Bill O’Reilly

Bill O’Reilly’s Bald-Faced Lies About His Ratings

Posted by on October 27, 2009 at 8:52 am. 15 Comments :

On his program Monday, Bill O’Reilly had another episode of Ratings Derangement Syndrome. I first reported this malady exactly one year ago when O’Reilly became unhinged at what he believed was a conspiracy by Nielsen to destroy him:

“The bottom line on this is there may be some big-time cheating going on in the ratings system, and we hope the Feds will investigate. Any fraud in the television rating system affects all Americans.”

Of course the Feds have no oversight authority to investigate private polling firms. And O’Reilly had no evidence of wrongdoing anyway. It’s also interesting to note that O’Reilly has no problems with Nielsen’s data now that they are reporting a rosier picture of his program’s performance. But he still has his knickers in a twist over any media critic who dares to question his primacy. This most recent outburst began with a declaration dripping in hyperbole and delusions of grandeur.

“Fox News is now the most powerful news organization in the United States of America, and that means in the world.”

It is statements like that that require linguists to create new adjectives, because supercilious, delusional, and narcissistic, simply don’t cut it anymore. O’Reilly still doesn’t get that Fox reaches a mere 1% of the American public. The vast majority of news consumers are opting to watch programs other than his. O’Reilly was responding to criticism from Time Magazine’s Joe Klein, who raised O’Reilly’s ire by saying that, “Fox News peddles a fair amount of hateful crap.” O’Reilly ought to be grateful to Klein for being so gentle. The truth is Fox News peddles a huge amount of hateful crap. But instead, O’Reilly’s misguided indignation led him to spew a batch of unmitigated lies:

“Look what’s happened. Fox News thirteen years on the air, OK?. Wipes out every other cable network, OK?. It’s not even close. Now, we’re approaching, the Factor is approaching Katie Couric numbers. We’re real close to Katie Couric numbers. We beat everybody else. Good Morning America. Nightline. I think the Today show is a little bit ahead of us, but it’s close.

First of all, Fox News does not wipe out every other cable network. They lead only amongst cable “news” networks. TBS, ESPN and USA, routinely beat Fox News (it’s not even close), but O’Reilly failed to make that distinction.

Secondly, O’Reilly’s contention that he is approaching Katie Couric numbers is laughable. Primarily because it wouldn’t be that much of a feat. Couric is the worst performing broadcast news program. But to compound his comedic dishonesty, he doesn’t come close to Courics ratings. Couric’s average of approximately 5.5 million is almost twice O’Reilly’s 3 million viewers. and the top rated NBC News brings in about 8.5 million, nearly triple O’Reilly.

Finally, O’Reilly doesn’t beat Good Morning America. Nightline, or the Today show. Setting aside the fact that these shows don’t even compete with O’Reilly, and their time periods have an entirely different potential audience, he still fails to best them. In fact, the Today Show also nearly doubles O’Reilly’s numbers even though it is on in the early morning hours while O’Reilly is on in primetime.. He could have claimed a victory over CBS’s perennial loser, The Early Show, but for some reason didn’t bother.

In the end, this is just another display of O’Reilly’s dishonesty and arrogance. And despite his objections, and his egotistical fantasies, he is only illustrating why knowledgeable observers do not regard Fox as a news network. It is merely a platform for self-serving propaganda, manic paranoia and partisan disinformation.

Fired By Fox News: Marc Lamont Hill Gets What He Deserves

Posted by on October 16, 2009 at 11:56 am. 18 Comments :

Marc Lamont Hill is described on his web site as “one of the leading hip-hop generation intellectuals.” He is an author and a professor at Columbia University. For the past few years he has also been a paid contributor at Fox News.

Hill’s appearances on Fox have been almost exclusively with Bill O’Reilly. He is actually one of the few foils who has demonstrated an ability to hold his own, to not get railroaded by O’Reilly, and to hold fast to true liberal arguments. In other words, he is no Juan Williams (aka Right-Wing Tool/Fool).

The news out of this morning’s annual meeting of News Corp shareholders is that Hill has been fired. This announcement came right from Murdoch himself. Murdoch was responding to a question about why he would employ a radical leftist defender of cop killers.

It appears that Hill was getting the Van Jones treatment and that Murdoch was as thin-skinned as President Obama. The question was presumably from Cliff Kincaid of the uber-rightist Accuracy in Media. Kincaid had issued a press release prior to the meeting announcing that he would be posing this challenge to Murdoch. Kincaid is so far to the right that he has railed against what he views as the “leftward drift” of both Matt Drudge and Fox News.

Well, now those drifting pinkos at Fox have set Prof. Hill adrift. They certainly couldn’t tolerate the presence of an intelligent, articulate, black man, spoiling the fun of the 24 hour Tea Party people at Fox. It will be interesting to see if O’Reilly has anything to say about the blackballing of one of his most frequent guests.

But Hill ought to have known better. He was crossing a river with a scorpion on his back. Did he think he would not get stung? Had he not taken the time to look around at the pathetic husks of Juan Williams, Kirsten Powers, Alan Colmes, or the rest of the limp losers who Fox allows to represent their version of the left? It was just a matter of time.

This is further evidence that it is a complete waste of breath to appear on Fox News. It only lends them credibility that they haven’t earned on their own. It permits the false claim of fairness and balance to persist. It boosts their ratings. The fireworks sparked by the conflict and manufactured debate is what Fox thrives on. I couldn’t be happier that Hill was fired. I hope that he’s learned something from the experience, and I hope that others take it as a warning.

No good can come from fraternizing with scorpions.

If You Still Think That Fox News Is Not Racist…

Posted by on October 1, 2009 at 9:40 am. 12 Comments :

This summer has seen an abundance of animosity directed at America’s new president. Town brawlers congregated at local Shriner’s clubs shouting to take “their” country back. Tea Baggers descended on Washington with posters of the President as an African witch doctor. When we weren’t marching toward Socialism we were euthanizing our grandparents. And through it all there was an overbearing stench of racism. It was stench that emanated most noticeably from Fox News, who went to extraordinary lengths to deny it. They complained that they were vilified as racist just for disagreeing with a black President – who himself was a racist according to Glenn Beck.

So if Fox News was not race-baiting, what would you say these folks have in common?

Pictured above (left to right) are Barack Obama (President), Van Jones (former White House Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation), Mark Lloyd (FCC General Counsel/Chief Diversity Officer), Valerie Jarrett (Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement), and Patrick Gaspard (Director of the White House Office of Political Affairs). And their obvious commonality is that they are all patriotic public servants with records of distinction and achievement, right?. Oh yeah…they are also all targets of Fox News conspiracy mongers like Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity. Hmm…Any other similarities?

The Obama administration has fended off attacks from inauguration day when Chris Wallace (of Fox News) suggested that Obama wasn’t really president because the Chief Justice flubbed the oath of office. It’s been downhill ever since. But it’s hard to ignore the fact that most of the fire has been aimed at low to mid level African Americans in the administration. The faces above have been relentlessly assaulted by Fox News and affiliated conservative outlets. Fox has attempted to marginalize them as “czars” and smear them as either corrupt or bent on subverting the principles of democracy. Van Jones has already been driven from his post by the forces of a resurgent McCarthyism. But this time the McCarthyites are as obsessed with race as they are with Communists.

The latest victim of this campaign of character assassination is Valerie Jarrett, a distinguished professional woman with a resume that includes public service, law, finance and academics.

Glenn Beck is now focusing his arsenal of defamation on Jarrett with all of the classic Beck smears: communism, corruption, and guilt by association, whether or not any association exists. Beck rolls out his “black” board to connect dots that only he can see. He aligns Jarrett with Che Guevara, Mumia Abu-Jamal, and even Darth Vader. He accuses her of being the lynch-pin between the Obamas and manufactured scandals at ACORN and the National Endowment for the Arts. By the end of his ravings he places her at the center of an evil cabal that he dramatically asserts is cancerous.

Much of these aspersions are cast in the shockingly despicable framework of her support for bringing the Olympics to Chicago in 2016. This is also a goal sought by the President, who is personally lobbying for the games in Copenhagen with the First Lady. Most nations consider it an honor, as well as an economic opportunity, to snag the Olympics. But Beck, and others at Fox News, seem to regard it as evidence of villainy. It makes you wonder for whom Beck is rooting. Spain? Brazil? Why does he hate America?

It cannot be mere coincidence that most of Fox’s targets have been African American. Obama has some pretty prominent associates who are not black: Vice President Joe Biden; Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel; Senior Advisor David Axelrod; Council of Economic Advisers Chair Christina Romer; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner; Secretary of Defense Robert Gates; etc. Yet there has never been a campaign against any of these, or other white staffers, even though there are many more of them and they have far more powerful positions. Fox pointedly goes after only African Americans who are much lower down the executive ladder. This is a situation that even Bill O’Reilly expressed concerns over when interviewing Beck last Thursday:

O’Reilly: Now, you’re hammering this guy Mark Lloyd, another Obama appointee. Is he a czar guy too? He’s the head of the FCC, right?
Beck: He’s the diversity czar.
O’Reilly: The diversity officer at the FCC.
Beck: He’s not the only one. Cass Sunstein and Mark Lloyd put together. That’s a dangerous combination.
O’Reilly: Sunstein’s a white guy, because I don’t want you to, you know, all black, and it’s the black…We had a black professor on just before you, thinks you’re…you don’t like the blacks and all of that.

How thoughtful of O’Reilly to consider the appearance of Beck going after all black guys. O’Reilly and Beck were clearly relieved that Cass Sunstein was white. They needed a token Caucasian to avoid the appearance of racial motives, and Sunstein fit the bill.

Unfortunately, as the photo montage above illustrates, there is still a vast over-representation of African Americans on Fox’s hit list. The presence of one or two white guys doesn’t change that. The obvious racism by the Fox crowd extends beyond the attacks on the administration. The crusade against ACORN is a blatantly racist attack on efforts to assist people of color with housing and voting rights. Beck has even called the movement for health care reform “the beginning of reparations” for slavery.

The truth is that it doesn’t matter what this administration does, the Fox contingent will find evil in it. If Obama personally found Osama Bin Laden and wrestled him bare-handed to the death, Fox News ranters would complain that Obama only did it boost his reelection bid and to sweeten the deal for his post-presidential autobiography. And in addition to finding fault with anything Obama does, they can also put any issue in a racial context. Then, of course, they will holler if anyone calls them on it. Their response to allegations of racism is that their accuser is guilty of reverse racism. But it isn’t much more than the old schoolyard taunt of “I know you are but what am I?” That’s the level of debate that is practiced on Fox News. It is a response that is just as childish and arrogant as one would expect from a network of overtly bigoted blowhards who still can’t believe that a black man is president.

Fox News Is Both The Most And Least Trusted News Network

Posted by on September 24, 2009 at 12:29 pm. 2 Comments :

Illustrating the ever-widening rift in American politics, a new poll by the Sacred Heart University shows that Fox News is the most trusted news organization (30%), as well as the least trusted (26.2%). That adds up to a 3.8% net trust for Fox. By comparison, CNN was most trusted by 19.5% and least trusted by 8.5%, for an 11% net trust.

Much of the rest of the poll’s results were decidedly negative for the media as a whole. Respondents consider them to be biased and more concerned with ratings than quality reporting. But the most profound observation in the survey, in my view, dealt with public perceptions of the media business and the monopolistic enterprises that dominate it:

“Nearly three-quarters, 71.0%, believed it is very (31.8%) or somewhat (39.3%) important that limits be placed on how many media outlets one company should own. Another 24.7% believe such limits are somewhat unimportant (8.4%) or not at all important (16.3%). Some, 4.4%, were unsure.”

“Over half of all respondents, 56.7%, believed it’s “bad for democracy” that six companies currently own almost all the major media outlets in the United States. Another 30.4% suggested it does not matter while 7.8% indicated it was good for democracy.”

That’s a particularly encouraging response from a survey that also reports majorities who believe that the media is predominantly liberal. With that kind of support for expanding diversity in media ownership, the prospects increase substantially for responsible regulations. This may portend one of the best opportunities for efforts to roll back the destructive consolidation that ensued since the passage of the ill-advised Communications Act of 1996.

Update: Bill O’Reilly cited this study in his Pinheads and Patriots segment. Except the only part he cited was that Fox News is the most most trusted network. He conveniently neglected to mention that it was also the least trusted. Does that make him a pinhead?

CNN’s Rick Sanchez To Fox News: You Lie!

Posted by on September 18, 2009 at 3:48 pm. 11 Comments :

An advertisement for Fox News appeared in today’s Washington Post. The headline for the ad said:

“How did ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN miss this story?”

The premise that Fox News is posing is that these other networks neglected to cover the Fox-sponsored Tea Bagging in Washington, DC. The truth is that they all covered the event, despite how little news value it contained. They all had correspondents at the scene and they filed updates at least hourly.

It is remarkable how Fox gets away with these attacks on their competitors who generally do nothing in response or in their defense. Last April I published an extended essay on the failure of the broader media community to stand up for itself. I included documentation of Fox’s repeated insults that were met only with silence. And I made the case for why it is imperative to speak up when your detractors are falsely disparaging you. Well, today, Rick Sanchez of CNN spoke up.

In this rare defense, Sanchez made some withering rebuttals. For instance, one of the photos in the Fox ad was actually of coverage provided by CNN. Let that sink in. In the very ad in which Fox was lambasting CNN for neglecting to cover the event was a photo of CNN covering the event. Furthermore, Fox’s own Bill O’Reilly referenced CNN’s coverage on his program. Sanchez also played multiple clips of their coverage of the event throughout the day.

In summing up his deconstruction of Fox’s dishonesty, Sanchez noted that Fox’s claim of covering the event was less than accurate. In fact, he notes, they were promoting it. That is something that was proven unequivocally by viewing the reports from Fox’s Griff Jenkins, who actually rode along with the Tea Party Express bus. And in closing, Sanchez pulled no punches by adopting Joe Wilson’s trademark exclamation which he directed at Fox News: You Lie!

This is not the first time that Sanchez has called out Fox for lying. Back in June of this year Bill O’Reilly asserted that no network other than Fox reported on the shooting of Pvt. William Long. On that occasion O’Reilly had to issue a correction, but typically, he lied while correcting himself.

Fox News has long had a reputation for shoddy journalism. Surveys show that their viewers are decidedly less informed than consumers of other media outlets. Studies have proven that it is Fox News that has failed to cover important and newsworthy events. For instance, they broadcast fewer reports on the Iraq war than any of their cable news colleagues. So it is the height of cynicism for them to publish ads that criticize their competitors and aggrandize themselves. In fact is beyond cynicism. It is deliberately false and an insult to news consumers everywhere.

In other words, it’s Fox News.

[Update:] The networks are issuing their responses. ABC, NBC and CBS have all criticized Fox for their demonstrably false advertisement. Fox is defending their ad saying:

“Generally speaking, it’s fair to say that from the tea party movement … to Acorn … to the march on 9/12, the networks either ignored the story, marginalized it or misrepresented the significance of it altogether,” said Michael Tammero, vice president of marketing for Fox News.”

It seems, though, that Fox is defending an ad they didn’t run. This ad has nothing to do with ACORN or any event other than the 9/12 rally. The Tea Bagging was a Fox-sponsored program from the start, and other news enterprises have no obligation to help to promote Fox’s programming.

Also, the Washington Post is defending their having printed the ad:

“The Post will not reject an advertisement based on its content or sponsor, unless the ad is illegal, false, advocates illegal actions, or is not in keeping with standards of taste. When we do not see anything in a particular ad that is contrary to these standards, we will not place limits on speech or content. That was our review and judgment in this case.”

They further claimed that the ad wasn’t false because Fox News was merely “expressing its opinion.” Of course, an opinion can also be (and in this case was) false, so that’s a pretty lame defense. An objective and independent observer would have to conclude that this ad violated the standards of the Post.

And CNN fires back:

Prostitution And Criminality Rampant At Fox News

Posted by on September 11, 2009 at 4:10 am. 14 Comments :

The big story on Fox News yesterday was the undercover video of ACORN employees improperly advising a couple of conservative activists, posing as a pimp and a prostitute, on how to deceive the IRS and acquire funds to operate their illegal business. The video was featured throughout the day on just about every program on the Fox network.

It was a pretty revolting spectacle. The ACORN workers were utterly unethical and outside any standard of decency. This is the sort of behavior that ought to get someone fired. And that’s exactly what ACORN did. Both of the women who appeared in the video were terminated the same day as it was exposed. But that didn’t stop Fox News from exploiting and sensationalizing the story.

So far anyone has been able to determine (including Fox) the events depicted in the video were limited to the two people caught up in the sting. Of course, everyone from Glenn Beck to Sean Hannity implied that the the video documented what they alleged was the rampant corruption of the entire ACORN organization. The facts, however, reveal just the opposite. One fact that Fox News neglected to report (so that their audience could decide) was that the sting operation attempted to snare at least three other ACORN offices but came up empty. The phony journalists (James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles) who sought to entrap ACORN just kept running the scam until they got a bite. Nothing wrong with that, really. The problem is that they didn’t report that most of their targets proved to be honest and uncorruptable. They deliberately left the false impression that all of ACORN was a sewer of sleazeballs.

It should be noted that O’Keefe and Giles are not journalists, but conservative activists. O’Keefe has plotted scams aimed at Planned Parenthood, and Giles is a Yaffie (a member of the uber-rightist Young Americas Foundation). Also, despite the pathetic behavior of the two women in the video, no actual crime took place. There is no reason to assume that more senior ACORN officials would not have been appalled by this and turned in these women themselves if the episode had progressed up the chain of authority. Indeed, that has been the norm within ACORN.

It is standard procedure at Fox to misrepresent news events, that is, when they aren’t inventing them entirely. Just yesterday, Fox News ran another ACORN story under an intentionally misleading headline that read “ACORN INSULT.” So did the Fox Nation, whose version of the same story said “Arrest Warrants Issued for 11 ACORN Workers.” But what actually happened was that ACORN had discovered evidence of fraud and reported it to the state attorney’s office. So while Fox portrayed ACORN as crooked, it was ACORN who turned in their own people and were praised by law enforcement for their diligence.

When Fox News goes out if its way to create scandals based on intellectually dishonest conclusions that everyone in an enterprise is guilty if anyone in it commits a crime, they are leaving themselves wide open. Following the Fox model of culpability it would be easy to declare Fox News guilty of numerous abhorrent crimes.

Earlier this year, Fox News producer Aaron Bruns was arrested for trafficking in child pornography. Another Fox Newser, Don Broderick, committed hit-and-run on a bicyclist. Fox News contributor Dick Morris was famously caught with a hooker, whom he let listen in on phone calls with the White House. And Bill O’Reilly himself was the subject of a sexual harassment case that he settled privately for millions of dollars.

With evidence like this it is pretty clear that Fox News is a venal criminal enterprise, steeped in the most repulsive sorts of violence and sexual assaults. That is, if we use the Fox criteria for establishing guilt. And while ACORN fired their offending employees, three of the four Fox felons above still report there for work.

This is all reminiscent of another case where Beck accused ACORN of having a criminal culture because a few employees were found to have filled out forms improperly. Beck analogized that no one would ever eat at Burger King if it were found that BK employees were as criminally prone as he alleged ACORN’s were. Unfortunately for Beck, it was easy to show that Burger King employees were indeed a rather lawless bunch that made ACORN look like a Sunday school.

Therein lies the fallacy of this variety of guilt by association. Burger King, ACORN, and even Fox News, have thousands of employees. And since they are, for the most part, human, some of them will behave poorly. That does not mean that the rest of the enterprise is similarly prone to misbehavior. Unless, of course, you’re Fox News and it is your intention to slander your political enemies. Fox News, and the whole of the Rupert Murdoch empire, is by design a vicious smear machine and ought not to be taken seriously by anyone interested in the truth.

Rupert Murdoch’s Organization Wants Another 9/11

Posted by on September 2, 2009 at 12:58 pm. 3 Comments :

The faux patriots at Fox Nation are continuing to make a habit of exploiting the image of 9/11 and contriving false and negative associations with Democrats. This time Rupert Murdoch and Co. have outdone themselves by accusing President Obama of politicizing the anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center and other targets.

It takes a pretty hefty portion of chutzpah for the Fox Nationalists to sell this falsehood. Particularly in light of how brazenly they themselves have been politicizing 9/11:

In this latest episode, Fox Nation links to an article at RedState, the blog of the uber-rightist magazine, Human Events. The RedState column credits the equally right-wing Heritage Foundation for discovering what they characterize as a despicable act of political exploitation.

What these stalwart detectives found was a notice on the website of Organizing for America (OFA), the Democratic National Committee’s social networking site for Democratic activists. Note: This is NOT a site that is affiliated with the White House or the President.

The offending notice was posted by a user seeking participants for a health care reform event. The notice itself could reasonably be regarded as offensive and inappropriate, but no more so than what Fox Nation has published itself.

The content of the notice said (click to enlarge):

“Sep 11, is Patriot Day, designated in memory of the nearly three thousand who died in the 9/11 attacks.

“All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.”

I can’t say that I disagree with the assessment of Fox News, but the reference to right-wing domestic terrorists was unnecessarily contentious. However, the response by Heritage/RedState/Fox Nation is ludicrous beyond imagination.

First of all, the OFA web site is a user driven site. That means that anyone can post comments, blogs and even announcements of upcoming events, as is the case here. So those responsible for the site’s administration (the DNC) cannot be blamed for inappropriate material that they did not produce or authorize. The site’s administrator did become aware of the posting and promptly removed it. Now you would think that the martinets of manners at RedState would be assuaged, even encouraged, by this behavior, but no. They quickly leaped to a new accusation that the web site had “scrubbed” the embarrassing content. How can OFA win? If they leave the posting up, they are guilty of denigrating the memory of 9/11. If they take it down, they are alleged to be hiding something.

Remember, this is the same organization that permitted Michael Scheuer to appear with Glenn Beck and openly root for another terrorist attack on America:

“…the only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States.”

So, does Murdoch’s organization want another 9/11? That sounds much more plausible than the assertion that Obama’s organization is politicizing 9/11. This is nothing more than the routine disingenuous outrage from people who only know how to stir up mischief, even when none occurs. And for the Fox Nationalists to raise the ante by publishing gut wrenching photos of the 9/11 attack, with a completely dishonest headline, is the height of cynical and grotesque politicization. Especially after all of the examples above of obvious and intentional politicization on the part of Fox.

But don’t get comfortable yet. Fox News has been running promos today for tonight’s O’Reilly Factor that promise to blow the lid off of this fake scandal. So this nonsense is going from a bunch of ignorant think tankers and bloggers, to the number one cable news program in America.

Seriously…Is this all they’ve got?

Bill O’Reilly’s 99 Loofah Loons

Posted by on August 23, 2009 at 5:59 pm. 8 Comments :

Last week Bill O’Reilly spent several minutes gushing about himself and his ratings. This is a regular feature on “The Narcissist Factor” wherein he boasts about the huge pool of lemmings that are transfixed by his megalomaniacal visage. On this occasion he offered up an explanation for his popularity amongst the brain-dead demographic:

“Well, a major reason is the health care debate. While the other network news broadcasts downplay the dissent and promote the government takeover of the health care industry, FOX News highlights the intense debate. When we cover the town hall meetings, we don’t describe the protesters as loons.”

Oh Really? O’Reilly’s self-righteous homage to his fairness and/or balance rings somewhat hollow when his actual record of name-calling is examined. The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart touched on it briefly, airing a video of O’Reilly calling some protesters loons. Then a smug O’Reilly struck back asserting that Stewart had unfairly taken him out of context. O’Reilly’s rebuttal was actually wide of the mark, but even if we give him the benefit of a doubt, if O’Reilly wants to represent himself as someone who has never unfairly characterized political opponents as loons, he is going to have to deal with more than just Stewart’s single example, he is going to have to face up to this (partial) collection of his childish loon-acy:

The Far-Left Loons / She’s a loon / I know a loon when I see one / these far-left loons / and he is a loon / there are enough loony judges / if you’re a far-left loon / some kind of loon / these loons get completely out of control / about 4000 loons are roaming / obviously a loon / A left-wing loon / a loon catcher / the loon who wrote that / Some loons / he’s a certified loon / protesters as loons / because loons control / because those loons / and their loony parents / you’re a loon / left-wing loons / attacks by far-left loons / radical left wing loon / Hey, you loons / some loons want / get the loons / anti-American loons / Enter far-left loon / number two, you’re a loon / you’d think the far-left loons / Far-left loons continue / some left-wing loons / The loony Web sites / Far-left loon Katrina van den Heuvel / radical loons are still / I believe Wright is a loon / many far-left loons hate / opposing the loons / allowed loons to post / Far-left loons may / with the loons / far left loon Nickie Think [sic] / far-left loons who believe / dishonest loon like that / far-left loons are furious / bother the loony left / John Edwards is a loon / hear some loon say / put loons on / some progressive loons / One loon opined / another far-left loon / is he a loon or what / encouraged the loons / these loons step up / the Kos loons / dangerous loons / some loons are even supporting / far-left loons gleefully / the far left loons who put / politicians who are far-left loons / the loons from Barack Obama’s past / You sound like a raving loon / far-left loons and America haters / far-left loons are – vile people / San Francisco loons / That’s the far left loons / the far left loons demean / some loons decided / their loony commentators / far-left loons have denigrated / postings by loons / duke it out with this loon / Left-wing loons desperately want / If far-left loons gain power / the same loons back again / funneling money to left-wing loons / their parents are loons / derailed by some loony guy / a complete loon / pieces on those loons / far-left loons are targeting broadcasters / the loons who spit / Moore and his loony philosophy / Enough loons running around / far left loons are running wild / they’re just left-wing loons / biggest left-wing loon conference / Say the loons in Sacramento / hundreds of loons are on the streets / certifiable left-wing loon / We don’t need loony ideologues / all of these far-left loons / far-left loons like Franken / outnumbered by far-left loons / the lefty loony agenda / the goal of those loons / some of it is just loony

Yes, there are 99 of them. I had to stop somewhere. I’d love to see O’Reilly try to justify his habit of demeaning those with whom he disagrees by calling them names. The documentation above proves that it is not the rare moment of excitement that draws O’Reilly to sink to these tactics. It is a core element of his behavior, one which he repeats incessantly. What’s more, his disparagement is ALWAYS directed at liberals. There was not a single instance of him referring to a “right-wing loon” or a “far-right loon” when searched in Google. Despite his disingenuous claims of neutrality, his words belie a record of bias that is indisputable.

One has to wonder how O’Reilly jumped to the conclusion that his ratings benefited from him not calling town hall protesters, with whom he agreed, loons. He certainly called everybody else loons. And he has called protesters much worse when he disagreed with them. In December of 2005, he had this to say about anti-war protesters, including peace activists from World Can’t Wait:

“…early in Hitler’s rise to power, Nazi brown shirts did the same thing that World Can’t Way [sic] and other radical extremists are doing now, disrupting speeches, denying opposing points of view […] ‘Talking Points’ respects honestly held views, including those held by Communists, socialists, and other radicals. This is America. They have a right to believe what they want to believe. They don’t have the right to infringe on the rights of others by trying to stop them from speaking. And they don’t have the right to spread malicious propaganda unchallenged.”

From O’Reilly’s perspective, anti-war protesters were monstrous traitors for engaging in activities that disrupted speeches and denied opposing points of view. But when town hall tea baggers do it they are patriotic icons of free expression. But the most ironic of O’Reilly’s assertions is his professed opposition to spreading malicious propaganda. Of course, if he truly believed that he wouldn’t work for Fox News.

One More Thing: A study by Indiana University found that…

“O’Reilly called a person or a group a derogatory name once every 6.8 seconds, on average, or nearly nine times every minute during the editorials that open his program each night.”

The study proved that O’Reilly is a textbook propagandist who “consistently paints certain people and groups as villains.”

The Idiots Of Fox News: Garrett, Sammon, And O’Reilly Edition

Posted by on August 18, 2009 at 2:25 pm. 1 Comments :

I know, the headline is redundant. What’s more, this list is far from comprehensive. It is just intended to spotlight a few recent examples. I couldn’t possibly keep up with them all.

For the last Week, Major Garrett has been making it abundantly clear that he is a moron. He doesn’t seem to understand how the Internet works and he thinks that emails received by some Fox News viewers is a more important issue than health care or Afghanistan or Iran or anything else on the nation’s agenda.

Now a Fox colleague has joined him and may have surpassed his idiocy. Bill Sammon, VP and Washington managing editor, appeared this morning and was interviewed by anchor Trace Gallagher (who delivers every report as if you are a kindergartner – which may be appropriate for Fox viewers). In his attempt to prolong the manufactured pseudo-scandal over emails, Sammon explained that the White House improperly collected email data (it did not) and that it should not be retained. He then went on to speculate that the administration might destroy the alleged data and that, if they did, they would be in violation of the Presidential Records Act. So Sammon was criticizing the White House for both keeping the data and not keeping the data (he later acknowledged this paradox, but the damage he intended was done). It’s the perfect Fox News perspective. No matter what the President does, it’s wrong.

Perennial Fox News idiot, Bill O’Reilly had this to say yesterday on the President’s health care proposal:

“‘Talking Points’ watched President Obama in Colorado on Saturday, and once again I had no idea what the president was talking about. He went on and on about all kinds of stuff that seemingly only he understands. It’s kind of like a poltergeist. He can see it; nobody else can.”

“So here’s the deal. If President Obama wants more fairness in the health care industry, he has to come up with five bullet points that even I can understand. Five things that clearly tell us what Obamacare would do.”

First of all, isn’t it cute that O’Reilly refers to himself as “Talking Points,” some kind of disembodied concept that watched the President? But more to the point, he admitted that he is an idiot who has “no idea what the president was talking about.” I suppose we should respect his honesty for confessing to his inferior comprehension skills. But he goes on to complain that Obama’s plan isn’t simple enough for him and that it should have five bullet points to make it understandable to someone of his deficient mental capacity. Unfortunately, the White House ignored O’Reilly’s advice and published eight bullet points:

  • Reduce long-term growth of health care costs for businesses and government
  • Protect families from bankruptcy or debt because of health care costs
  • Guarantee choice of doctors and health plans
  • Invest in prevention and wellness
  • Improve patient safety and quality of care
  • Assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans
  • Maintain coverage when you change or lose your job
  • End barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions

Those three extra bullet points may be too much for Mr. “Talking Points” to grasp. It was also too difficult for him to even find this list of the President’s objectives (it took me about ten seconds. I searched Google for “White House” and “healthcare” and clicked on the first link). So O’Reilly is essentially asking for an explanation that he can understand, which is already available, but he still can’t understand it. Another perfect Fox News perspective.

Bill O’Reilly’s Journalistic Standards Revealed – Again

Posted by on August 13, 2009 at 10:13 am. 3 Comments :

Bill O’Reilly has indeed proven again and again that he has no journalistic standards. It is becoming somewhat tedious having to point this out when it occurs with such frequency, but this latest example just cries out for attention. I’m going to let O’Reilly tell the story himself…

“Sources tell ‘The Factor’ that there is a federal investigation underway to find out if any American company sold components for roadside bombs to nefarious people. In May of 2008, and again in October ’08, coalition forces discovered unexploded roadside bombs in Iraq and handed them over to the FBI bureau in Baghdad. The FBI discovered that radio frequency modules inside the bombs were part of a shipment made by a U.S. company to Corezing International, a business in Singapore with direct ties to Iran.”

Oh my. That’s sounds frightening. Do go on…

“According to authorities, these modules are still being used today to kill Americans. The FBI will not comment, and ‘The Factor’ believes the investigation may be classified, because information is very hard to come by.”

So I assume that “The Factor” dove in and conducted a thorough investigation to get the “hard to come by” information, carefully documenting the exploits of a corrupt and dangerous program that is threatening American soldiers and America’s interests…

“‘The Factor’ has been told, but cannot confirm, that the General Electric corporation is under suspicion in the case.”

Ummm…..If you’ve been told something that you can’t confirm, why are you reporting it? You know, I’ve been told that Bill O’Reilly fixes breakfast in bed for Osama Bin Laden every Sunday morning before going to Mosque together. I can’t confirm it, but…..

“To be clear, ‘The Factor’ is not accusing anyone of anything. We are just reporting what we believe to be true.”

You aren’t accusing anyone of anything? Unless I’m mistaken, you just accused General Electric of arming America’s enemies and killing American troops. You made the accusation despite not being able to confirm it. And “reporting what we believe to be true” isn’t reporting at all, it’s gossip. So your assertion that you aren’t making an accusation is contradicted in the very same sentence by your admission to being a gossip monger (see Antilogical Reasoning).

Needless to say, O’Reilly got it all wrong. GE responded calling O’Reilly’s allegations “irresponsible and maliciously false” GE’s spokesman, Gary Sheffer, said that GE doesn’t do business with Corezing, and they don’t even make the radio frequency modules to which O’Reilly referred. Sheffer continued…

“We usually do not respond to the misleading and inaccurate claims made on this program because very few people take them seriously, but tonight’s report took this smear campaign to a new low.”

It is a pretty good general policy to regard O’Reilly as someone who is “misleading and inaccurate” and whom few take seriously. Although O’Reilly takes himself seriously enough to make up for all of those who know that he’s a joke. In response to remarks by Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, O’Reilly imagines that he is now at war with the White House. And, once again, he cites his ratings as evidence that Fox News will prevail in such a war.

First of all, there is no correlation between TV ratings and public opinion. This has been proven repeatedly. Secondly, when will O’Reilly and his comrades at Fox get it through their heads that being a top rated cable network is not an endorsement of their journalistic credibility. The National Enquirer has twice the circulation of the nation’s top daily newspaper (USA Today). By O’Reilly’s reasoning, the Enquirer is the the best newspaper in the country.

Finally, the notion that O’Reilly could seriously address the question of whether Fox News and the White House are at war is the best evidence that they are a disreputable enterprise whose obvious biases should disqualify them from being granted press credentials. The truth is that Fox News has more in common with the National Enquirer than a vast community of gullible readers/viewers. It is only a matter of time before Fox broadcasts headlines directly from the Enquirer. In fact, they may already be doing so. Stories about the President being a secret Muslim born in Kenya, and a health care plan that implements “death panels” for the purpose of euthanizing your grandma, could have come right out of the same issue of the Enquirer announcing the capture of Bigfoot by intergalactic (illegal) aliens.