Countdown to Keith's Objectivity

Keith Olbermann has a reputation of being difficult to work with, but in my brief encounters with him when we worked together at ESPN in 1995 he was gracious to me. As the liaison in Bristol, CT. for the New Jersey-based SportsTicker bureau which helped provide ESPN with scores and statistics, I had to meet with Olbermann after SportsTicker provided incorrect statistics that he read on the air while co-anchoring SportsCenter. He stressed how the mistake hurt ESPN's credibility especially because it involved the University of Connecticut Huskies women's basketball team and ESPN is based in Connecticut, but he never took out his frustration on me which I appreciated.

In 2003, he took a gutsy stand against President George W. Bush and the unprovoked invasion of Iraq on Countdown with Keith Olbermann. In subsequent years Olbermann made eloquent criticisms of the illegal war and the Bush administrations use of torture and warrantless wiretapping. While being accused of liberal bias, Olbermann also ripped President Obama to task for not prosecuting Bush for war crimes, continuing the use of the Bush state secrets defense and escalating the war in Afghanistan.

So I was saddened about Olbermann's Friday suspension from MSNBC for making contributions to three Democratic candidates without network approval. As Olbermann colleague and MSNBC host Rachel Maddow noted, the suspension highlights the difference between MSNBC and Fox News where hosts donate to and shill for Republican candidates. But I feel conflicted. Does anyone really believe Olbermann doesn't have strong opinions about politicians whether he contributes to them or not?

The suspension also brings into question whether we journalists should give up our rights as citizens. If we can't donate to candidates should we also not be allowed to vote? Obviously we can't work for a candidate, but if we donate to them or vote for them does that mean we've lost our objectivity and will go easy on them in interviews or stories about them? Not me.

An editor once told me I needed to go into a story without an opinion. I told him I had an obligation to be fair, but everyone brings bias and opinions to stories. If I go to cover a KKK rally am I not expected to have a strong opinion about the Klan? Or about covering the sentencing of a convicted child molester?

I'm a flaming liberal, but if anything, that has made me tougher on liberal candidates than conservative ones. Reporters have a responsibility to hold people in power accountable, but we don't forfeit our right to political beliefs or to exercise them judiciously. We should take it on a case by case basis and avoid conflicts of interests of the appearance of them, but I'd prefer journalists with strong political opinions who try to be fair rather than blank slates who use objectivity as an excuse not to educate themselves on politics.

As Dante said, "The hottest fires in hell are reserved for those who, in a time of great moral crisis, remain neutral."