Oh yes. Things of that nature rarely escape my eager little brain. Now if only he'd actually talk about it a little. I mean, I respect his stated position, but still.
And funny how that works, isn't it? (The crush plausibility thing. Not AC's stated position.)
From Wikipedia: "I understand why people might be interested. But I just don’t talk about my personal life. It’s a decision I made a long time ago, before I ever even knew anyone would be interested in my personal life. The whole thing about being a reporter is that you're supposed to be an observer and to be able to adapt with any group you’re in, and I don’t want to do anything that threatens that."
Which, you know, is fine to some extent. I get what he's saying and it's obviously his choice. Still, I know that as an individual it cheers me more to see people who are "out and proud" as it were than to know but watch someone toe a line.
Yeah. I mean, he is much more a reporter (and I think he wants to be more of a reporter than a talking head in general) than say, Rachel Maddow (as our other out newscaster person). So from my background in J-school and with the type of reporting he seems to want to do, I think he's probably right. But you know, we don't always get the life we want (and his very wacky family history is proof) and maybe I think it's time he rethought that, but I actually do admire it, in a way, as a conviction.
Exactly. So while it frustrates me on a personal level, it's also a well-reasoned position, and totally his right to make that choice. At this point it's an open secret, which serves him in a lot of ways (and, to some limited extent, the community).
And absolutely re: Rachel Maddow. She's more of a commentator, in the same camp as Olbermann at this point. There's a real difference in the work Maddow does v. Cooper's.
Maddow, I think, has a level of credibility that Olbermann (sadly) doesn't have, because his little dicksizing war with Bill O'Reilly ceased being funny months ago, and even if O'Reilly is infinitely more of a shit, Olbermann needs to let it go, because I actually don't think his audience cares that much. They'd much rather see him do righteous anger than justified but repetitive snark.
Well, to my mind at least, a sizable part of Olbermann's whole gig is about being O'Reilly's reflection. He's "our" angry pundit v. theirs. Which, you know, doesn't leave a lot of space for credibility so much as being a rallying point and a starting point and a counter. I'll venture that Olbermann seems to be more honest than the O'Reillys and the Cavutos of the world, but he's probably not going to be the best primary source.
It serves some purpose, but it isn't always news. Maddow and Cooper are a lot sturdier in that area, and more reliable.
Yeah. It's just... under Bush, everything was so crazy, there was a certain reliability to Olbermann, because everything was worthy of that level of outrage and disgust. But without an administration that despicable, he has to play gotcha with Fox in ways not really related to politics, and I just don't care! Which makes me sad.
I suspect it's been an easier transition for people like Jon Stewart -- who can shift their focus around and kind of mock at will because that's their role -- than it's been for Olbermann. He's got a real and useful position, but it doesn't need as much defending right now.
Also, as much as I adore him, I will never forgive him for in his gay marriage rant explaining that he didn't have a horse in the race and it didn't even affect any of his friends.
It's the old "straight but not narrow" thing. He said valuable, useful things, but that was kind of a grit-your-teeth moment. It's like, "Yeah, thanks well-meaning ally. It's always helpful when you distance yourself from us filthy, filthy queers."
Of course, now I'm amusing myself by imagining a behind-the-scenes rapper-style feud between him and Maddow. They could have posses!
I thought the angle at which he came at it from was useful. As the big, straight, vaguely uptight white-guy in that performance, he was potentially persuasive. But everyone knows he's chummy with Maddow and everyone knows she's a lesbian so both that, and the depth of his emotion on it, made it one of those really odd WTF? moments for me.
Yeah, and Olbermann has to be Owen Wilson because of his (Olbermann's) sports commentary background. Plus, Maddow could totally pull off those cheekbones.
For what it's worth, it really did seem to strike a chord with most of my straight/married friends. I don't think they even noticed that moment as much as they were like "YES!" to the "What is it to you?" angle. It was really interesting to see how people for whom it's a social good but not a personal issue responded differently.
And really, I was glad for it overall. It's hard to overstate the awesomeness of overtly straight, married people on the teevee telling the world that they're supportive. If I were prince of everything, though, and had a little crown and could make the whole world right, though, there would be edits called for. Again with the credibility.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:18 pm (UTC)I'd add him to the list, but he's already on the list liek whoa.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:19 pm (UTC)(you know Cooper is actually gay, right? Just to make your crush slightly more plausible).
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:23 pm (UTC)And funny how that works, isn't it? (The crush plausibility thing. Not AC's stated position.)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:33 pm (UTC)"I understand why people might be interested. But I just don’t talk about my personal life. It’s a decision I made a long time ago, before I ever even knew anyone would be interested in my personal life. The whole thing about being a reporter is that you're supposed to be an observer and to be able to adapt with any group you’re in, and I don’t want to do anything that threatens that."
Which, you know, is fine to some extent. I get what he's saying and it's obviously his choice. Still, I know that as an individual it cheers me more to see people who are "out and proud" as it were than to know but watch someone toe a line.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:46 pm (UTC)And absolutely re: Rachel Maddow. She's more of a commentator, in the same camp as Olbermann at this point. There's a real difference in the work Maddow does v. Cooper's.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 02:56 pm (UTC)It serves some purpose, but it isn't always news. Maddow and Cooper are a lot sturdier in that area, and more reliable.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:02 pm (UTC)Which, you know, is good. Just not for him.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:04 pm (UTC)Um... Rachel Maddow?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:12 pm (UTC)Of course, now I'm amusing myself by imagining a behind-the-scenes rapper-style feud between him and Maddow. They could have posses!
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:14 pm (UTC)I thought the angle at which he came at it from was useful. As the big, straight, vaguely uptight white-guy in that performance, he was potentially persuasive. But everyone knows he's chummy with Maddow and everyone knows she's a lesbian so both that, and the depth of his emotion on it, made it one of those really odd WTF? moments for me.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:21 pm (UTC)For what it's worth, it really did seem to strike a chord with most of my straight/married friends. I don't think they even noticed that moment as much as they were like "YES!" to the "What is it to you?" angle. It was really interesting to see how people for whom it's a social good but not a personal issue responded differently.
And really, I was glad for it overall. It's hard to overstate the awesomeness of overtly straight, married people on the teevee telling the world that they're supportive. If I were prince of everything, though, and had a little crown and could make the whole world right, though, there would be edits called for. Again with the credibility.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:24 pm (UTC)Way to not know what I'm talking about, me.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:31 pm (UTC)It's like Schrodinger's Girlfriend. Until proven, she both does and does not exist.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 03:32 pm (UTC)And that is all I have to say about that.