I don't think I am going to win a popularity contest with this one, but I think this needs to be said:
Olbermann deserves the suspension, at a minimum. I am a fan and I hope he doesn't get canned for this, but I got to say that if I was his boss, he would be clearing out his desk right about now.
You must jump, gentle reader, if you care to know why I make such an assertion. And please read first, then comment. The diary is short.
Olbermann is in the doghouse, and deservedly so, not because he gave to some Democratic candidates, but because he failed to immediately and publicly disclose said donations. And then he doubled down on this serious ethical lapse when offered up reporting and commentary on these same candidates and races, repeatedly.
This is more than sufficient to raise the question of whether or not there is a conflict, and if you are asking the question, you already know the answer: Yes. It's a conflict, and a serious one.
Big problem. Bad problem. The kind of eff-up that gets journalists fired in most any setting, from school paper to big-time cable news. At least it should.
By the way, not just my opinion. This excerpt from today's online edition of the Columbia Journalism Review:
To start with, Olbermann was foolish to so blatantly violate company policy, that while dusty, is well intentioned: Commentators—even those with strong ideological foundations—are expected to survey the political landscape and offer an opinion that is sharp, critical, and independent. And while Olbermann and others at MSNBC might frequently align themselves with Democratic ideas and politicians, there must be a line between arguing for a cause or candidate and directly and materially contributing to a candidate’s re-election. You create questions about entanglements that may affect your reporting and do affect the way your reporting is perceived. Cross that line and you become an activist or teammate and no longer the kind of journalist Olbermann purports to be on his show. Or, as we found out today, the kind of journalist NBC does not consider above reproach. And that is their prerogative.
Sorry, but ethical practice, tightly and truely followed, is a very harsh mistress.
I am going to anticipate a couple of responses here:
- Joe Scarborough did it, he works for the same network. So WTF, you got a double standard?
Response: (Giant Eye Roll) First of all, what, you're going to make the (ahem) ethical practices of Joe Freakin Scarborough your metric here? Christ on a crutch! Secondly, the obvious and logical retort you probably heard from your mom growing up: "So because Joey Scarborough went and shoplifted at Thriftimart, what, you go and do that too?!?!?! You're grounded, kid!"
- Olbermann is not a journalist per se, but rather a commentator and a host for other news commentator.
A little better response, but still pretty weak. Olbermann has said that he abstains from political activity because he doesn't want to have a dog in the fight (pretty sure those are his actual words) when it comes to political reporting. What he is, is all of the above. He writes, reports, and offers commentary, and hosts and interviews others who do the same. I shouldn't--and don't--expect him to be "objective" but I do expect him to be ethical and fair, and to disclose things like: the fact that he gave the legal maximum to Congressman Raul Grijalva's campaign, up front, when he interviews the congressman on his show.
Again, I like KO, think he is a brilliant commentator, but I gotta say, I feel seriously fucked over by this. A sympathetic interview by an ideological compatriot, that's one thing. A journalistic blowjob along with a five-figure campaign contribution, that's another, that's the kind of bogus shit you see on Fox News.
The fan in me does hope Olbermann gets reinstated, but only after a good long suspension. His excellent work for a long time at Countdown might suffice to keep him in his job, if he apologizes to his viewers for this very serious ethical breach. Without that at the very least, he has lost me forever as a viewer.