So if you want to understand what a pundit meant, it helps to know something about what he’s personally seen and done. Nothing anyone does takes place in a vacuum — something happened that shaped it.

For example, you disparage Olbermann’s Murrow Award, but 9/11 occurred in his own home town — practically right down the street from where he lived. It gives a perspective to those daily dispatches which most of us don’t have; and as a blogger, if you know that — maybe even tracked down those reports and read them — you get why he went off on Republicans for acting at their convention like 9/11 was their preserve to exploit as they wished. Maybe you still won’t accept his conclusions, but at least you understand why he was so steamed.

Same with that SportsCenter catchphrase that puzzled you and Cas so much. It shouldn’t puzzle you, if you know that catchphrases are something Olbermann is known for. If you’ve only read as much as his Wikipedia entry.

What it all comes down to is, no writer wants to appear clueless to people who already know something of his subject. But avoiding that takes a little curiosity.

So, by the way, are you a blood relative of his, or is it by marriage?

I see… so that explains the RW minions trolling the sports blogs, trying to foment revolution and urging everyone to plague NBC with demands to get that “liberal partisan hack” off their beloved pre-game show!

These obviously are NOT viewers who knew him when; they’re relatively young Johnny-come-latelys who’ve only been aware of Olbermann’s existence since folks started blogging about him in POLITICAL terms. They imagine his journalistic credentials mirror Beck’s, and have no inkling of Olbermann’s versatility and the fact that he long ago made his mark in areas of news that have nothing to do with his current cable gig.

I don’t know about you, David, but I think a guy with a Murrow Award has standing to reference Murrow in his sign-off. Your average NewsReal/Newsbusters/NewsMax consumer isn’t going to understand that.

I know you think you’re here to eddicate us, but all us here right-wingers didn’t just fall off the turnip truck on our way to Sunday meetin’ son.

In fact, among average people who don’t pay very close attention, when I say one of my beats is to write about Keith Olbermann, the ONLY thing they know him for is sports. They are surprised– despite the HUGE viral audience you suppose is out there– to find out he does– or has done– anything else. A lot of people wonder how he got the NBC Sunday Night Football gig, because they thought he was out of broadcasting for the last decade or so.

I hope you mind my using that admission to make a larger point:

The reason so much of what RW bloggers write about Olbermann doesn’t make sense is that they haven’t bothered to acquaint themselves with the previous chapters in his career. Particularly, they don’t realize that the majority of his 30 years in journalism have been in sports — most notably at ESPN, where he and Dan Patrick were practically required viewing.

Viewers’ nostalgia for SportsCenter’s glory days explains why executives at NBC knew what they were doing when they added, first Olbermann, and later Patrick, to the cast of their Sunday night NFL pre-game show. Olbermann brings with him a substantial audience who’ve loved his work in the past, many of whom aren’t even aware of his recent foray into political news and commentary. They know him only, or primarily, as the guy who, with Patrick, revolutionized sports highlights on ESPN.

Post-ESPN, Olbermann stayed with sports — at ABC radio, CNN and Fox Sports Net, on his current cable channel anchoring the 2004 Summer Olympics, and on ESPN (radio this time) with Dan Patrick beginning in 2005. And now Sunday nights on NBC. Some people think he still does his best work in sports, but he’s made significant contributions to straight news reporting as well; even if Countdown isn’t your cup of tea, Olbermann’s daily radio dispatches from the scene of 9/11 following the attack (recognized with a Murrow Award, and still preserved online) certainly deserve props.

That’s a long and impressive history, one which can’t easily be dismissed by partisan bloggers who remain largely uninformed about this multifaceted broadcaster. Regardless of what you think of his politics, understanding Olbermann’s current work requires some awareness of the diverse reporting to which he’s turned his talents previously.

Dude, it was obvious before I read it.

“The left’s methods and agenda.” Got it. That phrase implies a certain level of effectiveness on the part of the people you write about, doesn’t it? And the obvious point I’m making — obvious to the average reader, I mean — is that if you characterize someone as ineffectual and irrelevant and then devote the majority your waking hours to writing about him, people are going to notice the inconsistency and ask, “Who are you trying to kid? Of course he’s effective. Of course he’s relevant — or you wouldn’t be spending so much time trying to convince people not to pay any attention to him!”

People understand the strategy of attempting to shape public opinion by repeating as a “fact” that which you HOPE will one day come to pass. Like chanting, “Nobody watches MSNBC.” If nobody watches them, why do they matter enough to turn a whole blog over to them?