He's not an unbiased journalist. Duh. He's not really a journalist at all, and he makes no effort to seem unbiased. I don't agree with him on much. But he should not have been fired for having an opinion and acting on it in private.
How could MSNBC honestly think that they can force their employees into not having personal opinions? Progressives really are running MSNBC, aren't they? I fully expect all journalists and pundits to have their own personal politics. I expect real journalists to keep those opinions separate from their work, but they should absolutely be allowed to donate to whichever campaigns they choose. Granted, it was in his contract, but it sounds like it was a pretty controlling contract. I don't think that him donating should mean anything in relation to his job. MSNBC's 'no donating to campaigns' rule is stupid. Nobody is totally apolitical who actually has to talk about politics as their job. Of course Keith has an opinion and should be able to use his own money however he chooses. It's HIS money. MSNBC sees otherwise, and he lost his job for it. That was wrong.
I don't agree with him, but I think the debate he's a part of is absolutely essential. He can't be shut up without it putting the masses back to sleep. We can only educate the people if there is allowed to be an honest, unabashed discourse on the issues and principles so they can choose a side. The firing of Keith Olbermann seems to me to be part of the silencing of an open debate. That serves the purpose of the losing side, by the way.
Progressives are in a position right now where they have to figure out whether to hunker down and crawl back into their caves, ending the debate, or push on the gas and be seen for what they are. This firing, to me, signals that they want to hide, because they know they're losing the debate. They couldn't get Keith to shut up, so they took him off the air.
I have a big problem with that. How can we teach the people when there is no discourse because someone wants to end the debate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm with you on this one.
ReplyDeleteMSNBC is a clubhouse of hate against anything conservative, they sing hallelujahs and hosannas to Democrats day and night, but they can't contribute to a politician?
Do they actually see themselves as objective? If so, they are even more delusional that I thought.
If it's in his contract, then the firing is justified. His choices. His consequences.
ReplyDeleteAt the very least, though, it was a stupid move. MSNBC is a private company, so the owners can do whatever they want with it. They have the right, of course, to be stupid. MSNBC already has a thoroughly entrenched reputation as Wacko Central, and this type of attempt to control the opinions, etc., of their employees (whether stipulated in a contract or not) just makes them look worse.
Aside from the contract issue, though, it seems like a pretty minor issue. Nobody with at least half a brain cell expects Olbermann to be anything other than a leftist windbag (I couldn't stand him even when he was with ESPN), and he's never made even a small effort to be fair, balanced, or objective on his program, so contributing to leftist campaigns (even for that anti-American, Marxist, racist thug Raul Grijalva) should be viewed as merely part of who he is.
Whether it was just to get him to shut up or what, there's clearly something else going on here besides the campaign contributions. What is MSNBC trying to cover up (this time)?