t see what Olbermann has got his knickers in a twist about (Note: I have not seen Olbermann’s segment for the night so I don’t know exactly in what context the word “swine” was used). Sure O’Reilly got in his digs at NBC, most of which Allard didn’t bite on…even going so far as to say Arkin isn’t a loon and that NBC has a wide diversity of people there. O’Reilly countered that he couldn’t get a list of who’s an analyst there to find out who’s conservative. I find that somewhat disingenuous. For one thing, O’Reilly managed to research the number of times Arkin has been on NBC air but can’t research who else was? It’s not like there’s a long list of military analysts out there. The MSNBC website used to list them for a long time after the Iraq war. I could probably name most of them by memory. But I wouldn’t characterize the interview as O’Reilly trying to goad Allard into laying into MSNBC nor would the fact that Allard had a stroke be of any significance. It was obvious to me that Allard was still dealing with after effects of the stroke but Allard’s a grown man. He didn’t have to come on. He knew what he was doing.
But more to the point is this: NBC has not dumped Arkin. Allard can’t believe it. From his column…
As soon as they read the blog — or at least gauged popular reaction to it — I figured NBC News would lose no time firing Arkin, a colleague during our occasional television stints together as military analysts. There has long been an unwritten but well-understood policy governing outside experts appearing on TV: Hold any opinion you choose, but don’t do anything to embarrass the network.
Arkin, or any of us, was free to disagree with Clinton domestic policy, Bush foreign policy or Dick Cheney’s marksmanship. But ever since Vietnam’s wounds healed over, it has been off-limits to criticize the American soldier. Instead, modern dissenters retreat instinctively to the Great American Cop-out: “I oppose the war but support the troops”
But it is becoming increasingly apparent that Arkin won’t be fired despite having gone well beyond those bounds — and not for the first time. In 2003, for example, he tried to blacklist a decorated Green Beret general as a “Christian jihadist.” In 2005, he published an astonishing primer on deciphering American military code names and covert operations.
O’Reilly can’t believe it either but his opinion is biased and undercut by the fact that he has a get NBC agenda because of all the shots Olbermann has taken at him. I however have no such entanglements. And I can’t believe NBC hasn’t cut Arkin loose. There is no justifiable reason to keep someone on the payroll after their usability to the network as a military analyst has been destroyed by their own actions. All Arkin can do now is bring NBC grief. Proper PR strategy is to get out in front of a scandal, not react to it or try to duck it. But like CNBC and Maria Bartiromo, NBC News apparently thinks laying low and waiting for it to blow over is the best course of action rather than addressing it head on with a full public statement severing ties with Arkin. I think it’s a tragic mistake. It gives O’Reilly something that up until now he hasn’t had much of in his war with NBC News; proof. NBC News is playing right into Bill O’Reilly’s hands.
You summed up the whole situation very well, Spud.
I saw Olbermann’s rant…I don’t remember entirely what he said, but he made O’Reilly’s putting Allard on the air (still recovering from a stroke, he added) sound like what Michael Moore was criticized for doing when he filmed “Bowling for Columbine,” when he interviewed Charlton Heston when he was suffering from Alzheimers. This is where the “swine” accusation came in. Olbermann also accused O’Reilly of trying to put words into Allard’s mouth. Now it’s clear that O’Reilly was trying to steer the context of the conversation a certain way, but Allard, I thought, was very objective and did not follow down the road O’Reilly wanted to travel.
Olbermann also neglected to mention that O’Reilly commended Allard on his recovery. Olbermann made it sound like O’Reilly preyed on a feebled, defenseless man, and this is just not the case.
As I said in another topic here, Olbermann’s hatred for O’Reilly is draining his credibility because he is blowing things out of proportion and, sooner or later, his audience will catch up to the reality that this is less about the facts and more about Olbermann’s personal vendetta against O’Reilly.
And, as you said, this plays right into O’Reilly’s argument…especially that MSNBC has anchors that, as he puts it, “traffics in defamation.”
If Olbermann wants to build his career with his “Special Comments” that are held up as nuggets of truth amidst a rock pile of government lies, then he better hold his “Worst Person” segment to the same standard and not twist the facts to suit his own agenda.
Comment by FishOil — February 10, 2007 @ 2:49 am
At this point, this situation is a win/win for O’Reilly. If they fire Arkin, than he gets to look the hero. If they don’t, as you said Spud, he has a whole lot of ammo to use against MSNBC.
MSNBC is now in a tough position. Do they fire him, and make Bill that hero, and in turn upset Olbermann… of do they retain him, and loose credibility with mainstream America (who support the troops, even if not the effort).
I wonder which road they take.
Comment by ImNotBlue — February 10, 2007 @ 2:58 am
Don’t some of these analysts work on an independent contractor basis? Meaning that they aren’t under contract, and don’t get paid unless they are called to the studio to chat. If that is the case, firing Arkin is like firing your plumber.
Comment by elmonica — February 10, 2007 @ 3:16 am
Elmonica — If your plumber screws up your pipes and “CRAP” comes out of your kitchen sink — What do you do? — You do not use that plumber again “AND” you tell your friends (in this case NBC’s friends are the American public) to never use that plumber.
Comment by Aunt Mary — February 10, 2007 @ 3:53 am
I must say Allard’s writing is very eloquent and articulate. There are very few people who can write so well in their prime, much less recently after a stroke.
I doubt O’Reilly had any idea about the stroke; he seemed surprised when Allard told him. O’Reilly did try to steer the conversation a certain way, but Allard ducked and weaved very skillfully.
I’m glad you posted what his original coulmn said. It wasn’t apparent to me, watching “The Factor,” that he had taken O’Reilly’s view.
Comment by erljr — February 10, 2007 @ 4:21 am
All of this just because someone doesnt agree with someone else…if that’s the case all the BO hate is justified. Who is BO, the god and savior of the media? I dont think so.
Comment by Big Dave — February 10, 2007 @ 9:47 am
Hey Spud–why don’t you cover what Olbermann said about Anderson Cooper? What’s emerging here is a pattern of someone totally obsessed with his competition. While some of his criticisim of O’Reilly might be well-founded, I fail to see what Anderson Cooper has done other than risk his life time and time again to cover a story, to deserve the scorn and ridicule that Olbermann heaped on him last night.
Comment by Alison — February 10, 2007 @ 11:00 am
> All Arkin can do now is bring NBC grief.
And rather than distancing themselves from him, “elements at NBC” are doing the opposite: embracing him. Last night Olbermann declared that Arkin’s controversial columns were in fact “valid criticisms of the military”. Not fair. Not arguable. Valid.
Comment by johnny dollar — February 10, 2007 @ 11:24 am
Has BOR or Olbermannfor that matter mentioned Arkin’s later column where he clarifies or tries to clarify depending on your point of view his previous comments.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2007/02/post_11.html#more
Comment by myview — February 10, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
Matthews drops the “F” Bomb on The Crypt Keeper’s Show. Now Olby defends Arkin.
Well unless Olby signed a new contract this morning in less than 19 days N.B.C. will have one less embarrasment around.
I agree with what folks hear have said this morning. This can only now become a win/win for O’Reilly.
Let’s see O’Reilly? Been to Iraq.
Cooper? Has Been everywhere!!!!!!!!
Olby? Hides behind or under his desk and tosses turd balls.
Olby is lower than the scum thats sits at the bottom of a toxic pond in Love Cannal, NY.
P.S. Did anybody catch that train wreck of a show on Larry King with the female wrestler? Now that was brutal!!!!!
Comment by puck — February 10, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
I thought the Cooper criticism was valid. Cooper is overrated. This guy was the host of “The Mole”
Comment by Keyser Soze — February 10, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
In the six years since The Mole went off the air, I think AC has been an outstanding, risk-taking journalist. He obviously moved on.
Comment by Goldfish — February 10, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
“I thought the Cooper criticism was valid. Cooper is overrated. This guy was the host of “The Mole””
He’s also been to Sarajevo, Rwanda, Niger, Beirut, Haifa… He was the first national American journalist reporting from the Israel/Lebanon war last summer, and the last to leave, reporting from Israel artillery batteries and Beirut slums.
I suggest you lay your prejudices aside long enough to watch some of his reporting.
Comment by Arthur — February 10, 2007 @ 12:58 pm
And Olbermann is a former Sports guy who did commercials for Boston Market. And hasn’t been to Bosnia, Iraq, Sri Lanka, or the Gulf Coast during Hurricane Katrina. He has never left the confines of the NYC-NJ studios unless it involved spring training in Florida. he has NO right whatsoever to criticize Anderson Cooper, whom, by the way, he has defended in the past.
Comment by Alison — February 10, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
I watched that Ken Allard interview and I had no idea he had had a stroke. I thought O’Rielly handled it very well, albeit he did try to get him to maybe pound on NBC a little bit. Shame on O’R for having someone on who might lean his way a little bit. Huh? Every night he has someone on who doesn’t and when you do ever see Keith O have anyone one with a different opinion than his? NEVER. I think Olberman is self-destructing and if Dan Abrams is counting on him to save his pitiful cable network, he is in a heap of trouble and to make him out to be such a ratings magnet is just preposterous. DA is using the wrong yardstick to measure this guy. He is nuts.
Comment by sophia — February 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
This is typical Olbermann bomb-throwing. The man has zero regard for facts or anyone else’s opinion that might not be in conjuction with his.
What Arkin said in his column was disgraceful, and he has not retracted those words. NBC should have in the very least condemned what he said, but then again, they should do the same w/ a lot of what Olbermann says. Instead, they make him the face of MSNBC.
Comment by bigred — February 10, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
#9 and anyone else, for real perspective on who these people are that Arkin is foolishly calling “mercenaries”, go to commentator Michelle Malkin’s website (http://www.michellemalkin.com) and read about some of the HEROES who were killed in action just this week. Regardless of how you feel about President Bush and the war, these men and women deserve our respect and gratitude.
Comment by Scott — February 10, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
MSNBC is now in a tough position
It’s not MSNBC’s call. It’s NBC’s.
Hey Spud–why don’t you cover what Olbermann said about Anderson Cooper? What’s emerging here is a pattern of someone totally obsessed with his competition.
Well I didn’t get a transcript of the Cooper part until today. Honestly, I didn’t think much of it one way or the other. And there’s nothing “emerging” about Olbermann being “obsessed” with his competition (FNC). That’s well past emerging status, as is O’Reilly’s “obsession” with NBC.
Comment by Spud — February 10, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Spud — February 10, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Yup… you’re right. Meant to say NBC, not MSNBC. My bad.
Comment by ImNotBlue — February 10, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
Well gee thanks Spud. I thought you would have been a bit smarter and gotten what I was trying to get at instead of mocking me in your reply. So let me be a bit more clear about what I meant.
1) While I get that many feel that Olbermann’s attacks on O’Reilly and Fox News are totally justified given their right-wing bias, how can anyone honestly say that AC or CNN was deserving of that attack given their reputation for fairness? Sure they’re bland but biased? I don’t think anyone can honestly say that they were deserving of being attacked, especially not from Olbermann whose own credibility is highly questionable.
2) Secondly, Olbermann, a former sportscaster, has never gone overseas to cover a single story nor ventured into a single danger zone in the United States. Yet, Olbermann was questioning the journalistic credentials of Cooper, who has made it his life’s work to go into dangerous areas of the world and Olbermann’s attack on Cooper seemed to be totally without merit and more about his own jealousy and resentment since Cooper has just signed a $4 million a year contract, is making the cover of magazines and had apparently been offered a network news job which he turned down. The idea that someone whose main experience reporting from a field is confined solely to a sports field dared questioned the credentials of someone who has spent the vast majority of his career (sans his “Mole” hosting gig) in danger zones is ridiculous to me and his attack was totally without merit. THAT was the story. And since when did it become the vogue to go on the air and attack your competitors? Yet Olbermann seems to make a career out of it (and Fox too for that matter). When did these antics become standard on-air behavior exactly?
Furthermore, and if for no other reason than the following, the item deserved more attention than a sarcastic reply because wasn’t it just last month that an industry publication floated the notion that CNN was expressing “interest” in Olbermann if MSNBC failed to re-sign him? If nothing else shouldn’t Olbermann’s ripping of CNN & Anderson Cooper be considered a bad career move if he might have to go looking to them for a job if his current employer decides they no longer need his services?
But apparently I was wrong and it’s no big deal whatsoever for Olbermann, who has never, ever, EVER, reported a single story overseas to criticize Cooper’s reporting credentials.
Comment by Alison — February 10, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
I wasn’t mocking you. Just saying that to call this emerging is not accurate because it’s been going on for a long time.
Comment by Spud — February 10, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
Keith: You’re jealous…ask your friends…this approach will not win you ratings…reality check time
Comment by john — February 11, 2007 @ 11:37 am
Olbermann has made his career by attacking those up the food chain, most notable O’Reilly. But it is telling that Keith now feels it necessary to go after Cooper.
Comment by Caufield — February 12, 2007 @ 10:30 am