Bill O'Reilly also lied about being in combat, but since he's only on Fox News...

[KAWDUP]

Seeking to defend MichChamp is shameful, no matter what news show you watch for bias.

The guy's a raving jackass ...so let MichChamp hold himself out to be superior and play the same 'liberal elitist' crap that Ihave for 20yrs.

Fixed that first part for ya. :*)

The gay ass smilie is for you MichChamp

 

[Michchamp]

Fixed that first part for ya. :*)

The gay ass smilie is for you MichChamp

at least you're smiling now, instead of making vaguely-threatening comments about how O'Reilly's viewership would murder me in cold blood.

:tup:

 

[KAWDUP]

at least you're smiling now, instead of making vaguely-threatening comments about how O'Reilly's viewership would murder me in cold blood.

:tup:

Aw come on - I thought you would get the humorous connection between the conservatives who would watch O'Reilly, might be the same gun nuts who would carry concealed weapons.












. . . and we have all wanted to murder you in cold blood one time or another, so you can't hold that against me.

 

[Michchamp]

Now Bill O threatened a NYT reporter who was covering the story. A woman at that... what a gentleman. Article also has this choice quote:

"While NBC News was aghast at its biggest star being accused of journalistic lapses, Fox News seems to be enjoying it. "Fox News Chairman and C.E.O. Roger Ailes and all senior management are in full support of Bill O?Reilly," said a network spokesperson. 'Fox News channel is news for people who don?t trust the rest of the news media,' NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen explained in the Times. 'They actually want the controversy because it fits this strategy.'"
​

We should do a fill-in-the-blank contest over that:

"Fox News channel is news for _______ who don?t ________."
​

 

[Thumb]

It's not afghanistan or Iraq so in that context "war zone" could be an exaggeration but hardly on the level of the Brian Williams whoppers.

Splitting hairs here.

His lie was not as big as the lie the other guy told, whom he criticized for lying.

 

[byco42]

It's kinda crappy of you to conflate my criticism of a dumb movie about the Vietnam War that adds a Hollywood-esque bayonet charge to the ending with the actual soldiers who fought there, but yeah, I must hate the troops... that's it.

Hal Moore is Catholic is my point.

 

[Michchamp]

Hal Moore is Catholic is my point.

I wasn't criticising him, just that crappy movie is mine.

 

[Spartanmack]

Splitting hairs here.

His lie was not as big as the lie the other guy told, whom he criticized for lying.

That's not splitting hairs. There's actually a big difference between exaggerating or using hyperbole and repeatedly telling multiple bold faced lies.

 

[Michchamp]

That's not splitting hairs. There's actually a big difference between exaggerating or using hyperbole and repeatedly telling multiple bold faced lies.

Williams was on a helicopter that followed one that had been hit a half hour before. He later repeatedly claimed he was on the one that had been hit.

O'Reilly claimed he had been in a war zone, in combat, etc. even though he was 1,200 miles away.

this is not splitting hairs?

 

[Spartanmack]

Williams was on a helicopter that followed one that had been hit a half hour before. He later repeatedly claimed he was on the one that had been hit.

O'Reilly claimed he had been in a war zone, in combat, etc. even though he was 1,200 miles away.

this is not splitting hairs?

smoke and mirrors - no surprise. Williams' chopper landed more than an hour later and was not even part of the same transport group that was forced to land in the dessert after one was hit. He then also falsely claimed to have spent the night in the desert, protected by US troops when in fact he left the scene less than 90 minutes after landing. he also falsely claimed to have witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall. And he lied about rushing into a burning building and saving "multiple" puppies. O'Reilly described Buenos Aires during the riots as a war zone. That's hyperbole at best. That is NOT splitting hairs - unless you have an ax to grind, then it's no different than the Brian Williams whoppers and it proves he's also an egomaniac and a pathological liar, or at a minimum, that he should also be suspended or fired..

 

[Michchamp]

smoke and mirrors - no surprise. Williams' chopper landed more than an hour later and was not even part of the same transport group that was forced to land in the dessert after one was hit. He then also falsely claimed to have spent the night in the desert, protected by US troops when in fact he left the scene less than 90 minutes after landing. he also falsely claimed to have witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall. And he lied about rushing into a burning building and saving "multiple" puppies. O'Reilly described Buenos Aires during the riots as a war zone. That's hyperbole at best. That is NOT splitting hairs - unless you have an ax to grind, then it's no different than the Brian Williams whoppers and it proves he's also an egomaniac and a pathological liar, or at a minimum, that he should also be suspended or fired..

I'm not defending Brian Williams. Hell, I posted this thread. But I'm not sure why you brought him up, as though it somehow excuses Bill O.

Ironically, if Bill O hadn't gone on that sanctimonious lecture invoking the Founding Fathers, and the 1st Amendment while attacking Williams, I don't think anyone would've even taken the time to dig into his own claims.

And are you intentionally ignoring all of the rest of Bill O's claims about being in a war zone to ... defend him? This wasn't an isolated incident for him for him either. Both he and Williams repeatedly made these claims.

if Fox News had any pretentions to being considered a legitimate source of journalism, he'd be suspended too. But it doesn't, so he won't be, and his fan boys won't care.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Does anybody know what O'Reilly's business relationship with Fox News Network actually is?

Is he a regular old W-2 employee, or does he actually produce the show himself (or as a corporation), and provide content to Fox on a contractor agreement?

Either way, Fox could dump him if they wanted to; and I imagine he's free to walk away from Fox anytime he wants to.

I'm just wondering...

 

[tinselwolverine]

If I were a communications and media scholar - which, as a matter of fact, I am - I would have this objective observation - love Fox News, hate Fox News, love NBC Network News, hate it, love O'Reilly, hate O'Reilly, love Brian Williams, hate him, whatever - under the LAW of the Federal Government of the United States of America, established in the Federal Communications Act of 1934, the United States Government, under the direction of the Federal Communications Commission, is obligated by LAW to hold the NBC News Network to a MUCH higher standard than which it's obligated to hold Fox News.

This is because NBC has broadcast affiliates - like, you don't need casble; you can still watch them with your rabbit ears and an HD converter and as established by the FCA of 1934 those affiliates themselves need to demonstrate they've been guardians of the public trust when they need to renew entitlement to continue to broadcast and get approval from the FCC.

So the network affiliates have a much more significant interest to remove Brian Williams from the NBC News Network for his bullshit, which gives NBC News Network a much more compelling reason to remove Brian Williams, than Fox has to remove Bill O'Reilly for his bullshit.

It's completely irrelevant whose whoppers were bigger, or if they're apples to apples - it matters not a wit - Brian Williams lies are a much much bigger deal than O'Reilly's are, simply because of who NBC News is as compared to who Fox News is, in the eyes of the law.

And that is just the plain objective truth.

 

[Michchamp]

Does anybody know what O'Reilly's business relationship with Fox News Network actually is?

Is he a regular old W-2 employee, or does he actually produce the show himself (or as a corporation), and provide content to Fox on a contractor agreement?

Either way, Fox could dump him if they wanted to; and I imagine he's free to walk away from Fox anytime he wants to.

I'm just wondering...

according to the wiki page, he created the show, but others produce it.

I remember reading a "behind the scenes" article written by a former ass't producer on how the show was made, and IIRC he said O'Reilly and his boss (Roger Ailes?) were often butting heads. the article was actually pretty favorable to Bill, and his work ethic, although it seemed like O'Reilly pretty much butts heads with everyone who's path he crosses, for any reason. He's always like he is in the "FFF it, we'll do it live!" clip. He hasn't mellowed with age.

I'd love to see his contract with Fox News... it would be hilariously ironic if Fox had clauses in their talent contracts that allowed hosts/talking heads to be fired for dishonesty.

As far as media trustworthiness goes, I guess you could say Fox News is completely in the tank for the DC establishment/the military industrial complex/Wall Street/big business, and the others are only mostly in the tank to various degrees... but at least aspire to do journalism, and occasionally do. Rarely do.

 

[Michchamp]

If I were a communications and media scholar - which, as a matter of fact, I am - I would have this objective observation - love Fox News, hate Fox News, love NBC Network News, hate it, love O'Reilly, hate O'Reilly, love Brian Williams, hate him, whatever - under the LAW of the Federal Government of the United States of America, established in the Federal Communications Act of 1934, the United States Government, under the direction of the Federal Communications Commission, is obligated by LAW to hold the NBC News Network to a MUCH higher standard than which it's obligated to hold Fox News.

This is because NBC has broadcast affiliates - like, you don't need casble; you can still watch them with your rabbit ears and an HD converter and as established by the FCA of 1934 those affiliates themselves need to demonstrate they've been guardians of the public trust when they need to renew entitlement to continue to broadcast and get approval from the FCC.

So the network affiliates have a much more significant interest to remove Brian Williams from the NBC News Network for his bullshit, which gives NBC News Network a much more compelling reason to remove Brian Williams, than Fox has to remove Bill O'Reilly for his bullshit.

It's completely irrelevant whose whoppers were bigger, or if they're apples to apples - it matters not a wit - Brian Williams lies are a much much bigger deal than O'Reilly's are, simply because of who NBC News is as compared to who Fox News is, in the eyes of the law.

And that is just the plain objective truth.

whoa, look at King Solomon here, splitting the baby and allowing all to live in peace.

 

[tinselwolverine]

If I were a communications and media scholar - which, as a matter of fact, I am...

And that is just the plain objective truth.

Forgot this important point I was gonna make in #53 - this is why, for example, Ed Schultz can refer to Laura Ingraham as a "slut" on the NBC cable network - pretty sure if anyone said anything like that on the broadcast network, they would be gone...

Forgot to add, he did get a slap on the wrist, a short suspension...but he would have been gone if he had said that on a broadcast news program, pretty sure...

 

[Michchamp]

Forgot this important point I was gonna make in #53 - this is why, for example, Ed Schultz can refer to Laura Ingraham as a "slut" on the NBC cable network - pretty sure if anyone said anything like that on the broadcast network, they would be gone...

you can say things like that, but if you don't have on more pro-war guest speakers than anti-war speakers, or try to maintain an unbiased program as the nation marches to war, you'll get fired, even on cable.

 

[tinselwolverine]

you can say things like that, but if you don't have on more pro-war guest speakers than anti-war speakers, or try to maintain an unbiased program as the nation marches to war, you'll get fired, even on cable.

I thought Donahue was fired because he claimed to have protested the Viet Nam war on the University of Michigan campus with Tom Hayden, then later was conspiring with the Chicago Seven at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, and later it was proven that he was nowhere near Chicago during the convention, and had never been to Ann Arbor in his life.

 

[Michchamp]

I thought Donahue was fired because he claimed to have protested the Viet Nam war on the University of Michigan campus with Tom Hayden, then later was conspiring with the Chicago Seven at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, and later it was proven that he was nowhere near Chicago during the convention, and had never been to Ann Arbor in his life.

imagine how much nicer the world would be if national figures had to lie about their involvement in peace efforts/opposing war, instead of the opposite.

 

[tinselwolverine]

imagine how much nicer the world would be if national figures had to lie about their involvement in peace efforts/opposing war, instead of the opposite.

It looks like it already happened. Many Claim Jesse Jackson lied about his circumstances associated with the death of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King.

Some King associates, still bitter, have accused Mr. Jackson of fabricating or exaggerating his role after the assassination.