are you implying freedom of speech and freedom of the press is wrong.
so if the president sends the country to war based on weapons of mass destruction and believing that iraq, a country that fought a was with iran for 10 years and both countries lost, was a threat to the u.s..and that the pres. thought iraq was involved with 9/11 and he proven wrong the press shouldn't come down hard on him. especially since over 4,000 americans have been killed because of w-cheney-rummy's personal ideology. or the press shouldn't come down hard on somelike pelosi because she would rather put politics and her party above what is good for the country?

Rachel Maddow doesn't cover news? Mr. Zurawik, how are you qualified to be a media critic? Have you seen any of her interviews? Please compare her questions and familiarity with the issues to what we get on the Sunday shows. As a Baltimorean, I've been annoyed with your substance-less analysis for years but this latest rant is beyond idiotic. Yes, Keith Olbermann is a ideologue, but unlike Fox, generally support his assertions with facts and credible sources, which makes all the difference. Have you ever watched Fox? Listened to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity? I highly recommend reviewing some basic rhetorical analysis textbooks and reviewing your own objectivity. You also should look up the definition of "fascism."

Hey Seth, chill out. While I totally despise Olbermann and MSNBC, I have no problem with them being on the air as long as they have an audience ie capitalism works. Anyway, I love Fox and you should also respect that from a capitalist standpoint. If you don't then you are not a capitalist and I'll let you call yourself whatever you want. One thing though, when was the last time Keith O had a conservative showing an opposing view on his panel? Fox while conservative, does it all the time....that IS a fact.

"As you can see from the video, I am harder on MSNBC than Fox, because this NBC sister channel has outrageously decided it doesn't have to cover news on weekends and holidays -- and yet, still calls itself a news channel."

And if you're main argument is that all of this partisan anger is bad for our democracy, then this is not a good justification for criticising one more harshly than the other, IMO.

The rhetoric from FOX has been more insidious than that of MSNBC and they do a lot more of it. Who else besides Olbermann or Maddow on MSNBC do what you and the other panel members were complaining about? FOX has more people doing this and the things they're saying in many cases are arguably worse.

I'm sure that your Facist Right task masters at the SUN are proud of your Reliable Sources idiocy Sunday. Fox News has been assaulting its viewers with character assassinations, holding innocent people to public ridicule and engaging in extreme right-wing distortion for years, and you have the gall to call out MSNBC when they suggest that unpatriotic people like Cheney be held accountable?

Get a clue, asshole.

David,
I am saddened by the vulgar and abusive comments posted here regularly. Purposely inflammatory comments are unnecessary, hurtful, and counterproductive. Holding a civilized and respectful conversation is the best way to influence other people.

I love Olbermann from his ESPN days. He has a sharp wit. I find it amusing that when Gingrich and his "Contract w/America" cronies started the hateful dialog in the 80's and the Republicans were in power at the time, and Fox and right-wing radio exploded, no one was saying make nice. O'Reilly and Hannity are two of the most unwatchable "barkers" in the history of television. Not because you disagree with their position, but because of the total lack of ADULT journalistic pride in their jobs that they and the Fox News network display. The climate that we currently enjoy can be almost 100 percent be credited to the right media and Fox. The blueprint for this ugliness has been laid out by them since the 80's

"your Facist Right task masters at the SUN..."

Now that's classic.

I the issue is whether or not FOX and MSNBC are news shows, I would say no they are opinion shows. If they were presenting the headlines without the personal opinions then they would be news shows. They shouldn't represent themselves as news. After watching Reliable Sources I would have to agree this not a good thing.

Sherry Tellitocci

I feel like I often disagree with you, but so be it. I too find MSNBC both offensive and unwatchable, but those people have a right to their opinions. I cannot agree that freedom of speech is a bad thing. There are billions of people in the world that would love to be able to criticize their leaders.

As for Fox, unfortunately without them all television news would have a leftward tilt. NBC, ABC and CBS are nothing but MSNBC light. Without Fox, we would not have had any reporting on many important stories. Here are a few highlights (but this list is by no means exhaustive):
(1) The President's hate mongering preacher
(2) ACORN (There still has been scant reporting on this organization even though it threatens the core of our republic)
(3) The fallacy of government run healthcare.
(4) The President's strong arm tactics via TARP to force secured creditors to take pennies on the dollar in Chrysler's bankruptcy to help the unions (political payback)
(5) The fact that the current President's spending is out of control and will lead to greater taxes

In short, Fox's popularity is a reaction to the traditional media's failure to effectively report the news.

Most of FOXNEWS is news programs except the commentary programs like Hannity, Glenn Beck, OReilly Factor.
FoxNews has never denied those programs have commentators rather than news anchors. Overall ther are fair & balance imo.

David,

I think the comments on this blog entry prove your point.

That said, this model isn't anything new. Up until about the 1950s or 1960s, the newspapers were explicitly on one side of the other. Go back to the election of 1800 and read some of the vicious things the Federalist newspapers wrote about Jefferson. We came through that in decent shape.

Only actual "News Shows" are "Fair and Balanced." The "Talk Shows" are Talk Shows in which the host expresses their own opinions. The problem comes from Keith O. and that woman being dishonest and making up their facts.

Keith O is a very angry man. So is that woman. They make up most of whay they say. I have seen both leave out parts of a clip they use as examples of news. Rush or Hannity would never do that. Rush is correct 98% of the time. Thats on record some where. I'm not sure about Hannity, but he's probably right at least 95% of the time. And MSNBC is NOT Fair and Balanced. I'm not sure if I can say this, but I also think that woman is somewhat unsure of her sexuality.

Mr. Zurawik has his head in the sand. To compare FOX on the right with MSNBC "on the left" is illogical. FOX is all GOP all the time, and anti- liberal, anti-Democrat, anti-Obama, anti-black (most of the time). Yes Olbermann comes across as an angry man, but MSNBC has good old Morning Joe, who still gives the impression he is taking his cues from Newt Gingrich, and of course "Tweety" Chris, who cheered Bush into this war as though he was Bush's stooge. Zurawick is right about the anger level, but he should level his attack on FOX and Clear Channel Radio -- those are the "hate" mongers, not MSNBC.

@ Frank,

I guess the two percent of the time that Rush isn't right is when he was trying to illegally score drugs. No need for you to watch the weather forecast. Just ask Rush since he is right 98 percent of the time. I hope your family is on cult-alert because it sonds like you are a member.

Mr. Zurawik has not really watched all of Fox and MSNBCs shows. I have and I actually paid attention and even took notes. (I was doing this for a class I was taking at UCSD). I decided that I liked a couple of MSNBC programs. On Fox Shep Smith (everyone else pretty much empty-brained talking heads)!
With the exception of Joe Scarborough, Keith Olbermann and the new guy-Ed Schultz, the rest of the anchors actually do report accurate news. Rachel Maddow takes great effort to explain to her audience the events as they occur (just in case her audience(s) aren't used to listening to pundits all day long). She presents her point of view and explains why. And, unlike most Fox shows, she uses FACTS!! Fox news is like the National Enquirer because they just make up stuff and put it on the air.
Mr. Zurawik I dare you, I double triple dare you to either face Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow. They would tear to you shreds. Why—because they deal in truth and verifiable facts. You could go on Fox, however, and be just fine.
Most of the time when there is vital news, MSNBC does weekend/24-hour coverage. I guess since NBC is the number-one watched news channel they don’t feel the need to compete with themselves??

Thanks for the chance to respond!

Philliard

WAH, so someone that doesn't have "news" 24/7 365 is not a "news" program?? I would offer that fact that feaux "news" NEVER has news. So that when on weekends MSNBC shows lock-up, which By the way could be considered news, they are showing more "news" than feaxu does every day. Have a great day.

Olbermann just attacked you personally on his show. The problem is that you had the temerity to criticize the left: Do that and you're off the good team. You're out of the club! Though all you did was restate the same argument for which Jon Stewart won vast hosannas when directed at Tucker Carlson. But I'm with you. Just sick of it. Our political discourse has been taken over by the most uncompromisinly ideological members of the dailykos and littlegreenfootballs comments section. A cartoon.

Hi, I see you made Olby's "worst persons" list on his little tv show. of course I wasn't watching it, but I can get recaps.

I found it particularly humorous, that he accused you of "repeating the same thing over and over"

Hmm.. seems familiar.

Keithy is such a thin skinned person, it's really sad, what will happen when he finally burns his bridge at msnbc?

will he latch on someplace else, and then devote lots and lots of time ripping his former employer?

Anyways, I live in the midwest, but I will definitely be checking your blog regularly now.

Actually my favorite part of his rant against Z was the inference that he's somehow one of the people responsible for the Sun's decline into bankruptcy.

...what a ------

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/why-david-zurawiks-argument-bogus

Mr> Zurawik:

Did you have similar complaints about Fox not being a "real" network for not covering the Obama press conference, instead opting to broadcast a profit-generating episode of, ironically, "Lie to Me" (one of my favorite new shows). Every other network broadcast the Press Conference, along with analysis.

You compare MNBC to "fascism" yet Fox "News" was in the contract rider for former VP Dick Cheney; only FNC was to be on in his hotel rooms. FNC continues to give former VP a platform, not only not challenging him on issues, but never providing a counterpoint t his opinions.

Your complaint is that MSNBC doesn't broadcast original news on the weekends, why not focus on the tripe that FNC broadcasts the rest of the week?

Oh, BTW, find a dictionary or history book somewhere, and look up the meaning of "fascism". Fascism is the government acting in lockstep with corporate entities, without citizen input. Under the definition is the corporate logo for Fox.

Hey folks, I am deadline for a Page 1 story for Thursday. As soon as I get done with it and get to eat something, I will get back on the blog and repond to Olbermann's cable-TV hotdog antics last night. Thanks. Z

Z - Please stick to covering reality shows. If you are willing to lump in the (seemingly only) two progressive talk show hosts on MSNBC with the large number of right-wing mouthpieces employed by Fox you are clearly not capable of making a distinction. Watch MSNBC in the AM for Morning Joe (if you can stand it), or Hardball.
I agree with you only in your basic premise that we are not getting "news"; not only from the biggies: CNN, MSNBC, Fox, but from our local providers either. It is increasing either spin or infotainment and it panders to the lunatic fringe, primarily on the right.

Freedom of speech is not without limits. You can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. And you can't get up in front of a group of people and incite violence.

I've been watching Fox News and listening to conservative hate radio for a while and I was not surprised when a Democratic campaign office was attacked during the 2008 election.

Hannity, Beck, Levin, Limbaugh spew hate on a daily basis and have no regard for the fact that many of their supporters take them too seriously.

How many times have we heard of right wingers going on crazy shooting rampages because they fear Obama is going to 'take their guns'? Two, three times? Once is too many. And where do they get these ideas? Right wing radio and Fox News.

There is a reason why the radio hate talkers in Rwanda were tried as war criminals. Radio is an extremely powerful communication mechanism. In the wrong hands, like Hannity or Limbaugh, the effect can be deadly.

I expect (sadly) that as the right becomes more marginalized, largely on their own accord, they will become increasingly violence prone.

H Jack, If you read even a little of the blog here, you would see plenty of criticism of all the Fox folks you name for the same sins as Olbermann. But that is a fact Olbermann conveniently kept from you in his skewed attack. And that is the way propagandists and ideologues operate. Thanks. Z

LOL. OIberman's sheep army has arrived to really tell you how it is!

Mencken wrote long ago that what distinguished the Am. press from press elsewhere was its "incurable fear of ideas." No longer is this just a distinguishing factor; it's policy, enforced by that grandstanding anachronism, the FCC. Cable "news" is comic book characters: even Larry King subsists solely on platitudes.

As a fan of Fox News I still understand your viewpoint. But as one other commenter stated, where else am I going to find news that other stations wont cover. Sure, half is news and half is opinion, but they usually make sure to tell us that. And unlike MSNBC and most other mainstream media, they will have someone with opposing views on to state their case. And as long as it doesnt go off the deep end (like a few of the crazy lefties above, btw lefties are way more violent than righties), the person isn't chastised for their view. It got so bad during the election that I was watching MPT for news and convention/candidate coverage. CNN(especially Cooper & Brown) was full of hate, FOX was typically slanted, but MSNBC was a total joke.

Gerry,

I suggest that you read the confession of the guy who killed two people at the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church before you make such asinine distinctions between liberals and conservatives.

Your stupidity knows no bounds.

Anonymous...never heard of such a case. Although I am not debating its validitiy. I am stating my opinion in my experiences. Typically Leftists tend to use more vulgar language and resort to name calling without focusing on healthy debate. Leftists tend to hold more 'rallys' and damage property - take a look at the demonstrations during the opposing conventions, much more damage and disruption during the RNC. That is NOT opinion, but fact. Stay classy.

Gerry, let me enlighten you. One of your fellow conservatives went on a rampage shooting up the 'liberal' Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church, killing two, wounding six. His confession as reported:

Adkisson "stated that he had targeted the church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of the major media outlets," investigator Steve Still wrote.

And this was not the only such incident on the run-up to the election.

Yes, liberals can get a bit noisy and tromp on the grass. But we don't shoot up churches and kill people.

You sound like a reasonable guy. Can you not hear the violence preached by Hannity, Limbaugh and Beck? These guys have called for armed insurrection.

Z, your right I don't read your blog, I will start. But you say, "...you would see plenty of criticism of all the Fox folks you name for the same sins as Olbermann". What I don't see Olbermann doing is inciting violence or insurrection. I don't see him trying to convince his viewers that Obama will 'steal their guns' and frighten them into violent action.

I have no problem with heated rhetoric. My problem with the right wing variants is that in their passions they call for violent solutions. Ann Coulter talks about assassinating Bill Clinton and Supreme Court judges. My local hate radio station consistently characterizes liberals as 'vermin'. What does one do with 'vermin'?

I'm serious when I compare conservative talk radio with the talk radio in Rwanda. Hutu talkers were charged with genocide, rightly, for inciting their compatriots by describing the Tutsis using words like 'cockroaches', and telling them to 'stamp them out'. Not so long after the machetes came out.

Freedom of speech does not cover hate speech and what Hannity, et al is doing is clearly hate speech. Just listen to their shows. Listen to the callers. Take a look at the forum postings on hate sites like Free Republic, Town Hall, The 9/12 Project and Stormfront.

Hi Jack, You put your finger on the danger of the heated, angry rhetoric: opponents are often demonized, dehumanized and mocked. Absolutely. I would argue, though, that both sides do it different ways. While the right does often seem more raw-edged in its characterizations, the left uses ridicule, contempt and distortion. That's what I mean by the Maddow sneer. But I have heard borderline hate speech from some of the TV cable folks on the right whom you mention. Z

I'd happily agree with you if you can cite some instances of Maddow or Olbermann calling all conservatives 'mentally ill' or a 'cancer on society'. There is a vast difference between mocking an individual, which Maddow does continuously, and painting an entire population as 'vermin'.

Honestly, if I caught my liberal friends saying that all conservatives are mentally ill, or are a blight on humanity, I would punch them straight in the face. I'd turn off Olbermann or Maddow in a second if they made general sweeping statements characterizing all conservatives as subhuman. But I've never seen either get close to that.

I'm fine with heated rhetoric. I'm fine with taking individuals to task. I'm fine with conservative ideology. Let's talk about how taxes are evil. I'm all for that. Tell me I'm personally stupid. That's fine. I hear that a lot. But don't say everyone who is 'x' is 'evil' or 'is an animal'. Generalizations are as worthless as they are toxic.

Generalizations like that are the only way that you can get someone to go on a shooting rampage. "His belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country". That stems directly from talk radio, Fox News and right wing books that paint the 'others' as 'sub-human'.

I'm honestly not sure what the way out of the hate speech spiral is. History paints a fairly gloomy end-game for this scenario. Sadly, the 'have you no decency' line appears to no longer work. We live in the 'Limbaugh/Rove era' of politics in which all civility has been lost.

I think the point being made here is that these network's current models being called news channels (CNN not to be excluded) are nothing more than opinions dressed as news. While there is some news being delivered to the viewers there is FAR TOO MUCH commentary. Olbermann and his equals on all the networks are free to say what they want as it is understood by most that these are op/ed programs but the daily news cycles outside of these shows need to find the tracks again.

Journalism should not have a gray area without disclaimers. Journalism is a fact based trade that I think most of America has lost sight of. News today seems nothing more than a reality show that you know is coerced and scripted to suit the desired demographic for advertising dollars. The viewers are now being indoctrinated into a far leaning media where opinion can easily be misconstrued as fact. The news is now based on a belief system that, dare I say, is beginning to look like a propaganda mill.

A perfect example of journalism losing it's way is the NY Daily News. Reading their articles is like reading the state run media in N. Korea or Soviet Russia.

Both of the three major news networks are flawed about journalism. Both of them uses lots of material about viral videos at the web and they all lack a extensive team of correspondents. Most of the international material is produced by agencies.

Unfortunately, few Americans have access to BBC´s excellent material.

Jack Herrington must have missed the episode of Countdown that featured the noted brain expert Janeane Garofalo explaining the conservatives have biological differences that make them deranged and racist. Olbermann giggled and nodded the whole time. But he needn;t have said a word, because we all know that Olbermann won't have anyone on his show who holds a contrary opinion; thus all opinions on his show are, a priori, host approved.