Skip to content Skip to footer

Olbermann Is Out: MSNBC Host’s Departure Shows the Limits of Corporate Media’s Liberalism

Whether the abrupt termination of MSNBC host Keith Olbermann’s contract on January 21 was connected to Olbermann’s left-of-center politics or the recent purchase of NBC by Comcast from General Electric, the host’s departure provides an opportunity to reflect on the bigger picture.

Whether the abrupt termination of MSNBC host Keith Olbermann’s contract on January 21 was connected to Olbermann’s left-of-center politics or the recent purchase of NBC by Comcast from General Electric, the host’s departure provides an opportunity to reflect on the bigger picture.

MSNBC’s current liberal identity is generally attributed to Olbermann, whose success offered compelling evidence that a left-of-center TV host could find a sizable audience. Olbermann’s willingness to criticize prominent Republican leaders and right-wing commentators like Fox’s Bill O’Reilly was virtually unknown in corporate television. And the show did more than that for progressive causes; for instance, as the Nation’s Jeremy Scahill noted on Twitter (1/21/11), Olbermann’s program regularly reported on the scandals associated with the Blackwater mercenary company.

Olbermann was not, however, the first avowedly liberal cable host. He was preceded at MSNBC by Phil Donahue, whose program was canceled in the run-up to the Iraq War for explicitly political reasons: His firing followed an internal NBC report that called him “a tired, left-wing liberal” who would be a “difficult public face for NBC in a time of war” (FAIR Action Alert, 3/7/03).

It’s reasonable to wonder whether politics were involved in Olbermann’s departure as well. Olbermann had several clashes with NBC management, most recently over donations he made to Democratic political candidates (FAIR Action Alert, 11/5/10).

Olbermann revealed in 2005 that MSNBC management had two years earlier pushed back against the leftward direction of his show, calling him onto the carpet when he had Al Franken and Janeane Garofalo on as guests in close succession (FAIR Media Advisory, 10/27/05):

I got called into a vice president’s office here and told, “Hey, we don’t mind you interviewing these guys, but should you really have put liberals on on consecutive nights?”

Last week’s formal approval of the Comcast/NBC merger raised questions about whether the new company had any role in the termination of Olbermann’s contract. Howard Kurtz of the Daily Beast, citing a “knowledgeable official,” reported that it didn’t (1/21/11), while the Washington Post’s Paul Farhi (1/23/11) reported that one source “intimate with MSNBC’s management” believed that the removal of Olbermann was related to the Comcast takeover.

Comcast’s record in this regard suggests concern is warranted. In 2008, Comcast fired one of its own reporters, CN8 TV host Barry Nolan, for speaking out against a local Emmy being awarded to Fox’s O’Reilly. Nolan had distributed materials critical of O’Reilly to other reporters—or, as Nolan explained it (Think Progress, 5/27/08), “I got fired from my job on a news and information network for reporting demonstrably true things in a room full of newspeople.”

There’s some truth to the notion that Comcast is a conservative company; Stephen Burke, Comcast COO and the man picked to head up NBC after the merger, raised at least $200,000 for George W. Bush’s 2004 campaign. But GE, a major military contractor, has also long had a Republican orientation—going back to its launching of Ronald Reagan’s political career (Extra!, 11-12/94). And no media conglomerate is likely to be comfortable owning an outlet with an explicitly progressive slant, given the critique of corporate power that’s at the heart of the progressive philosophy.

In discussions of cable news channels, there is often a tendency to treat Fox and MSNBC as mirror images—Fox providing one thing on the right, MSNBC doing the same on the left. This is wildly misleading, though (FAIR Blog, 10/4/10). Fox, from its inception, has sought to deliver a right-wing product. MSNBC, by contrast, tried and failed to succeed as a competitor to Fox on the right (FAIR Action Alert, 2/5/99, 3/7/03; Extra! Update, 2/05): “We have to be more conservative then they are,” NBC CEO Robert Wright reportedly told NBC News chief Neal Shapiro after September 11 (New York, 10/3/10).

NBC only reluctantly accepted a progressive tilt for its cable channel after Olbermann, moving to the left after being hired, proved that counter-programming against Fox with left-leaning programs was the only way MSNBC could win an audience. Even then, NBC executives (and even on-air reporters) were clearly uncomfortable with the political leanings of its most prominent host (Daily Beast, 1/21/11).

There is little reason to believe that Comcast’s takeover of MSNBC will make things any better. As fired Comcast reporter Nolan put it (CJR.org, 8/16/10), Comcast “aspires to run a major network news operation. What happens when Keith Olbermann goes after O’Reilly? I think that’s scary.” With Olbermann gone, the future of MSNBC under Comcast is very much up in the air.

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.