MSNBC: Eh, Who Needs Objectivity, Anyway?

What's the difference between a host and an anchor? Between analysis and color commentary? Between news and a "news event"?

At MSNBC, the answer is it's all a question of convenience.

The GE-owned cable network is reversing field on a decision taken last September to use personnel other than Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews to anchor news coverage. The Countdown and Hardball hosts will co-anchor MSNBC's telecast of the presidential inauguration.

Phil Griffin, the channel's president, seemed to be suffering from a form of amnesia yesterday when discussing the inauguration plans with the Los Angeles Times. "There was a sense at the time that we wanted Keith and Chris to be able to be themselves and not hold back, and that's why David was put in," Griffin told the Times, referring to David Gregory, who has since shifted most of his time over to the parent network. "And it worked beautifully, and if we're ever in a situation like that, I would do that again."

But exactly how the inauguration differs from the electoral events that led up to it is a mystery known only to Griffin. He suggests it's because the swearing-in is an occasion of "pomp and circumstance" whose outcome is preordained, or something like that. Therefore, it's appropriate to have opinionated talking heads providing "color commentary" rather than play-by-by.

Does anyone else find that logic iffy? A lot of big political events are pre-scripted. Take the State of the Union address. Or take the nominating conventions -- which were the impetus for MSNBC's decision to bar Matthews and Olbermann from the anchor chair in the first place. Just because an event is choreographed doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences. What Barack Obama says in his inaugural address will set the tone and priorities for his administration; whoever's decoding it for MSNBC should be clearly identified as an analyst (particularly if that person is Olbermann, who seems to have trouble even understanding why the distinction is important -- at least for someone of his superior judgment).

Or not. Either way, a little consistency, maybe?