NBC/MSNBC Redux: Bauder Picks Up Where Stelter Left Off

Today David Bauder writes of the "uneasy coexistence" of NBC with MSNBC, its junior cable sibling living under the same roof at 30 Rock. Bauder points to last week's letter to NBC News prez Steve Capus from White House counsel Ed Gillespie wherein Gillespie totted up the various ways in which NBC had run afoul of the Bush administration — daring to edit an interview, daring to label long-term ethnic conflict in Iraq a civil war, hair-splitting over the definition of "recession" — and zeroes in on the last paragraph:

Mr. Capus, I'm sure you don't want people to conclude that there is really no distinction between the "news" as reported on NBC and the "opinion" as reported on MSNBC, despite the increasing blurring of those lines. I welcome your response to this letter, and hope it is one that reassures your broadcast network's viewers that blatantly partisan talk show hosts like Christopher Matthews and Keith Olbermann at MSNBC don't hold editorial sway over the NBC network news division.

That, says Bauder, is"the soft white underbelly" of NBC's relationship with MSNBC — echoing a concern raised last week by the NYT's Brian Stelter, who wondered "Is MSNBC a Political Liability to NBC?"

The question at the crux of both these articles is the one posed by Gillespie: Does the "increasing blurring of the lines" between NBC and MSNBC mean that the opinionated cable sibling is starting to "hold editorial sway" over its straight-news counterpart, threatening to tarnish the reputation built over decades as a news organization? Both articles point specifically to Keith Olbermann, the most opinionated, outspoken pundit on the network and the one whose ratings have shot up as his broadcast has veered left. One of the keystones of this success has been his tirades against the Bush administration, his "Special Comments" which have also targeted Hillary Clinton in recent months.

Yet Olbermann regularly co-anchors MSNBC'c primary coverage, along with Hardball host Chris Matthews — who, Bauder reminds us, made an on-air apology to Clinton after a sexist comment in January. As anchors, it is Olbermann and Matthews who lead the evening's coverage, bringing in NBC News journalists as MSNBC correspondents, including Tim Russert, Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams. There have been rumblings about whether Olbermann, who dedicated two of his last three Special Comments to criticism of Clinton, should be acting as anchor on one hand and partisan on the other.

Both articles frame the situation as a question — is it a problem for NBC or isn't it? — but even the suggestion of an appearance of a problem is a problem for a news division trying to report the news at any time, let alone during such a highly-charged election season. Bauder quotes former NBC News correspondent and former host of Fox News Watch host Eric Burns: "It's a fine point, but for someone who cares about news it's a very important one...and it's not something that has ever been raised before."

Well, it's being raised now, and how: There's the recent onslaught of attacks from Fox News (whereon Bill O'Reilly has been ripping into GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt) and Karl Rove's recent five-page letter ripping into MSNBC host (and former top exec) Dan Abrams, plus Gillespie's letter, firing a warning shot.

Capus shrugs off the criticism, calling it a "non-issue" and noting that the channel's success "comes with attention and scrutiny." Yes — and it's that scrutiny that has raised this question, even before the broadsides from the right. It remains to be seen whether continued scrutiny will keep the question alive...or get to the point where the question marks are removed.

Is MSNBC a Political Liability to NBC? [NYT]
NBC News, MSNBC: Uneasy coexistence? [AP via USA Today]

Comments

[TheRebel82]

These are just people terrified that Faux News is on the cusp of getting its ass kicked by msnbc whose ratings are rising. Thats why Bill O'rally continues to try and defame GE's Immelt.

[jlp48]

I will no longer watch NBC or MSNBC - I see no difference between Brian Williams and Tim Russert and the 2 crazies Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman.

If I was to rate them starting with the worst to least worst - it would be difficult because of their different stages - they all twist and spin - I CAN'T STAND THEM.

[LivingStardust]

This article is based on the premise that ANY mainstream corporate media should be trusted after their complicity in helping Bush violate the Constitution. Many people (and more every day) already get their news like I do: we dig across the world's coverage and extract the truth from behind the obfuscation and fascist lies. NBC has no image or reputation to tarnish. Nor does MSNBC, FOX, CNN, CBS or ABC. They all capitulated to Bush Co. propaganda (which if you know anything about propaganda was obvious from day one).

CORPORATE DRIVEN NEWS ARE ALL LIARS AND SHOULD NOT BE TRUSTED. THINK FOR YOURSELF. EXERCISE FREE WILL. LEARN TO DISCERN FACT FROM SPIN.

The truth sets you free. It may make you an angry miserable bastard, but you'll be free and freedom has no price too high to pay.

[Gdebs]

Totally agree. Networks told us that it was more important to vote for a candidate we would like to have a beer with than someone with some brains.

[DocR]

This latest round of criticism from the corporate news appears to be nothing but a last ditch attempt to discredit Hillary Clinton critics. Clinton is, after all, Wall Street's darling. Her whole campaign seems to have found a new home on Fox News. I agree with the posters who assert Fox News is unwatchable garbage posing as news. Remember Brit Hume's debate question to Ron Paul (paraphrasing): Why do you want al Qaeda to win in Iraq? MSNBC, especially Obermann, is the only cable news station worth watching anymore.

[BigLib]

The stink of MSNBC has finally gotten so bad that the AP is noticing.

[Fizzgig]

It's not a violation of journalistic ethics for an anchor to express an opinion. I remember when Walter Cronkite came out in opposition to the war in Viet-Nam. It shook the Johnson administration to its boots, with LBJ reportedly wondering aloud how long they could go on having "lost Cronkite." What is important is for the anchor to be able to keep his or her opinions separate from the reporting of the news, which consists primarily of reporting the factual occurrences of the day.

In Cronkite's day, he had a half-hour newscast, wherein he reported the facts and then occasionally, in a totally separate segment which, if I recall was tagged on screen as "commentary," gave his opinions.

Olbermann's special comments are always identified as such. But that raises two questions - one is whether he can keep his opinions from coloring his editorial decisions - i.e., which facts are the salient ones and need to be reported. The other is whether his viewers begin to doubt whether he can be trusted to do so. Cronkite had the trust of his viewers. Whether Keith can keep his remains to be seen.

[navalflightofficer]

You've got to be kidding me? Are you seriously comparing Keith Olberman to Walter Cronkite?
You've fallen, of course, for the hard left liberal rhetoric he puts out. Whether I agree with it or not, it is still liberal propaganda. Remember, not all propaganda is untruth. But be clear, Keith Olberman is NOT reporting.
Now Olberman wants us to believe he is in Edward R. Murrow's class. Give me a break.
It is nice to see a counterpart to Fox News, but it is just that - Fox news from the left and should not be viewed as real journalism.

[Fizzgig]

Sorry to have been unclear. I was trying to make two points, which evidently I did not do very well. The first point was not that I think Keith is a modern Uncle Walter. Rather it was simply that reporters are allowed to give their opinions so long as they make it clear that they are commenting, not reporting.

The second point was that making commentary is dangerous because if a reporter becomes identified as a partisan or ideologue, he or she risks losing credibility because the viewers may mistrust the reporter's editorial judgment.

If you reread my post, you'll note that I did not equate Olbermann with Cronkite - I merely used Cronkite as an example of how a scrupulous journalist could engage in commentary.

I respectfully disagree with your statement that Olbermann is not reporting the news. As an example, his piece last night on Phil Gramm's involvement with the McCain campaign was newsworthy. Keith pointed out that, during his tenure in the Senate, Gramm was was instrumental in drafting and sponsoring many bills that changed how the financial services industry was regulated. These laws helped establish the current regulatory climate which allowed the abuses of the lending industry and helped lead us into the current mortgage crisis. Keith's report constituted both news and analysis, and raised legitimate issues that voters should be aware of. However, with that said, the question of whether Keith is a journalist comparable to Cronkite was not part of my original post.

[jayburd]

In Olbermann's defense he usually puts his punditry aside when he anchors Primary coverage and sticks to straight newscasting. Matthews, on the other hand, is his same confrontational, hardballish self on those nights.

[kingsbridge77]

The New Republic's Isaac Chotiner has an interesting piece today on MSNBC's pro-Obama bias:

Excerpt:
"So, as much as I find MSNBC entertaining, their creation of a parallel, pro-Obama universe is the type of thing I'd expect of Fox. That's when I know it's time to change the channel..."

Read whole story: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=b48a6936-fb3c-42b0-83c1-f91d1cb3a3dc

[berberry]

Fox has been in the tank for the Bush administration for way more than 5 years, dexx. But of course your point is taken.

I think there IS something to this criticism of MSNBC's coverage, though. I'm very liberal and I can see the bias clearly.

The problem for MSNBC is the need to protect the reputation of NBC News. There is no similar issue at Fox News. Until FNC came along, the Fox name hadn't been associated with news coverage since MovieTone News reels were popular at cinema. NBC News has a serious reason to be worried, I think, if their cable network's supposed straightforward news product - like election night coverage and daytime reporting - is perceived as being biased.

I think the solution for them is to leave things as they are, except quit using Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as anchors on election nights. Put them on the commentary panel instead. Plus, they should make greater use of slogans like Countdown's "You're entitled to his opinion!" to make it more obvious that certain programs are intended to be biased.

[dexxjones]

i dissagree. "liberal" as defined by the typical wingnut actually describes 70% of this country. look at how well pox news did catering to just 27% lunatic fringe. i suspect that some people here are using the clintonesque definition of what the actual middle is. newsflash it AINT republican light like they would all have us think.

[nolalily]

FOX is nothing but opinion. The difference between Fox and MSNBC is that Fox will make up their own facts in order to win an argument whereas MSNBC attempts to put forth opinion based on facts.

MSNBC is necessary as long as there is also a Fox News.

It's interesting that Gillespie, (who is employed as another Republican shill) holds the opinion that it is MSNBC that is questionable and not Fox.

[tlcutter]

nolalily the bias is in your post.

[jayburd]

Truer words were never spoken. If Fox wants MSNBC to ease off on the partisanship, MSNBC should reply, "you first."

Until that day comes, though, MSNBC should go right on stating facts and sticking it to Fox, the Bush administration, and the neocon chickenhawk pundit community at large. MSNBC has managed to even the scales that had been greatly tipping to the right in recent years and I applaud them for it. I continue to be an avid "Countdown" viewer and am proud to call myself a fan of Keith Olbermann. It takes tremendous courage to do what he does -- speak uncomfortable truths and face harsh realities in an unflinching manner. Yes, he's an opinionated, abrasive loudmouth but so what? He rarely gets his facts wrong and he admits it when he does. You can't say the same for O'Hannitycoulterbaugh.

[kingsbridge77]

Olbermann recently said that McCain should "buy depends" in order to help the economy recover.

Using McCain's age against him is something Obama spoke against two days ago. He said:

"Senator McCain is healthy, he is campaigning actively all across the country, his doctors have given him a clean bill of health, I don’t think it should be an issue in the campaign."

link:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0508/Obama_says_McCain_age_shouldnt_be_issue.html

[strifeknot]

MSNBC is a liability to NBC because The White House and FOX News have their panties in a bunch over it?

Sounds like an asset to me.

[DasBoot]

It should be fairly obvious that the right is trying to shame GE into putting MSNBC, esp. Olbermann, on a shorter leash. As if they ever cared about the blurring of reporting and opinion at Fox.

But as long as the left turn increases MSNBC's revenues, this should remain a mere charade.

[hwebb54]

MSNBC should be renamed "Obama Headquarters"

It's that bad.

[theDrip]

And we care about the far right wing trolls and their extreme definitions of fair play why? NBC and GE are right wing, folks! Keith just happens to report the news without a slant or omission of fact as Brian and that real news show "Today" often do. Give me a break.
Real news would be found on the internet, on BBC maybe, or at some independent newspaper outlets in California or Wisconsin. You will not find credible journalist on corporate broadcast television. Although they use a public license and should be forced to report honest and complete information much like how they cannot show us Janet Jackson's breast, but they can conspired with the Pentagon to mislead on the facts of the "war on terror".
This is a fascist media debate trying to convince us the ugly baby is not as pretty as theirs. The news at NBC and FOX are both ugly. NBC has a glimmer as long as a new more moderate regime has the prospect to take back the White House. One must always be on the right side of the power curve especially when government contracts are on the line.

[tlcutter]

If you honestly believe that Olberman presents the "news "without bias, you have had one too many.

[spaceman3838]

or better yet on crack