In the second in a series of excerpts from his new book, Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America, John Avlon examines how Keith Olbermann tries to echo the moral authority of Edward R. Murrow, but only delivers self-righteous indignation.
* * *
In the beginning there was Phil Donahue. The soft and snowy-haired advocate of liberal causes, a caring, not confrontational ‘70s-style talk show host—he wanted to feel your pain.
Then there was Keith Olbermann—he wants you to feel his pain.
Liberals’ new assertiveness accompanies the rise of this unlikely on-air advocate, a sportscaster turned straight news anchor turned partisan pit bull.
Smart, funny and acerbic, Olbermann also has a reputation for being prickly and paranoid. But his instinct to pick fights provided important utility: At a time when conservative opinion anchors were ruling the cable news world, Keith Olbermann decided to return fire.
Here’s a measure of his success, When Olbermann started his eight p.m. show, Countdown, on MSNBC in 2003 there were no overtly liberal prime-time anchors in all of cable news. Now his network is seen as the liberal corollary to Fox, featuring a full line-up of liberals in the orbit of his eight p.m. slot.
Aiming to echo the moral authority of Edward R. Murrow down to his lift of “Good Night and Good Luck,” Olbermann trades in self-righteous indignation. His signature schtick is the special commentary, five minutes of Keith staring right into the camera delivering a diatribe that he has written himself. It’s a radio sermon made for TV, delivered in a born broadcaster’s baritone. His targets are anyone-or anything-to his political right.
It’s tempting to describe his commentary style as full-contract, to reach for an available sports metaphor for combat, but it wouldn’t be accurate—because Olbermann doesn’t have guests on his show who disagree with him. It is an amen corner, an echo chamber presented as a truth-telling moment for America. Keith Olbermann isn’t interested in any opinion but his own.
Like his rising alter-ego Glenn Beck, Olbermann had his roots in radio, a precocious if isolated teenager running a half-watt station at his high school in Westchester, New York, and then graduating to the Cornell University radio station. His love of radio is evidenced in his pauses and diction, delivering a point with dramatic effect. He doesn’t talk so much as deliver.
But it wasn’t politics but sports that drove him, and after bouncing around local sportscaster gigs in regional markets, he landed at ESPN in 1992, selected to co-host SportsCenter at eleven p.m. with Dan Patrick. Their repartee redefined the model, with amped-up humor and sly asides (“If you’re scoring at home, or even if you’re alone…”) they mocked the formalities of the format and made the show an event, a return to the frat house for exhausted adults. Most of all, they made the news fun to watch, a lesson that would last.
But Olbermann did not last at ESPN. In 1997, at the height of his public popularity as a sportscaster he left. One colleague recalled, “He didn’t burn bridges, he napalmed them.”
Olbermann’s reputation as a malcontent would dog him as he hosted shows on Fox and MSNBC. Sometimes contracts were not renewed, sometimes he was fired. After an ESPN expose portrayed Keith as a sour, insular man who made co-host Suzy Kolber cry after shows, Olbermann felt compelled to write a public mea culpa in Salon.com. More than a face-saving PR stunt, the 2002 essay was a reflective walk through Olbermann’s psyche, full of competing insecurities and perfectionism: “I have lived much of my life assuming much of the responsibility around me and developing a dread of being blamed for things going wrong,” he wrote. “If anything would have cut through my neuroses, it would’ve been a colleague’s tears. If I had known, I think I could’ve jumped over the fence I’d built around myself and said what the inner guy always knew: No TV show is worth crying over. Suzy: I’m sorry.”
In 2003, Olbermann got a rare second chance to host a prime-time show on a network he’d left on strained terms, MSNBC. Countdown was a late March replacement for Phil Donahue’s brief return to television, a ratings failure that was seen as the end of experimenting with liberal views in prime time. “MSNBC takes sharp right turn,” was one typical reading of the tea leaves. Ironically, the night of Olbermann’s debut, he announced, “Our charge for the immediate future is to stay out of the way of the news. … News is news. We will not be screwing around with it.”
He played it straight down the middle and enjoyed middling ratings. He cultivated a feud with Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly, naming him one of “the worst persons in the world” more then fifty times in four years. He reenacted news stories with puppets (another thing he shared with Glenn Beck). Humor was his calling card as a news broadcaster. His personal political beliefs were unknown even to people close to him, and Olbermann has said he doesn’t vote.
But that profile changed dramatically in August 2006. Then-general manager Dan Abrams had written a memo encouraging hosts to offer opinion on air. Waiting for a flight at LAX, Olbermann happened upon a speech given by Bush Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in which he compared opponents of the administration’s war and counter-terrorism strategy to Nazi appeasers, saying that America was fighting “a new type of fascism.” Fired up and fueled by a few screwdrivers, Olbermann wrote his first special comment.
“The man who sees absolutes where all other man see nuances and shades of meaning is either a prophet or a quack,” he began. “Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.” Olbermann accused the secretary of impugning “the morality or intelligence-indeed, the loyalty-of the majority of Americans who opposed the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. … This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely. And as such, all voices count–not just his.”
It was a forceful but odd addition to prime time, a counter-speech with an inner history nerd erupting from within: Churchill, Neville Chamberlain, Hitler, Nixon, Joe McCarthy, General Curtis LeMay and Ed Murrow all mentioned within five minutes. The audiences loved it. The special commentaries continued and the ratings spiked with the rhetoric.


































GOProud // Feb 17, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Herr Olbermann is, first, last and foremost, a sports news reader.
His show routinely ranks at the bottom of ratings for the MSNBC line-up… for a cable network and flagship element of the NBC Con-Job, that’s pathetic even by AirAmerica standards.
Herr Olbermann is the junkyard dawg still tied to the rusting, discarded Volvo chassis labeled “Liberal” on the license plate. Someone needs to put the dawg to sleep because he’s doing exactly that to his viewers.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/05/keith-olbermann-defends-c_n_451482.html
Just take a listen to Herr Olbermann recently trying to convince himself he’s still relevant to the farLeft, liberal cause.
His career peak was sports new reader.
kevin47 // Feb 17, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Really? Olbermann compares himself to Murrow?
GOProud // Feb 17, 2010 at 12:57 pm
I’m not sure, but did Murrow’s show ever get cancelled like it now appears Herr Olbermann’s show is heading?
Maybe Keith-with-the-captivating-teeth can join Fox News… as a go-fer intern or something appropriate to his skill set?
franco 2 // Feb 17, 2010 at 2:26 pm
As negative as this review is, it gives Obermann far too much credit. It compares his radio career to Glen Beck’s which is laughable. “Like his rising alter-ego Glenn Beck, Olbermann had his roots in radio…”
“Smart, funny and acerbic, Olbermann…” Really? Ya think John???
And this book is co-written by that famous non-partisan Tina Brown which is conveniently omitted here.
This book is a hit piece on Beck, pure and simple . Obermann is the camouflage used to pretend this is about the ‘extremes” and denigrates Beck by citing Obermann as an equivalent.
Beck has far superior ratings than Obermann, like by a factor of 8 or 10. So you might as well compare the Rolling Stones to Herman’s Hermits.
The book needs an editor and it needs to be proofread by a human being, and the amateurishness of presentation is embarrassing…
“more then (sic) fifty times in four years” -the hallmark of a badly educated slacker
“It’s tempting to describe his commentary style as full-contract (sic), to reach for an available sports metaphor for combat”
Here’s a measure of his success, When Olbermann started his eight p.m. show, Countdown, on MSNBC in 2003 there were no overtly liberal prime-time anchors in all of cable news. – punctuation (success, When)
“Then-general manager Dan Abrams had written a memo encouraging hosts to offer opinion on air.”
– punctuation
“The man who sees absolutes where all other man (sic) see nuances and shades of meaning is either a prophet or a quack,”
This is an error of transcription or spelling. Obermann does not speak ungramatically.
I can’t imagine what it is like to have to read this whole book. What drivel!
LauraNo // Feb 17, 2010 at 4:15 pm
MSNBC is not carried on regular on regular cable programming so ratings cannot be compared to channels that ARE carried for free and in hotels etcetera. Keith is smart and is magnificent at high-lighting absurdity. Not everyone’s cup of tea but I wouldn’t call him Beck’s alter ego.
kevin47 // Feb 17, 2010 at 6:01 pm
“MSNBC is not carried on regular on regular cable programming so ratings cannot be compared to channels that ARE carried for free and in hotels etcetera.”
I don’t know what “regular on regular cable” is, but MSNBC is included in the vast majority of cable packages.
“Keith is smart and is magnificent at high-lighting absurdity.”
Keith is a lunatic.
“Not everyone’s cup of tea but I wouldn’t call him Beck’s alter ego.”
He’s hardly anyone’s cup of tea. Nobody watches the guy, unless they are tuning in to Sunday Night Football.
GOProud // Feb 18, 2010 at 7:38 am
“Nobody watches the guy, unless they are tuning in to Sunday Night Football.”
…or unless they’re part of the farLeft lunatic fringe from MoveOn or CodePink or ACORN or one of the other faithless Obami cult groups.
Which are you, Dr Laura?
kevin47 // Feb 18, 2010 at 2:59 pm
“or unless they’re part of the farLeft lunatic fringe from MoveOn or CodePink or ACORN or one of the other faithless Obami cult groups.”
Meh, my parents watch him. I think he appeals to liberals who don’t like to actually discuss politics. My mom, in particular, gets tongue-tied and flustered when she realizes people don’t share her animosity toward conservatives.
I’m not sure CodePink or ACORN types are in the same layer of the fringe as MoveOn. The latter are earnest, prototypical liberal types in the conventional sense. The former are pretty darn scary. I’m not sure they watch cable news at all.