Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Unorthodox and Sometimes Polarizing, the Incredibly Popular Rosie O'Donnell Will Exit Stage Left

By Jeanine Plant, AlterNet. Posted May 8, 2007.


This fall, viewers will say goodbye to Rosie O'Donnell, a woman who, in spite of her unorthodox voice and often polarizing views, remains overwhelmingly popular. So what is it about this social misfit that so attracts the public?
050807story
Advertisement

"I'm fat and I'm gay," Rosie O'Donnell confessed, smiling sardonically at the camera, on a recent broadcast of ABC Daytime's gabfest, "The View." Deliberately thumbing her nose at the manners and morals of mainstream television is workaday for O'Donnell, so presumably her unabashed honesty didn't ruffle any viewer's sense of decorum. Rather, O'Donnell's voice -- unorthodox and uncouth -- has resuscitated the flagging program in its 10th year on the air. Her remarkably blunt disclosures and infamous feuds helped increase the show's viewership by over a half-million a day, according to the Associated Press.

But just last week, she announced that she will be exiting the show in June. Having initially only signed for a year, she didn't agree to the terms of a new contract. According to the New York Times, ABC had wanted her to commit to three more years with the show, but O'Donnell wanted more money than they were willing to pay.

Come September, when the new season starts, viewers will lose one of the most beloved and most progressive television personalities in mainstream media. Now that she will be leaving, it's instructive to take stock: How do we square her intransigent views -- which can be offensive and polarizing to many, and seem out of step with the larger culture -- with her overwhelming popularity?

Certainly O'Donnell's popularity can't be reduced to her politics. Her unapologetic lesbianism probably offends (while also educating) whole swaths of more traditionally-minded viewers, just as her dietary habits, which consist of eating Oreo cookies in bed, Ring Dings, and Dunkin Donuts, are probably frowned upon by upper-middle-class audience members, who pride themselves on their sense of healthful propriety.

Even those who don't find her coarse and agree with many of her political views sometimes recoil at her misinformation and divisiveness. When she trumpeted 9/11 conspiracy theories recently, suggesting it was an inside job, critics, including AlterNet's Joshua Holland, suggested she helped fuel embarrassing right-wing stereotypes about liberals: "that they're extremists, that they're defined by their fringe and led by out-of-touch Hollywood elites."

So what is it about this social misfit that so attracts the public? For starters, she seems to forge genuine connections with her guests -- unlike the more aloof Barbara Walters -- in part because of her discernible imperfections. At the height of the cell-phone tabloid scandal incriminating Alec Baldwin as a bad father, for instance, he requested to speak on "The View" because he had a history with O'Donnell and knew her to be sympathetic to public embarrassment. When Courtney Love, who has been called a negligent mother in the past, was touting her new book last fall, she bypassed the other panelists to give O'Donnell a hug, as if to gird herself against a potentially chilly reception from the other judgmental hosts.

She's also funny, of course, which is an indisputably likeable quality. But sometimes Joy Behar, her fellow comic panelist, is funnier, always quick with a one-liner; and sometimes O'Donnell can, in fact, be a downer. During the Anna Nicole Smith media frenzy, for example, O'Donnell self-righteously brought up the disparity in media coverage between the B-list starlet's death and the deaths of soldiers in Iraq. And she raised the forbidden topic again during the whole Imus debacle, because -- to the dismay of some feminists -- she didn't quite get what all of the commotion was about. It's precisely because of these impieties, which challenge the niceties of vacuous conversation, I'd argue, that she has so many fans.

That O'Donnell consistently raises uncomfortable truths to an ever-growing audience shows just how hungry the public is for a woman willing to tell them. Bill Maher, for instance, is a somewhat similar public figure in that he's equally funny and politically incorrect, but many of his jokes smack of misogyny. Which gets to the heart of O'Donnell's polarizing nature -- that she is a woman who dares to have an opinion.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: television, progressives, the view

Jeanine Plant is a New York-based freelance writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hot Commodity
Posted by: edith on May 8, 2007 12:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If she were such a "hot commodity", she would be going nowhere. What are the data as to her popularity? The author repeatedly claim O'Donnell's popularity, yet he comes up with no numbers.

O'Donnell's indiscriminate embrace of every wacko cause, regardless of objective evidence (pro or con), has made her presence a heavy burden on the audience indeed. Moreover, he main talent, i.e.,, a voice that can outshout the other gabsters on The View, is simply unpleasant, regardless of the content of her diatrabes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: picket
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: fedupw/bush
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: babs
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: Redhead5050
» Rosie Borealis Posted by: edith
» Sniff, sniff Redux Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» Sniff, sniff! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Sniff, sniff! Posted by: edith
» RE: Sniff, sniff! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: bannelee
Rosie O'Donnell
Posted by: Tom Degan on May 8, 2007 12:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that Rosie O'Donnell is right on the mark with regard to many of the issues she decides to take on. The problem is this (and it doesn't give me any pleasure to say this): that she is a very troubled woman is obvious. When she tries to come off as a physics expert and says that it is impossible for the fuel of a jet plane to melt the steel foundation of a building - even one as large as the world trade center - she just fuels the right wing's pre-concieved notions about progressives. She has implied that 9/11 was an inside job. Really? I need more proof than someone's guess. My guess is that some of the people within the neo-con junta knew it was going to happen and didn't do anything to stop it - that is probably why the Bush Mob was so dead set against the formation of the 9/11 Commission. The problem is Rosie's bloviating (like Al Shapton's) tends to, at times, destract us from disscussing the issues that are screaming to be discussed.

No doubt about it, her heart is in the right place, but at the end of the day, it is not the substance of her argument that the country is talking about - but her presentation - and that's a shame.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Tom Degan
» a crying, dying shame Posted by: orwellwasn'tdreaming
» RE: a crying, dying shame Posted by: Rolomax
» Third-rate psychobabble Posted by: brunowe
» hardly sir Posted by: gretavo
» VERY well written. Posted by: hoogenboom
» Almost... fiction-like... Posted by: eddie torres
» Too easy Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» Who told? Posted by: eddie torres
» Short cut Posted by: eddie torres
» Why must you deny 4/29 Truth? Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Almost... fiction-like... Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: brunowe
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: gretavo
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: brunowe
» at least you try... Posted by: gretavo
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: MrAllen
» brunowe - Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: brunowe - Posted by: brunowe
» The (n/t) was a mistake Posted by: LeftWright
» Brunowe? Building 7... Posted by: raffers
» RE: Third-rate psychobabble Posted by: whiteaglesoaring
» It wasn't quite conventional Posted by: brunowe
» Correction Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Correction Posted by: gretavo
» That's right. Posted by: raffers
» any evidence for that? Posted by: gretavo
» the problem here is... Posted by: gretavo
» RE: the problem here is... Posted by: Rolomax
» Tom,,,Please explain.... Posted by: John Rice
» not the Bush Mob Posted by: gretavo
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Krain61
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: greenback
» RE: PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: greenback
» RE: PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: Conservasaurus
» BOY! Posted by: Tom Degan
» #7 is the key Posted by: vangogh69
» RE: BOY! Posted by: whiteaglesoaring
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Redhead5050
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: glorybe
double standard
Posted by: Alec Freeman on May 8, 2007 1:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And sometimes her desire for a quick laugh leads her astray, such as when she offended Chinese Americans with her mockery of their language."

Oh, I see. When you insult Chinese people, it's going "astray" (rather than acting like a nine-year-old schoolyard bully, or the neighborhood racist, or...Don Imus). By the way, I'm not Chinese and I was offended by her mockery. There is absolutely no difference between O'Donnell and, for instance, Rush Limbaugh or Michael Savage -- bellicose foghorns with no conceivable intelligence. But that's all you need in America today, bluster without facts or reason.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: double standard Posted by: H_H
» RE: double standard Posted by: hilaryuk
» RE: double standard Posted by: icj
» RE: double standard Posted by: carcinoid112
Recommended Viewing: 70s movie "NETWORK"
Posted by: ZPaul on May 8, 2007 2:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I´d like to suggest, as something that was brought to mind when it became clear Rosie O´Donnell was on her way out, viewing the old, pre-PC, pre-Internet movie "Network". Although there are considerable differences, of course, you just may see some aspects in the film that parallel Rosie´s demise as a TV host.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good commentary
Posted by: kepstein7777 on May 8, 2007 2:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If she's pissing off a lot of people, she must be doing something right.

I hope she gives Elizabeth a good pounding before she leaves. I would take off from work just to watch that.

Either way, Joy is still the coolest out of all of them. If she ever leaves, I hope she goes on to do something even better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: Roverton
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: raffers
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: Truelass
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
Adios, Rosie -- and good riddance!
Posted by: HughScott on May 8, 2007 3:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Enough said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Adios, Rosie -- and good riddance! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Rosie rocks and will be making a lot more on her new show
Posted by: xbj on May 8, 2007 3:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hopefully she'll stick with politics and real matters, or else she'll lose the new audience she's gained.

Daytime TV needs an Olbermann... or nightime TV, although it's a lot trickier to deal honestly with politics with what has traditionally been a tired or dead drunk audience. Although David Letterman has certainly come around admirably in that regard.

Time will tell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Around since MTV-Too eary for some
Posted by: placid on May 8, 2007 4:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back in the early years Rosie was a part the new wave of experiencing music. Pioneering on T.V.'s new video station MTV.(Where are her MTV peers? No bash, she is the only one I recall..Oh,Downtown Julie Brown?) I enjoyed her but I had NO idea "where to from here." That was in the early '80s. .Movies,shows, t.v. radio and most definitely unique.Katrina?!She spoke out and helped out personally, entertainers helped yet Rosie was there and made no bones about"W"doing NOTHING. I love people with passion for others. Rosie got it Love her or not, she has made her mark much more than many of us have or will. Polarizing people intrique us,face it! Mary Basombrio

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Rosie was on VH1, not MTV Posted by: realmuzik
People are also attracted to train wrecks
Posted by: ISlamIslam on May 8, 2007 4:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's one explanation for people's apparent attraction to her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rosie is simply enjoyable
Posted by: nyscof on May 8, 2007 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She's an entertainer and she's good at it. Don't understand what all the fuss is except that her popularity gets ratings for anyone who writes or broadcasts about her.

Not only is Joy Behar funny; but she's said similar things that Rosie has said over the years. But she isn't as popular as Rosie. So criticizing her won't draw more readers or viewers. Too bad. She's really good and equally as intelligent as Rosie.

The View will do very well next year; but we'll miss Rosie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Sinks to a New Low of DIS-INFORMATION REGARDING ROSIE AND 9/11
Posted by: BillDouglas on May 8, 2007 5:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Rosie O'Donnell said was, "WTC 7. Look at the collapse. Steel reinforced buildings do not collapse like that from isolated fires. World Trade Center 7"

This is a fact of physics !! Not dis-information.

Rosie was absolutely right. Professor Steven Jones, a highly regarded physics professor formerly at Brigham Young University, has found traces of "thermate" in World Trade Center debris. Thermate is a patented "controlled demolition" steel cutting agent. See:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4884818450327382904

Professor Jones' analysis shows that melting steel was pouring from the buildings of WTC 1 and 2 as well. Jet fuel fire does not burn hot enough to melt steel, let alone all the steel in steel reinforced skyscrapers uniformly. Professor Jones first became concerned when he realized that the WTC buildings on 9/11, fell at near free fall speed. The steel beams were conveniently cut at lengths easy to haul away by a company hired by the govt. called "Controlled Demolition."

Guilliani and FEMA quickly destroyed the WTC steel by shipping it to Asia to be recycled, amid protests by the editor of Fire Engineering Magazine, who said "never before in fire forensic history has forensic evidence been destroyed like this before a full investigation.

There are several good documentaries on this that support Rosie's view. One is "9/11 Mysteries," and another is "9/11 Re-visited."

At PatriotsQuestion911.org you'll find over 100 high level military, intelligence, engineering, and physics experts, who agree with Rosie, that we've been lied to about 9/11.

Alternet's patronizing slap of people "re-coiling when Rosie spoke about 9/11" isn't supported by the facts. A ScrippsHoward Poll showed that 1/3 of Americans believe the US Govt. was either complicit in the 9/11 attacks, or knew they were coming and let them happen. As information continues to surface, that number will only grow.

Alternet's writes do a disservice to their readers by choosing to not only hear, see, and speak no evil re: 9/11, but to participate in the corporate media smear of heroes like Ms. O'Donnell who dare to say the king has no clothes regarding the official myth of 9/11.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» brunowe Posted by: Krain61
» Krain Posted by: brunowe
» So what was the MOTIVE for destroying WTC7? Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» thanks eddie! Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» But wait, there's more at... Posted by: eddie torres
» many motives added up Posted by: gretavo
» Hey, I just looked those words up Posted by: eddie torres
» Amen Posted by: BillDouglas
» RE: Amen Posted by: redbrownandblueparty
» Freak Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Keep saying it. Posted by: WhatNow?
If Rosie, representative of women, I Hope Not
Posted by: gdonald on May 8, 2007 6:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is Rosie really the best representative of women? I certainly hope not. I know that her foul mouth puts her in the same catagory as many so called movie industry elite's, the gutter. Yes, she is entitled to her opinions but let's face facts. She is not one who I would want as my neighbor, especially around my granddaughters. There are better ways to express your opinions of people to people, especially when you are given a platform to speak it. Her language and her manners tell me she lacks any significant IQ and moral or ethical values. Glad she is gone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WE NEED HER HONESTY!! Posted by: fluffmuffinmom
» RE: AN EXAMPLE OF COURAGE FOR WOMEN TO FOLLOW Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» feel better now??? Posted by: 50566
Rosie is a great and courageous American
Posted by: dainin on May 8, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And that's a rare thing these days.

This is actually a pretty fair article. How did it slip that by the editors?

911 Research

Scholars for Truth and Justice

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» More great and courageous Americans Posted by: eddie torres
» America's greatest freeway atrocity. yeowsa? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Rosie and the homeless
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma on May 8, 2007 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rosie objected to Giuliani's policies re: homelessness in NYC. A Times columnist was inspired to pose as a homeless man & camp out next to Rosie's mansion in Nyack. She & the Nyack cops were not amused.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rosie spoke about 9/11 being an inside job
Posted by: Aimee on May 8, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"When she trumpeted 9/11 conspiracy theories recently, suggesting it was an inside job, " is when she was on her way out. The View will be back to being just another dumb show for ladies ... no politics please. And the 9/11 issue? Gone. No one will even remember the subject of it being an inside job. TV viewers are so forgetful ...

The 9/11 issue will not go away. The "conspiracy theories" are not conspiracies. There are facts to back up the truths on inside job of 9/11.

Aimee
DataOptions.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Really?
Posted by: NoPCZone on May 8, 2007 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Bill Maher, for instance, is a somewhat similar public figure in that he's equally funny and politically incorrect, but many of his jokes smack of misogyny... "

Bill Maher is not equally funny- he's really funny and unlike Rosie, actually has something to say. He also not a repulsively overweight, shrill pig.

"Certain media men" may not understand O'Donnell's popularity and even resent it because of their belief "that women who watch daytime television are mostly stupid, concerned only with the latest fashions, celebrity gossip, and sex tips, while men are interested in the 'hard news' of politics, economics, labor, science, and world events."

No
Women who watch daytime television are mostly stupid, concerned only with the latest fashions, celebrity gossip, and sex tips, while men are mostly interested in sports, gossip and sex.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bill Maher Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» RE: eally? Posted by: MrAllen
» RE: Really? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Really? Posted by: binkey
A Nation of Radicals
Posted by: rwmk12 on May 8, 2007 6:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remeber building 7? Probably not. Google video it.

How to get rid of a T.V. celebrity who has broken the taboo of the great monologue of network television: throw her off the air that day? No, there goes the appearance of "freedom of speech".... Instead, offer her a new three year contract a few weeks later, but at a rate you know she will have to refuse... political radical gone... network tv safe again from "radicals"= thought control in a "democratic" society. (Just a theory)

By the way, to the author of this article, America was founded by "radicals", or so the story goes. The fat white suburbanite who thinks that reality is network sports, work, and shopping is the equivalent of a loyalist to the english crown back in revolution times, only less self-sufficient, and less free. Using loaded language like "radical" is a sneaky rhetorical tactic called "guilt by association", which undermines anything that is not in line with the conformist agenda. "Sit down". "Shut up". "This train is leaving the station and you aren't driving america". Thankyou author, you're a real paytriot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joshua Holland still buying the bull?
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on May 8, 2007 6:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is pointless to pander to the right. After attacking Kerry left right up down and sideways in '04 for being a flip-flopper, they will very likely nominate Romney. And if they do, there isn't much of a chance that the left will be able to use the same flip-flop argument effectively, even though it will be 10x more true for Romney than it ever was for Kerry. That's just the way it goes. I don't think Joshua understands that.

I commend Rosie for talking about WTC7 on her show. To this date there still has not been a real investigation. I'd find that amusing if it wasn't so alarming. We're just now finding out that there are thousands, perhaps millions, of tiny 100~1000 micron iron balls scattered throughout all of the WTC dust that coated all of lower manhatten. Didn't anyone think to take a magnet to this dust and see what happens? That I find very alarming as well.

Anyway, what I am saying is there is evidence of molten iron contained within the pyroclastic cloud formed by the building collapses. I have yet to hear anything even close to a debunking of this evidence... it is very difficult to argue against round iron balls because it clearly means that iron was at one point liquid AND was at one point thrown through the air. What could do that? Only one thing. If people like Joshua Holland actually focused on the facts and the science instead of on the name calling and playing silly little right wing games maybe we'd have answers by now. But that's ok. Why not let Rosie fight all our battles for us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]