Matthews and Olbermann: Back together again…

In another sign that last year’s posturing by NBC was just that, the Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz notes that Matthews and Olbermann will be back together again front and center for the Inauguration.

Now his short-term future, at least, is set: Matthews and Keith Olbermann will co-anchor MSNBC’s coverage of the Obama inauguration.

So all the talk about having serious journalists for the election was apparently just a way to tamp down what was becoming a troublesome situation for NBC and causing internal strife in the news divsion. Here’s the question everyone should be asking (as I’m sure some inside NBC are asking it): If the pairing of the two in 2008 became toxic for the network as the year progressed, why repeat a mistake?


15 Responses to “Matthews and Olbermann: Back together again…”

  1. Just because you and the all the breathless beltway bunch saw it as a mistake doesn’t mean it was. The actual viewers of MSNBC didn’t mind one bit (save a joeremi here and there). “Serious journalist” is subjective and a bit of an oxymoron these days, but you’re free to keep up your little campaign. I’m glad MSNBC is sticking to it’s guns and not letting the chattering class stop them from doing a good thing.

  2. fanofgrendel Says:

    The so called “actual viewers of MSNBC” would like to see Olbermann and Maddow cover the inauguration while they were having sex (or at least were simulating orgasm noises).

  3. This is a smart business decision. The Inaugeration is essentially a partisan parade, much like the conventions. MSNBC has chosen to let the editorial side cover the candidate they supported, which is what MSNBC viewers want. Obama supporters are going to watch on MSNBC and we have no interest in our historic occasion being tarnished by some journalist under pressure to think of something negative to say. We all know we can tune to Fox and listen to Karl Rove say something ridiculous if we want to. We don’t want to. Democrats are going to watch MSNBC, Republicans are going to watch FNC and Independents will watch CNN.

    It’s a no win for a straight journalist, anyway. David Gregory will get hammered if he shows up talking about “this historic occasion” and, uh, what else is he going to say?

  4. identcity Says:

    It’s not posturing. Elections require coverage that is editorially independent, or centrist, so that accusations of bias remain that, accusations, based upon the accusers own bias.

    Something like the inauguration, does not require editorial independence. Fox News will be letting their editorials do the talking all throughout their coverage, and MSNBC should be allowed to do the same.

  5. Only a mindless tool would think Olbermann & Matthews anchoring the convention coverage was “a good thing”. It was so over-the-top bad that even Jon Stewart blasted their douchebaggery.

    Though, it did result in Joe Scarborough absolutely bitch-slapping David Shuster live on the air, so maybe it wasn’t so bad.

  6. I don’t think having KO and Mathews host the Republican convention was a good idea, but the Democratic one was fine.

  7. Yes, because that accurate analysis immediately after Michelle Obama’s speech was vital: “Case closed. She nailed it….She hit a grand slam.”

    Joe, it was atrocious.

  8. Only a mindless tool couldn’t see that Michelle’s speech was awesome.

  9. I guess I’m a mindless tool then, as are the thousands of others who dozed off during it.

    It was an adequate speech, joe. Nothing more.

    Since you thought it was so awesome, care to refresh us with what it made it so awesome? Was it her delivery?

    Any memorable quotes?

    Olbermann immediately said “Case closed” when it ended. He was right. The case was closed on whether or not he should even anchor NEWS again. And the answer was a resounding no.

  10. It was awesome because it was sweet and from the heart, she looked tall and smokin’, and she was on the way to being the first African-American First Lady. Good enough for me. Don’t even get me started on how cute the kids were afterward.

  11. MSNBC has chosen to let the editorial side cover the candidate they supported,

    Olbermann and Matthews do not represent the “Editorial side”. NBC has no “Editorial side”. Matthews and Olbermann represent the “ideologue side”.

  12. Thanks for clarifying, joe.

    So basically, all Michelle Obama had to do was show up and look nice for her speech that was written by someone else, try to sound sincere, and that translates into “case closed’ and “grand slam”.

    You impress extremely easily, don’t you?

    If Hannity was anchoring RNC convention coverage (which they wouldn’t have him do), and he said “case closed” and “grand slam” after a ho-hum speech from Cindy McCain or Laura Bush, I would express the same complaints.

    Spud is right. Olbermann & Matthews are total ideologues and shouldn’t been anchoring MSNBC’s news coverage. Their past performances were abysmal and they are totally incapable of doing anything but cheerleading the left and slamming the right.

  13. Well, after 8 years of the Bush clowns, it may not take much to impress me. You got me with the Hannity analogy. That WOULD make me sick. I’ll amend my opinion. Although I personally won’t mind MSNBC’s Inaugeral coverage, it really aint right. So I changed my mind, sue me.

  14. You’re a gentleman & a scholar, joe.

  15. Aah BR, you’re only saying that ’cause I agreed with you…mindless tool. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: