Bill O'Reilly Has His Own Brian Williams Problem

[nyker96]

Just ran across this interesting article, link to source:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/bill-oreilly-brian-williams-falklands-war

what's your opinion on this?

 

[TheVrolok]

O'Reilly isn't a news man, he's an entertainer. He lies. He knows he lies. I can't imagine anyone would be surprised? Certainly nothing will come of it.

 

[Matt1970]

There is a big difference between a political commentator/pundit and a news anchor. If Brian Williams wants to continually lie his ass off with no real consequences, he should become a commentator, or better yet, a politician.

 

[oobydoobydoo]

Yeah he's going bezerk on the Factor... in all out denial mode right now. It's boiling down to a case of semantics; O'Reilly claimed he was in a "War Zone" when he was actually in Buenos Aires... which is at least a thousand miles away from where the battle took place.



His argument is that he "went there to cover a war" and "would've been there if they had let him" , it counts as being in a war zone. I wonder if veterans will buy this, but not Brian Williams story? They are both equal levels of BS IMHO, although Brian Williams certainly had a higher ethical pedestal to fall from.

 

[oobydoobydoo]

Maybe him and Brian Williams can make a couple's news team and show solidarity with each other. Like a support group for liars and fakes.

 

[MongGrel]

O'Reilly isn't a news man, he's an entertainer. He lies. He knows he lies. I can't imagine anyone would be surprised? Certainly nothing will come of it.

This. +1

The sad part there is many can not tell the difference these days.

Tea Party movement


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement

 

[brycejones]

Just ran across this interesting article, link to source:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/bill-oreilly-brian-williams-falklands-war

what's your opinion on this?

I think the bigger concern would be anyone who thinks O'Reilly had any credibility to damage in the first place.

 

[cubby1223]

If Williams were on any other newscast besides NBC, would anyone have brought up this O'Reilly story?

Why are these stories linked together? Are people out there saying "screw you Williams, I'm getting my news from O'Reilly from now on!" I don't think so. And the backlash against Williams is largely people who don't watch O'Reilly. And a note for the stupid of this forum, there are far more people who don't watch O'Reilly than who do, and the sum of people who disgusted at Williams are spread out amongst everyone.

Are people really worried the Democrats and Progressives are taking a hit politically because Williams is on NBC, they must divert the news towards Fox News anger?

 

[MongGrel]

Easiest solution is to never listen to O'Reilly.

The few times I've even seen the guy were Colbert related I suppose.

 

[ivwshane]

If Williams were on any other newscast besides NBC, would anyone have brought up this O'Reilly story?

Why are these stories linked together? Are people out there saying "screw you Williams, I'm getting my news from O'Reilly from now on!" I don't think so. And the backlash against Williams is largely people who don't watch O'Reilly. And a note for the stupid of this forum, there are far more people who don't watch O'Reilly than who do, and the sum of people who disgusted at Williams are spread out amongst everyone.

Are people really worried the Democrats and Progressives are taking a hit politically because Williams is on NBC, they must divert the news towards Fox News anger?

Why are these stories linked? Maybe it's because oreilly went on one of his rants about the lying liberal media.

Hypocrisy thy name is "righty".

 

[Sonikku]

Williams' problem is he apologized. You never apologize. Had he been on Fox News he could have owned it and spun it and chalked it up to mainstream media slander and repackaged it into something Americans would buy. Honestly I'm surprised his flub set off the the sirens in the first place.

 

[werepossum]

O'Reilly isn't a news man, he's an entertainer. He lies. He knows he lies. I can't imagine anyone would be surprised? Certainly nothing will come of it.

Agreed. But when the largest news source is "The Daily Show", is there really much difference? I'm sure lots of Americans look at Bill O'Reilly's opinion as fact.

 

[TheVrolok]

Agreed. But when the largest news source is "The Daily Show", is there really much difference? I'm sure lots of Americans look at Bill O'Reilly's opinion as fact.

What does the daily show have to do with this?

 

[HomerJS]

There is a big difference between a political commentator/pundit and a news anchor. If Brian Williams wants to continually lie his ass off with no real consequences, he should become a commentator, or better yet, a politician.

You mean Bill's show the one that's on the Fox News Channel isn't news. Why not have Billo, Hannity, Kelly moved to a Fox Entertainment channel? At least its closer to honest. Let's say "The Fox Comedy Channel"

Those people are not different then Jon Stewart except less funny.

 

[feralkid]

Those people are not different then Jon Stewart except less funny.

That's an understatement.

Kind of like "The Sahara is less watery than the Pacific".

 

[werepossum]

What does the daily show have to do with this?

Because like O'Reilly it's a non-news show that people use as a news show. This is the new norm, news as entertainment. Therefore O'Reilly's dishonesty is at least similar in impact to Williams' dishonesty. Both are attempting to build their bona fides to enhance their gravitas (to use political newsspeak) and therefore convince people to their point of view. We can argue that Williams is worse as he is a legitimate news anchor, but in reality O'Reilly and Stewart are competitors in analysts' clothing.

You mean Bill's show the one that's on the Fox News Channel isn't news. Why not have Billo, Hannity, Kelly moved to a Fox Entertainment channel? At least its closer to honest. Let's say "The Fox Comedy Channel"

Those people are not different then Jon Stewart except less funny.

Because they get huge ratings and a 24 hour news program with only legitimate news would be terribly boring - and therefore get low ratings. Unless maybe they actually covered the things that affect one's life.

 

[Spungo]

Maybe him and Brian Williams can make a couple's news team and show solidarity with each other. Like a support group for liars and fakes.

I want to google search a photoshopped image of the two men blowing each other, but I'm afraid I might find such a thing.

 

[DrDoug]

I saw a comment that pretty much covers it well:

The difference between Brian Williams lying and Bill O'Reilly lying is that Brian Williams' fans think that honesty matters.

Judging from those above who are dismissing this because O'Lielly is an entertainer, yup.

 

[Jhhnn]

Because like O'Reilly it's a non-news show that people use as a news show. This is the new norm, news as entertainment. Therefore O'Reilly's dishonesty is at least similar in impact to Williams' dishonesty. Both are attempting to build their bona fides to enhance their gravitas (to use political newsspeak) and therefore convince people to their point of view. We can argue that Williams is worse as he is a legitimate news anchor, but in reality O'Reilly and Stewart are competitors in analysts' clothing.

While Williams apparently embellished the story for effect, he was actually in a helicopter in a war zone. That's apparently not true wrt O'Reilly's mythical time in the falklands.

Williams rightfully lost credibility while O'Reilly used outright lies in an effort to gain it.

Which of them suffers the consequences of their own actions today? Obviously not O'Reilly. He's as trusted as he ever has been.

 

[Paratus]

Let's face it. Top Gear has been closer to a war zone in the Falklands than O'Reilly has.

 

[werepossum]

While Williams apparently embellished the story for effect, he was actually in a helicopter in a war zone. That's apparently not true wrt O'Reilly's mythical time in the falklands.

Williams rightfully lost credibility while O'Reilly used outright lies in an effort to gain it.

Which of them suffers the consequences of their own actions today? Obviously not O'Reilly. He's as trusted as he ever has been.

That thing leaving a contrail far, far over your head? That was my point.

Let's face it. Top Gear has been closer to a war zone in the Falklands than O'Reilly has.

Of course, the crew of Top gear are probably trusted by more people than O'Reilly.

 

[Jhhnn]

That thing leaving a contrail far, far over your head? That was my point.




Of course, the crew of Top gear are probably trusted by more people than O'Reilly.

You said that we "could" argue Williams to be worse, thus making excuses for O'Reilly.

O'Reilly presents himself as a serious commentator when he's actually a cynical propagandist, exploiting his audience at an emotional level, reinforcing every judgmental value that conservatives hold dear. He doesn't deal in reason, but rather in polarizing attitude & belief. At that visceral level, he's trusted by far too many people.

Imagine a world where more people had Bill's attitude. That's really what he preaches- attitude. It's horrifying in a self fulfilling prophecy sort of way.

Williams never had or intended that sort of impact on the world at all.

 

[cubby1223]

You said that we "could" argue Williams to be worse, thus making excuses for O'Reilly.

O'Reilly presents himself as a serious commentator when he's actually a cynical propagandist, exploiting his audience at an emotional level, reinforcing every judgmental value that conservatives hold dear. He doesn't deal in reason, but rather in polarizing attitude & belief. At that visceral level, he's trusted by far too many people.

Imagine a world where more people had Bill's attitude. That's really what he preaches- attitude. It's horrifying in a self fulfilling prophecy sort of way.

Williams never had or intended that sort of impact on the world at all.

You've either (1) watched O'Reilly a lot to pick up those truths, or (2) taken the opinion of someone else who wants to convince you O'Reilly is a terrible person

I don't know why, but those who know the most about Fox News on this forum always seem to be those who hate Fox News!

 

[ivwshane]

You've either (1) watched O'Reilly a lot to pick up those truths, or (2) taken the opinion of someone else who wants to convince you O'Reilly is a terrible person

I don't know why, but those who know the most about Fox News on this forum always seem to be those who hate Fox News!

Yeah, we tend to actually look shit up before we talk shit. Bill has been on the air for a very long time and he wasn't always this partisan.

As werepossum pointed out, bill is a commentator not a news reporter but his viewers watch his show as if it were the news. Bills mistake was criticizing a newsman for lying while not only does he himself lie but so does the whole "news" network he is on. So no, he's not the same thing as Brian Williams but he's still a hypocrite.

 

[Jhhnn]

You've either (1) watched O'Reilly a lot to pick up those truths, or (2) taken the opinion of someone else who wants to convince you O'Reilly is a terrible person

I don't know why, but those who know the most about Fox News on this forum always seem to be those who hate Fox News!

I've seen & heard enough from O'Reilly over the years to understand him. Here's Bill dancing around some of his own embellishments-

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/02/20/bill-oreillys-talking-points-memo-22015-airing-tonight-8pm-et

Covering a riot in Buenos Aires is not the same thing as actually being in a war zone, no matter how hard he spins it. When confronted with his own dishonesty, he doubles down on it. I never expected anything different.