The Freedom Files Continue to Grow!

ban basketball · 05-20-2008, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by matclone

Even if Olberman doesn't hate, would you say he exaggerates? My complaint, in general, about so many of the things we see on network television or radio, is their single-minded statements--as if they're in a debate, or in a courtroom, or a commercial--and it's their job to convince their audience of a certain point of view--with no ambiguities or complexities allowed. Even ESPN does this in their commentaries.

No one has yet to prove me wrong on this open challenge that I've had for two years: Watch the show and find an instance where he provided something false or exaggerated. Can't be done.

Olbermann is truly a trained journalist. He has bias, sure, but bias does not mean wrong or inaccurate. All of us have bias. We can still report facts.

matclone · 05-20-2008, 03:23 PM

I didn't watch the video of the link you provided so I don't have the complete context, but I see Olberman referred to Bush & Co. as "cold-blooded killers". I assume it was a statement intended to provoke rather than inform. One might ask: Did I learn anything new from this, or is it just feeding my anger? It's not unreasonable to be angry about injustice but that in itself only goes so far. Has Olberman offered any solutions to resolving a bad situation (the war in Iraq), or does he just want us to be bitter about Bush?

ban basketball · 05-20-2008, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by matclone

I didn't watch the video of the link you provided so I don't have the complete context, but I see Olberman referred to Bush & Co. as "cold-blooded killers". I assume it was a statement intended to provoke rather than inform. One might ask: Did I learn anything new from this, or is it just feeding my anger? It's not unreasonable to be angry about injustice but that in itself only goes so far. Has Olberman offered any solutions to resolving a bad situation (the war in Iraq), or does he just want us to be bitter about Bush?

As for the "cold blooded killers," I don't know. Considering that most of the mainstream media has done little to investigate this question, maybe it's valid. I would guess that for many-including many on this forum-it will be informative, as they haven't heard it in many other places. Furthermore, it ought to provoke anger anyway. Complacency and giving into bullies has gotten us to the point where we are at today.

Should Olbermann offer solutions? Is that the job of a journalist? Do we want out journalists to offer solutions? I personally want them to (1) report and (2) provide commentary where fitting.

matclone · 05-20-2008, 03:58 PM

He doesn't necessarily have to provide a solution--I'm just asking whether his commentary provides anything more than provocation (solutions being one possibility).

I agree journalists should raise issues--even those which are unpopular or that challenge the status-quo. It's perhaps not totally fair for me to imply criticism of a show I haven't seen, but I'm just highly skeptical of cable TV news outlets. These who present as regulars Glenn Beck, Hannity & Colmes, Oh Really?, Ann Coulter, Travis Carlson(?), Joe Scarborough and others lack a certain credibility. Contrast any of these to Bill Moyers, for example.

matclone · 05-20-2008, 04:11 PM

One journalist who holds political views that are probably close to mine is Amy Goodman (Democracy Now). Her goal is not so provocative but I have trouble even watching or listening to her on a regular basis because the point of view of the program is so skewed.

Throwby · 05-20-2008, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by ban basketball

I'm the biggest cheering section and fan of Olbermann that you'll find. Absolutely no: hate or "venom" is not Olbermann. Only during his "Special Comments" does he display anger-rightful anger by being betrayed by our government-but never "venom" and hatred.

Yes, Savage hates. Yes, Colter hates. Yes, Limbaugh hates. Yes, Ingraham hates. No, Olbermann does not hate. Simply watch his show for a night and you won't ses a rage filled person.

He looked pretty rage filled on the clip. Not to mention pompous, arrogant and self righteous. Maybe he was just faking it for effect.

Tight-Waist · 05-21-2008, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by ban basketball

I'm the biggest cheering section and fan of Olbermann that you'll find. Absolutely no: hate or "venom" is not Olbermann. Only during his "Special Comments" does he display anger-rightful anger by being betrayed by our government-but never "venom" and hatred.

Yes, Savage hates. Yes, Colter hates. Yes, Limbaugh hates. Yes, Ingraham hates. No, Olbermann does not hate. Simply watch his show for a night and you won't ses a rage filled person.

I suppose you find him the epitome of objectivity.

Tight-Waist · 05-21-2008, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by ban basketball

No one has yet to prove me wrong on this open challenge that I've had for two years: Watch the show and find an instance where he provided something false or exaggerated. Can't be done.

Olbermann is truly a trained journalist. He has bias, sure, but bias does not mean wrong or inaccurate. All of us have bias. We can still report facts.

When you refuse to acknowledge calling the President "a cold blooded killer" to be either false or even an exaggeration, you reveal to all your total lack of objectivity on politial punditry.

ban basketball · 05-21-2008, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by Tight-Waist

When you refuse to acknowledge calling the President "a cold blooded killer" to be either false or even an exaggeration, you reveal to all your total lack of objectivity on politial punditry.

Again, making a comment when you never even heard what Olbermann said.

I'm not the sharpest blade in the drawer but even I know that when I'm going to claim something entirely out of my ass to-all the while questioning someone else's credibility-I better damned well have credibility myself, or at least act like I have credibility.

This could be the most comical-if you can call it that (sad maybe?)-post that you've written, and you've written some doozies!

Tight-Waist · 05-21-2008, 06:57 PM

Originally Posted by ban basketball

Again, making a comment when you never even heard what Olbermann said.

I'm not the sharpest blade in the drawer but even I know that when I'm going to claim something entirely out of my ass to-all the while questioning someone else's credibility-I better damned well have credibility myself, or at least act like I have credibility.

This could be the most comical-if you can call it that (sad maybe?)-post that you've written, and you've written some doozies!

This is from the horse's mouth...
Last Wednesday, I quoted the phrase to say that Mr. Bush had now also given America "cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives."

I identified them as Mr. Bush's personnel "those in or formerly in your employ, who may yet be charged some day with war crimes." I also described the chaos of post-invasion Iraq, with "an American viceroy, enforced by merciless mercenaries who shoot unarmed Iraqis and then evade prosecution in any country by hiding behind" Mr. Bush's skirts.
No writer nor broadcaster is ever as clear and precise as he thinks he is.
Television goes by quickly and the viewer is not provided a copy of a script.
So it is possible that reasonable viewers might have been confused by exactly to whom I referred, especially considering I edited the original line: "Mr. Bush, at long last, has it not dawned on you that the America you have now created, includes cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives? They are called your cabinet. And your Pentagon."

The Freedom Files Continue to Grow!

Politics & Religion