While I hold a great deal of respect for the works of Ted Koppel,  I have to disagree strongly with the tone of his argument,  which basically espouses all the “qualities” of “the view from nowhere” which Jay Rosen defines and identifies as the working thesis of nearly all of the uproar over the recent issues concerning people who ,  as “journalists” or “commentators” allow their “personal feelings” to enter into their public work.  As if that is possible to “subtract”,  or even if we would want that to happen. 

We live now in a cable news universe that celebrates the opinions of Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly – individuals who hold up the twin pillars of political partisanship and who are encouraged to do so by their parent organizations because their brand of analysis and commentary is highly profitable.

Ted Koppel: Olbermann, O’Reilly and the death of real news

To suggest that outrage has no place in journalism is to advance something that seems to me to be as “monotonous” and “void of feeling” — and ,  at bottom,  of any interest. 

Olbermann draws more than 1 million like-minded viewers to his program every night precisely because he is avowedly, unabashedly and monotonously partisan

I find Olbermann anything but monotonous,  and despite his passion and intentional lack of “restraint”,  find something refreshing in having my own outrage articulated.  There is nothing inherently damaging in that ,  it seems to me,  as to its veracity as “news”  (except ,  it seems,  to the “defenders” of “real news”).  This is not to say that there isn’t a “line” to cross.  But that line is obviously a moving target,  depending on where you think that needs to be drawn.  I find it naive to suggest that we can “eliminate” every sliver of “opinion”.  If one thinks that they do,  I believe they fool themselves. 

I am also not suggesting that it is not feasible or advisable to be less impassioned than Olbermann.  Just that if we move too far in the direction of some blurry notion of “objectivity”,  we lay ourselves open to being molded by an invisible bias that is much harder to combat or recognize.  It seems as if this old guard of journalism is much closer to the “view from nowhere” which is actually a defense of the status quo view,  which isn’t always “benign”. 

The commercial success of both Fox News and MSNBC is a source of nonpartisan sadness for me.

So there we have it.  Koppel considers himself “nonpartisan”.  And to equate MSNBC with Fox News on that account?  FALSE EQUIVALENCY.  Not even close on the matter of objectivity.  Be sure,  MSNBC slants democrat.  But they aren’t completely blind or deceptive on that count.  They admit they “favor” democratic policy.  Fox NEVER admits this publically.  “Fair and Balanced” is a joke that everyone but their minions recognize (even most of ,  if not all,  of Fox News itself).  They border on EVIL on that score.  That’s a “value” judgment to be sure.  But aren’t there ACTUAL values like transparency and commitment to the truth in effect for the honest journalist?  Yes,  I believe there is.  The documentary “OUtfoxed” has been considered “leftist”,  even by those “in the middle” from that “view from no where”.  That disturbs me to see people unwilling to call those who engage in deception to account.