In Depth: Why Today’s Kurtz Article is a Big Deal….for Bill O’Reilly…
I was under the gun to get commentary up this morning on today’s Howard Kurtz piece on the Olbermann/O’Reilly feud and its escalating fallout and I didn’t have the time to adequately analyze the significance of all this so I’m going to take a bigger whack at it here (and will probably repeat some of the things I wrote earlier)…
Today’s Kurtz article really is a big deal. Particularly if your name is Bill O’Reilly. The amount of background process bits that came out regarding the behind the scenes back and forth between NBC and FNC (and their subordinates and superiors) shows a couple of things. It shows just how out of control this whole mess has gotten. But more importantly it shows just how much O’Reilly has gotten to NBC and GE.
In the past the Olbermann/O’Reilly feud was rather one sided; not because Olbermann was doing all the firing but because O’Reilly’s response was so pathetic, inept, and self-destructive. Those who remember the early days remember an O’Reilly flailing about in vain to try and parry Olbermann. There was the online petition which O’Reilly apparently thought was very clever but which backfired badly when Olbermann did the obvious and trumpeted the petition with a sign-a-thon at MSNBC. Similarly the repeated references to the Donahue program getting better ratings, while technically accurate, only served to fuel Olbermann. And I repeatedly argued as much; saying that O’Reilly would be best served by not responding at all.
Apparentlly sensing that engaging Olbermann like that was a mistake, O’Reilly went quiet for a few months. But then he returned to the feud with a new tactic; blaming Olbermann’s enablers; the people above him who had the power to shut him down but didn’t. Now the attacks were aimed at Jeff Zucker, Steve Capus, and, much later, GE CEO Jeffery Immelt. However this tactic didn’t have any more of an effect in my opinion than the previous attempts at parrying Olbermann and I said so.
Then last year O’Reilly launched a new front. Instead of talking about “smear merchants” and “elements at NBC News” which were not very thinly veiled references to Olbermann; O’Reilly hit upon a new strategy, go after NBC and GE for things that have nothing to do with Olbermann. It was at this point that O’Reilly started getting some traction in the feud. Of course it was all about Olbermann but it didn’t matter because by bringing up things to embarass NBC and GE O’Reilly was now doing what Olbermann had been doing for years to anything News Corp.
Some attacks worked better than others. O’Reilly went hard after NBC military analyst William Arkin after Arkin penned a tone deaf piece in the Washington Post. O’Reilly was wrong to associate Arkin’s article with NBC News of course. But he did register points by correctly noting that NBC didn’t immediately and publicly sever ties with a now radioactive Arkin. He then seized upon the NBC News has gone left for business reasons strategy. It too was mostly groundless, right up until the point that MSNBC decided to simulcast Race for the White House on Air America. Now suddenly O’Reilly looked positively prophetic even though the reality was he was just throwing anything at the wall to see what would stick and NBC made sure something did by simulcasting the program.
O’Reilly was now following the Olbermann playbook. Olbermann had been needling anything connected to Rupert Murdoch for years and it had already leaked out in the press that people were upset with this and it only served to keep Olbermann going. In these types of matters the only defense is to not respond at all. As Olbermann would say, “You don’t punch down. You punch up”.
O’Reilly had learned this lesson and learned it well. He was now punching up at NBC and GE. Which is what makes today’s Kurtz piece so noteable. NBC and GE’s reaction and the on the record quotes show that O’Reilly’s punching up has been having an impact. If it hadn’t we wouldn’t have been reading this…
GE spokesman Gary Sheffer called O’Reilly’s remarks “offensive,” saying: “He has a right to his opinion, and we equally have a right to be appalled by it. We felt he crossed the line. . . . Nothing we supply, or any goods and services we have supplied to Iran, is in any way endangering U.S. troops.”
Asked about O’Reilly’s motivation, Sheffer said that executives at Murdoch’s News Corp. “tell us if the attacks on O’Reilly end, the attacks on GE will end. They’ve had conversations with our news executives saying, ‘If you stop, we’ll stop.’ ” An NBC spokeswoman confirmed the calls.
and this…
“It is one thing to have corporate jousting between Keith and O’Reilly,” Capus said. “When it becomes an over-the-top, inaccurate distortion and gross misrepresentation of the job being performed by Richard Engel, then I’m going to be concerned and feel the need to act.”
Early last year, the sources say, Capus called Ailes to say that O’Reilly had gone over the line with reckless attacks on Engel. But, the sources recounted, Ailes said he agreed that NBC was against the war and had aligned itself with Olbermann’s mockery. Capus, he said, had the power to shut down the situation by telling Olbermann to back off.
Capus can’t have it both ways. He can’t complain about O’Reilly’s over the top gross misrepresentations when Olbermann has been making over the top gross misrepresentations of FNC people for quite a while now.
For the record, I think both sides have repeatedly gone too far and should throttle it back. So one side complaining about the other side when their side has been as bad rings very hollow in my ears. That O’Reilly may or may not have been worse by engaging GE when Olbermann has been sticking to just FNC, FBN, The Post, and other News Corp. properties is like saying the other guy is more pregnant than I am. Either you’re pregnant or not.
What we have here is what the cold warriors would call Mutually Assured Destruction. The only way to stay alive is to not fire.
But today’s Post article shows that O’Reilly has gotten to NBC and GE. Finally. I believe it was a tactical error for NBC and GE to give Kurtz this much information and on the record quotes. The better response would have been to not comment at all. In much the same way that O’Reilly’s petition emboldened Olbermann, today’s Post article will only serve to embolden O’Reilly because he knows his shtick is finally having an impact. Never mind that the thrust of his arguements, particularly regarding Engel and GE, are patently ridiculous. For this to work, it doesn’t have to be accurate if the other side reacts to it. Today NBC reacted to it. And that was a mistake.
Of course I think they should both be prohibited from mentioning the “other side” forever. But that is unfortunately a dream world which doesn’t exist.
May 19, 2008 at 6:40 pm
With the two egos involved, I’m sceptical as to whether either will pull back. That is unless the top management tells them to. Forcefully. And repeatedly. Olbermann has a record at ESPN of ignoring management demands; I imagine there are a few “up yours” in O’Reilly’s file cabinet too.
It seems to me that Olbermann raised this skirmish to Defcon 4 when he began to go after other FNC people like Chris Wallace and Brit Hume. Add in his bizarre claim that FNC has done more damage to the country than al-qaeda and the Klan. Then, when he went after Ailes re the Giluliani campaign, the big guns at FNC had to respond.
What is most striking to me in this feud (okay, after the silliness of the entire matter) is that Keith Olbermann continues to be sold to the public as a “news anchor”. He co-anchors the news desk for MSNBC’s election coverage.
That is frankly absurd. The man’s biases are so patently clear and expressed that no serious person believes he can objectively and fairly cover people he calls “murders” and “terrorists.”
MSNBC has a decision quickly approaching: do they want to have Olbermann be a commentator? Or a news anchor? He can be one but not both.
May 19, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Wrong. NBC thinks he can be both. They don’t get that viewers of all ideological persuasions, whether pro-Olbermann or anti-Olbermann, will be viewing Olbermann the anchor through the colored glasses of Olbermann the commentator and liberal activist.
May 19, 2008 at 7:05 pm
They don’t get that viewers of all ideological persuasions, whether pro-Olbermann or anti-Olbermann, will be viewing Olbermann the anchor through the colored glasses of Olbermann the commentator and liberal activist.
I agree that that’s their view right now. He’s getting the ratings; and Phil Griffin thinks KO is brilliant (“the future of news”).
But if the above back-and-forth continues and Olbermann (and O’Reilly) raise the volume (somehow), I think NBC will have to decide whether they want the branding of the news department to be marked by KO’s exploits.
Something will give. Either a truce is declared; or someone will be sitting in a different chair (it won’t be O’Reilly).
May 19, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Well done, Spud.
May 19, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Well said, Spud.
May 19, 2008 at 8:04 pm
O’Reilly has hit GE hard on Iran. Another thing, Olbermann is pro-Iran. He gets defensive whenever Iran is menationed, this indicates that GE is in cahoots with Iran. O’Reilly needs to continue the attacks.
May 19, 2008 at 8:08 pm
I can’t say I’ve been following this whole Iran thing very closely so I don’t know if your appraisal of Olbermann’s position vis a vis Iran is accurate or not…
May 19, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Keith Olbermann is a hypocrite. I remember when he made a comment on his program where he says that if anyone in the news organization compares another new organization to a terrorist organization is blatantly “Un-American”. Geez… I wonder what this Youtube Video says…
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IOWBnkaitd8
May 20, 2008 at 5:25 am
I think that at some point Olbermann is going to go out on the limb a bit too far and is going to say something that will get him into hot water to the point that Phil Griffin can’t save him. THEN I bet you’ll see the NBC suits declaring him to be a commentator, NOT a news anchor. They really should move to relabel his show correctly but for whatever reason, they stubbornly refuse to do so. The truth may have a well-known liberal bias but Olbermann’s show has devolved into a very bad-SNL style parody of its self.
May 20, 2008 at 7:08 am
Spud, great writing until this: “…today’s Post article will only serve to embolden O’Reilly because he knows his shtick is finally having an impact. Never mind that the thrust of his arguements, particularly regarding Engel and GE, are patently ridiculous.”
I would think O’Reilly’s POV would be even more credible this week, with the White House and it’s dustup w/Engle over editting the interview with the President. And I do believe it was shown that GE was providing components to Iran, were they not?
As an aside, I heard Doocy this a.m. state that Olbermann named Doocy’s kid, Peter, WPITW a few weeks ago after Peter’s participation in a Q & A session a few weeks ago at the college. Doocy was FURIOUS, and rightfully so, since KO went after Peter Doocy not because he did anything wrong, but because he’s Doocy’s kid! THAT is low, isn’t it?
From what I remember, young Doocy just asked some light-hearted question, something that any kid would have asked. Maybe Keith should name himself WPITW, maybe for an entire year or longer! Idiot.
May 20, 2008 at 8:55 am
OLDBOREMAN HAS GOT TO GO!!! He is no longer funny(except in his own biased little brain) and he is just plain HATEFUL!!!!
May 20, 2008 at 9:41 am
It shows just how out of control this whole mess has gotten. But more importantly it shows just how much O’Reilly has gotten to NBC and GE.
Spud: That is the most significant point of your analysis.
On ICN 1.0, when the Clinton campaign complained about David Schuster, it is likely the latter was suspended only after Hillary threatened no GE contracts in a Clinton Administration. On ICN 1.0, I also wondered whether Olbermann’s continued attacks on News Corp. threatened the Hulu deal.
While Olbermann’s attacks on O’Reilly and Fox are annoying, they are not really hurting anybody’s pocketbook. Now BOR has significantly upped the ante where GE’s contracting is being scrutinized and huge government and international contracts on the line.
I agree with number1tfan, above; Keith’s ranting are now indirectly hurting the GE bottom line; either KO shuts up or he is gone.
May 20, 2008 at 4:02 pm
I would think O’Reilly’s POV would be even more credible this week, with the White House and it’s dustup w/Engle over editting the interview with the President. And I do believe it was shown that GE was providing components to Iran, were they not?
I found nothing objectionable with the editing of the Engel interview. The main thrust of Bush’s comments were kept intact. The part that got left out didn’t seem that necesary to me. Of Gillespie’s three points the only one that really resonated for me was about the Iraq Civil War declaration.