Why Keith Olbermann Flounced from Daily Kos

Why did Keith Olbermann break up with political website Daily Kos? The answer highlights the tension professional journalists must resolve as they experiment with different audiences and relationships.

Olbermann, the host of MSNBC’s “Countdown,” has been a heavy participant at the political website the Daily Kos since 2008. He maintained his own diary there and often responded to others in comment threads around the site. But for a while last week, it appeared that relationship with Kos had ended — after a critic suggested Olbermann’s biting commentary on President Obama’s oil speech was a ratings ploy.

“For years, from the Katrina days onward, whenever I stuck my neck out, I usually visited here as the clichéd guy in the desert stopping by the oasis. I never got universal support, and never expected it, nor wanted it (who wants an automatic ‘Yes’ machine?). But I used to read a lot about how people here would ‘always have my back’ and trust me this was of palpable value as I fought opponents external and internal who try to knock me and Rachel off the air, all the time, in ways you can imagine and others you can’t.

“Now I get to read how we pre-planned our anger because ‘beating up on the President has been good for ratings.’ ”

The Kos community responded quickly, with more than 2,000 comments and a half-dozen blog posts addressed directly to Olbermann. Some pleaded for the host to continue to make his case. Others pointed out that one anonymous commenter did not signal a widespread site response. And yet others urged him to consider fighting bigger battles. Why did Olbermann’s missive provoke such strong discussions?

The boundaries between the traditional newsroom and the less structured world of social media have been eroding for years. Olbermann’s situation points to the downside of the new era of hyper-connectivity. As media personalities rely more and more on cultivating a fan base for support,  media consumers have unprecedented access to those who shape news coverage.

Olbermann was a pioneer in this regard. His high level of involvement at Daily Kos was unusual, particularly considering most members of the traditional press corps are leery of Fifth Estate-style engagement. While some broadcasters have started to incorporate blogging and Twitter into their brand, most use it as a space to solicit ideas, or as a marketing tool. Olbermann, however, used the Internet in true Fifth-Estate style, as an active participant. 

While Olbermann seemed to enjoy the Kos community and frequently used the site as a sounding board for his ideas, the accusation of one commenter apparently pushed him away.

Olbermann’s reaction was somewhat understandable. After all, those in the media — even those who provide more opinion than reporting — rely on the idea of truthfulness as a mission. To insinuate that Olbermann altered his actual opinion in pursuit of viewers is a serious charge. However, part of the culture of the growing Fifth Estate is that everyone is entitled to his opinion, no matter how ill-informed or incorrect.

Anyone can publish, for any reason. Some people share the pursuit of truth, and blog only about what can be verified as factual information. Others have no such allegiance and say whatever comes to mind. The commenter who offended Olbermann may not have been concerned about the truth, but happy to pass along a Fifth Estate speculation that would offend Olbermann’s Fourth Estate sensibilities.

Yet, Olbermann seems to have forgotten that just because people can say and do anything online, it does not mean others will automatically believe the statement. Many in the burgeoning Fifth Estate subscribe to the Greater Internet F***wad Theory (link contains profanity) which holds that people blessed with anonymity in online spaces will take the opportunity to act out in ways that would not be possible in real life. While Olbermann took great offense to the comment, another Kos blogger, David Kroning, called him on the reaction:

“I won’t speculate as to why you wrote an angry diary decrying this community. As others have noted, it seems more than a little strange to have gotten upset based on the comment of one random, little-known user who receved [sic] no support for his/her comment.”

Olbermann was concerned and upset that his credibility had been called into question by one of his supporters, and saw this as symptomatic of the changing nature of dialogue on Kos. But as Kroning explains, trust is a major component in the Fifth Estate.

Mentioning that the user was “little-known” and received “no support” is a code often employed in the blogging/commenting world to indicate little influence. While the Internet creates spaces where anyone can say anything, those who become credible for the ideas they share generally have to prove their expertise and become respected within the context of that particular community. From a Fifth Estate perspective, all types of comments are to be expected and some assertions will be ignored, unless the poster provides compelling evidence to back up his claim.

That didn’t stop Olbermann’s Fourth Estate sensibilities from taking a bruising, and instead of brushing off the accusation, or just addressing the commenter, he left the entire community. This behavior is known within the Fifth Estate as “flouncing.” As Wordiq defines it:

“A flounce is where a person on an Internet discussion forum or chat room announces that he intends to leave, however rather than making a quiet announcement and then leaving, he or she loudly and obnoxiously announces their departure, possibly sabotaging or closing some aspect of the forum or chat room as a parting shot. In most flounces, the flouncer returns after some period of time; thus, a flounce is a characteristic exaggerated exit which is inherently insincere.”