January 8th, 2012
12:51 PM ET

Media Round-up

Lauren Ashburn and Howard Kurtz discuss MSNBC's Iowa coverage, Keith Olbermann's latest feud and a study that finds good-looking lawmakers get more TV airtime.

Filed under: 2012 Campaign • Keith Olbermann • MSNBC • Reliable Sources
soundoff (3 Responses)
  1. Fanny from Ga.

    I generally agree with most of your criticism about partisan coverage. However, I was disappointed to see you practice the same bias that you pillory. In criticising the MSNBC coverage of the Iowa caucuses, you simply ignored the existance of Steve Shmidt, because it negates the narratve you were determined to forward. When did he ( Steve Shmidt) become a liberal columnist? I don't know the others know better but Shame on you because you do!!!

    January 9, 2012 at 11:51 am | Reply
  2. Jane Perrine

    You have mentioned on two shows that MSNBC had five liberal commentatros covering the Iowa caucuses, but on 1/8, you showed a picture with five peole at the table. ONE of those people was, I believe, Steven Schmidt, former chair of the McCain campagin, a Republican. Why did you ignore him?

    January 9, 2012 at 10:28 am | Reply
    • Tuu

      I take issue with this formulation by Parker:One does not have to be from a rural Georgia wetkbacar (Clarence Thomas), or the child of recently arrived immigrants (Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito), to qualify as a justice, though it might help in claiming identity with ordinary people.I see. If your parents are immigrants, you went to Princeton, and you advocated traditional values such as fighting against inclusion of women and minorities in traditional Princeton student institutions, then you may just be an ordinary person . If you went to a top law school and joined the Federalist Society you almost certainly have ordinary person status.Obama doesn't claim to want ordinary people on the court, he wants brilliant people who recognize the impact of supreme court decision on ordinary people.Nonetheless, I don't mind Parker's ideological bias as long as there are intelligent people on the program to call her on it.Is there any attribute of a person's words that one group or another wont cite to try and disqualify a person from hosting a nightly TV program? It's not exactly hate speech. No, it's debatable, so let's debate and let ideas win on the merit.

      March 3, 2012 at 5:01 am | Reply

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.