Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Keith Olbermann fired

PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 9:18:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Apparently his rants were just too much for the network. And now, an Olbermann parody.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 10:59:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 9:18:54 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Apparently his rants were just too much for the network. And now, an Olbermann parody.



9/10

They must be sick of Olberman being the scapegoat for conservative talk radio.
no comment
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:09:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
They must be sick of Olberman being the scapegoat for conservative talk radio.:

Apparently they told him to tone it down, and suspended him without pay for breaking a contractural agreement. Then MSNBC got new management and they canned him for being a gaffe machine.

Rick Sanchez was fired in October for making anti-semitic remarks about Jon Stewart. I found that out today.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:24:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
such a tragic loss. Do you think the ratings had anything to do with it? Did anyone ever actually watch that self-important jock-sniffing windbag?
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:31:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 1:24:13 PM, innomen wrote:
such a tragic loss. Do you think the ratings had anything to do with it? Did anyone ever actually watch that self-important jock-sniffing windbag?:

Sometimes, but it was to be amused by his self-righteous scorn, like the one in the parody video.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 5:13:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 9:18:54 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Apparently his rants were just too much for the network. And now, an Olbermann parody.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com...

Keith's suspension was in November.

If you're going to make a thread about someone losing (one of) their (highly paid, prodigious) job(s) then at least get it right.

The report states that Comcast recently came to own MSNBC and Comcast's reputation preceeds itself. I'm sure the corporatist actions of Comcast and the extremely anti-corporatist attitude of Keith had absolutely nothing to do with it, though.

Piece said. Carry on smuglings.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 5:57:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Keith's suspension was in November.

If you're going to make a thread about someone losing (one of) their (highly paid, prodigious) job(s) then at least get it right.:

Did I say anything counter to that? I said he was first suspended and then fired. Where in that was I factually inaccurate?

The report states that Comcast recently came to own MSNBC and Comcast's reputation preceeds itself. I'm sure the corporatist actions of Comcast and the extremely anti-corporatist attitude of Keith had absolutely nothing to do with it, though.:

If Olbermann wasn't a corporate shill he wouldn't have worked for gobs of money for a corporation that was started by the world's richest man, Bill Gates, and one of the most successful CEO's in entertainment history, Tom Rogers. At best he was a shill pandering for the Left, at worst he was a hypocrite for lambasting corporatism while biting the hand that feeds.

Piece said. Carry on smuglings.:

If I'm smug, what's Olbermann?
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 3:03:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Paradigm_L0st said:
Did I say anything counter to that? I said he was first suspended and then fired. Where in that was I factually inaccurate?

Y'certainly did. Your post pointed towards his suspension as a contributing or deciding factor. The fact that you provided neither the date nor the circumstances of the suspension (because providing either accurately would undercut the point) kind of makes you look bad.

Paradigm_L0st said:
If Olbermann wasn't a corporate shill he wouldn't have worked for gobs of money

Way to imply that being highly paid by a network partially created by a company looking for a FREE way to spread FREE media FREELY makes you corporatist. Oh, and that company trying to spread that FREE entertainment would be the most capitalistic of the two.

Paradigm_L0st said:
for a corporation that was started by the world's richest man, Bill Gates, and one of the most successful CEO's in entertainment history, Tom Rogers.

The same Bill Gates that makes a point of donating five or six billion dollars per year, founded, donates to and funds the Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation and never had to resort to fadist or populist strategies to increase sales, instead choosing to let people view their products as they were?

Yeah...

Paradigm_L0st said:
At best he was a shill pandering for the Left, at worst he was a hypocrite for lambasting corporatism while biting the hand that feeds.

Indeed, how dare anyone on television (and online, and who wrote a book) have a political opinion, worse yet, how dare anyone get paid to express that opinion eloquently and fluently in such a way that it dumbs down political process so the unwashed masses can understand them. Here's a fun tip, guess who, according to the Wikipedia article on the term "Pundit" was the first modern day political pundit?

Wasn't Keith.

It was Bill O'Reilly. (check it yo: http://en.wikipedia.org... )

So I'll just wait for you to apply the same harsh criticism to him now, since, you know, he's guilty of pretty much the same thing, especially being an employee of Rupert Murdoch who is endlessly looking to expand his cute little media empire and thus being a damn sight more corporatist than Keith and MSNBC are.

Paradigm_lost said:
If I'm smug, what's Olbermann?

Richer and more successful than you, I reckon, despite being out of a job during the worst global financial crises...well...ever.

Have fun with that one.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 4:02:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Your post pointed towards his suspension as a contributing or deciding factor.:

Bullsh*t, all I said was he was fired, and then I found out he was suspended before he was fired. THAT'S IT. Any inferences you drew from it is a figment of your imagination.

The fact that you provided neither the date nor the circumstances of the suspension (because providing either accurately would undercut the point) kind of makes you look bad.:

What?!?! Why did I need to provide a date, and how in the f*ck does that make me look bad?

Way to imply that being highly paid by a network partially created by a company looking for a FREE way to spread FREE media FREELY makes you corporatist. Oh, and that company trying to spread that FREE entertainment would be the most capitalistic of the two.:

See those things in between broadcasts? Yeah, those are called commercials which are used to PAY the network. MSNBC is no different than any other network.

The same Bill Gates that makes a point of donating five or six billion dollars per year, founded, donates to and funds the Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation and never had to resort to fadist or populist strategies to increase sales, instead choosing to let people view their products as they were?:

Haha, Bill Gates' charity is completely and utterly irrelevant to how MSNBC is a f*cking CORPORATION that PAYS Keith Olbermann exorbitant amounts of cash. Bill Gates is the BEACON for capitalism. All the money created by Bill Gates and donated to charity was by CAPITALISM, of which Olbermann benefited from, handsomely. My point is that Keith Olbermann is a hyprocrite.

Indeed, how dare anyone on television (and online, and who wrote a book) have a political opinion, worse yet, how dare anyone get paid to express that opinion eloquently and fluently in such a way that it dumbs down political process so the unwashed masses can understand them.:

Oh, no, I get why they all do it... money, in the form of ratings. The worst thing news outlets ever did was start this political commentary bullsh*t. FOX started it, MSNBC and CNN were falling by the wayside, and figured they'd better go sleezeball too since FOX was doing it.

Here's a fun tip, guess who, according to the Wikipedia article on the term "Pundit" was the first modern day political pundit?:

Who cares? What difference does that make?

It was Bill O'Reilly. (check it yo: http://en.wikipedia.org... ):

OMG, Bill O'Reilly came up with a term?!? WHOA!!!!.... Okay, I don't get it. What's the relevance?

So I'll just wait for you to apply the same harsh criticism to him now, since, you know, he's guilty of pretty much the same thing, especially being an employee of Rupert Murdoch who is endlessly looking to expand his cute little media empire and thus being a damn sight more corporatist than Keith and MSNBC are.:

You speak to me as if I side with the Right. I'm a libertarian, you chode, which means Bill O on the right and Keith O on the left could all die in fires for all I care. They're all infectious blights on the American landscape. What makes this Keith Olbermann especially peccant, in my opinion, is that he railed against corporatism while being fed by it. That just pisses me off while he condescendingly lectures everyone. So, f*ck Keith Olbermann.

Paradigm_lost said:
If I'm smug, what's Olbermann?

Richer and more successful than you, I reckon, despite being out of a job during the worst global financial crises...well...ever.:

Yep, that's right, he is. Which corporation do you think he's going to go to next to bite the hand that feeds him? That f*cking prick.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 7:05:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Paradigm_L0st said:
Bullsh*t, all I said was he was fired, and then I found out he was suspended before he was fired. THAT'S IT. Any inferences you drew from it is a figment of your imagination.

I bet.

Paradigm_L0st said:
What?!?! Why did I need to provide a date, and how in the f*ck does that make me look bad?

Do I really need to explain this to you? Are you THAT desperate to avoid admitting to a general lack of knowledge about the circumstances here?

This is a news forum.

It is for news.

Things that are in the news, like the firing of a news/political commentator need to be contextualised with any additional information provided.

Information like their suspension three months ago.

Information you failed to provide. You focus on the negative things, which is fair enough, it's clear you didn't like the guy, and yet you don't contextualise those things, so you have a heaving mass of negativity, which is pretty self-defeating, really.

Paradigm_L0st said:
See those things in between broadcasts? Yeah, those are called commercials which are used to PAY the network. MSNBC is no different than any other network.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

I was talking about the MSN section, there, not the NBC Section.

Pay attention now poppet.

Paradigm_L0st said:
Haha, Bill Gates' charity is completely and utterly irrelevant to how MSNBC is a f*cking CORPORATION that PAYS Keith Olbermann exorbitant amounts of cash. Bill Gates is the BEACON for capitalism.

It was relevant enough for you to try and use it as a smear point, and if Bill Gates, with his endless contributions to charity, creation of a charitable organisation, goals to spread media and information freely, and so on doesn't detract from his corporatism then it begs the question why Keith lasted as long as he did, really.

Paradigm_L0st said:
All the money created by Bill Gates and donated to charity was by CAPITALISM, of which Olbermann benefited from, handsomely. My point is that Keith Olbermann is a hyprocrite.

Your point is that Keith Olbermann is a hypocrite for being paid to do his job.

Do...do you get paid to do your job, PL?

Paradigm_L0st said:
The worst thing news outlets ever did was start this political commentary bullsh*t. FOX started it, MSNBC and CNN were falling by the wayside, and figured they'd better go sleezeball too since FOX was doing it.

If you understand it so vividly, then thatrt of negates your earlier point. Yes, they do it for the sake of ratings, yes, they get advertisers to pay for their broadcasts because charging ordinary people for the privilige of accessing free information would be kind of...corporatist...capitalistic...stupid...so the average person accessing the information loses nothing, the company earns enough to keep it's broacasts going and pay it's staff...and the companies that wish to advertise on the network pay their fees of their own free will for the sake of marketing...everybody wins...but corporatism and capitalism demand the presence of a loser, so...who would that be, again?

Paradigm_L0st said:
Who cares? What difference does that make?

None whatsoever, it's just nice to watch your reaction when you don't realise what I'm doing, Bill O'Reilly didn't come up with a term, the term "Pundit" is derived from an ancient Hindu word (I did provide you with a link so you could read this and not look stupid) Bill O'Reilly was the first modern day pundit of the form you seem to loathe, and yet, I see no criticism. Which means either you hate Keith more, for some reason, or you really just want the one person/thing to hate because two would be just too many.

Paradigm_L0st said:
You speak to me as if I side with the Right. I'm a libertarian, you chode, which means Bill O on the right and Keith O on the left could all die in fires for all I care.

I'm familiar with what you claim your political allegiance is, but that's sort of the point. You seem rather keen to hate Keith and if it were anyone else, chances are I'd be stood next to you saying exactly the same thing, but what you don't seem to have realised is that if MSNBC and it's creators were as corporatist as your point demands they be then we wouldn't be having this discussion, because Keith would have never had the kind of time he had on his show, he'd have been fired a long time before now. Now that Comcast, a genuinely corporatist corporation, comeinto the picture, now Keith gets fired, and now we're having this conversation. Put two and two together, PL, if Keith's hypocrisy (if any) were as bad as you claim then why did he last so long in the position he was in? Furthermore, even if he was a hypocrite, was it not for the greater good to use a position like his to speak out against corporatism because people tend to ignore people who stand in the street on soap boxes and yell at them about the evils of corporatism?

You seem to expect him to preach against corporatism, an opinion you seem to share, but do so without the coverage and the paycheck, but then his position, arguably, was the best position to do so.

So you either hate him for agreeing with you and using his position to his advantage even though he'd have to to be taken seriously.

Or.

You hate him because he was smart enough to realise that and did it anyway.

Paradigm_L0st:
Yep, that's right, he is. Which corporation do you think he's going to go to next to bite the hand that feeds him? That f*cking prick.

We'll have to see, no doubt even if he becomes a representitive of the Red Cross you'll still find reason to call him a wanker.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?