Government 2305 Olbermann vs.
OReilly The assignment called for to watch two political commentaries and compare and contrast the shows. I accessed both shows on their main online home page on September 17th, 2010. The shows were: Countdown with Keith Olbermann on [Link] at 8 pm central time and The OReilly Factor on [Link] at 11pm central time. After reading the first four chapters for the class, I quickly noted that several parts of the political commentaries pertain to the readings from this Unit. For example, the lead story for The OReilly Factor is The Truth about Higher Taxes. It talked about how President Obama would like to put an end to the Bush cuts, by increasing the federal income tax rate on Americans making above $200,000 a year. However, the president expresses that he is not going to ask Americans making less than $200,000 for more tax money (Fox news). The talk of taxes can be seen in the readings from the textbook in chapter two, where in an effort to ease financial troubles, as well as substantial debt, the British government wanted to increase revenue by taxing its North American colonies. The result was an organized colonial resistance by New England merchants and southern planters. On the other hand, the lead for Countdown with Keith Olbermann was about Christine ODonnell, the Republican candidate for U.S. senator for Delaware and her general views (MSNBC). In chapter one, I noticed the word political efficacy, which means the ability to influence government and politics. This candidate is trying to do that by running for office and if she wins she would affect the lives of the residents of Delaware. A similarity regarding the general nature of the stories which received coverage on both political commentaries, are that both were presented with facts and evidence that supported the lead stories. The OReilly Factor offered facts by saying how our tax dollars are at work and why many voters are furious with the Obama administration. Countdown with Keith Olbermann supported its negative
commentary on Christine ODonnell by showing videos previously aired on a different network pertaining to her dabbling with witchcraft, along with other audios from radio shows. One of the major differences would be that Countdown with Keith Olbermann mostly presented the negative side of Christine ODonnell. She had financial troubles and used campaign money to pay for her bills and her odd views on the issues concerning Americans (MSNBC). By presenting mostly the negative side of the story it is clear that the show is biased on this episode. The show is known to have commentaries critical of republicans and conservative politics as shown here. OReilly Factor, on the other hand, wasnt biased towards any side. He stayed on topic with his lead story and the guest he had was former President Jimmy Carter, someone who had direct experienced with taxes and the nation. As a viewer, I always expect a show to present both sides of the stories equally, but media coverage does not always do this. The rationale for the bias, in my opinion, would be to show viewers that she is not a rightful candidate for senate because of her background. Overall, my assessment of the medias coverage of political news after this activity is still the same that most television networks are biased, but there are a select few that are not. On the other hand, it is almost impossible for a show not to be a little biased. However, with the advantage of having global communication, the ability to examine news ourselves is now possible, and this helps to counteract bias media since we can see both sides of the story ourselves. Word count: 611
Works Cited: Countdown with Keith Olbermann. [Link]. 17 September 2010. MSNBC. 17 September 2010. <[Link] The Truth about Higher Taxes. OReilly Factor. 17 September 2010. FOX NEWS. 17 September 2010. < [Link]
