Why O'Reilly is a bad journalist

[CartesianFart]

True.He is a person who have experience in journalism and was groomed that way all his professional life,but he is not a journalist in the technical sense on his regular appearance on the O'Reilly Factor.A television personality who happen to assert his own idiosyncrancies on subject of current events and his own brand way of method questioning when a guest arrive.

 

[Rambuchan]

Uhm...I just clarified for you exactly what I meant in that other thread. I put my own quote up since you declined to do so and I clarified my position. Bottm line, I agreed with your definition of journalism, but I didnt say Bill O wasnt a journalist. The man is a journalist, whether you like it or not. You might not believe he is a good journalist, but thats your opinion.

The thing I find telling here is that even when I clarify my position for you, you still insist on misrepresenting me. At that point what is left for me to do but /shrug and say /oh well.

You sir have mis-represented yourself and treat us all like idiots in claiming that I have. This wouldn't be the first time either. I try and do you a favour to help you understand journalism a bit better and you let your ego get in the way as if this discussion is some kind of competition. Thanks for wasting my time and have a nice day wasting someone else's.

I dont even care that much for Bill O to be honest. I am certainly not obsessed with him as some here obviously are. But I would defend just about anyone that I viewed as being attacked unfairly...and perhaps thats what I am obsessed with.....justice.

More outright BS from you (just consider your foreign policy positions and you'll see that this paragraph is a load of crock).

 

[MobBoss]

True.He is a person who have experience in journalism and was groomed that way all his professional life,but he is not a journalist in the technical sense on his regular appearance on the O'Reilly Factor.A television personality who happen to assert his own idiosyncrancies on subject of current events and his own brand way of method questioning when a guest arrive.

But Cart, you have utterly failed to recognize that the mans career exceeds that one single television show. He is also in the print media and on radio as well. He isnt just "a television personality".

 

[CartesianFart]

But Cart, you have utterly failed to recognize that the mans career exceeds that one single television show. He is also in the print media and on radio as well. He isnt just "a television personality".

Sorry to say this(i hope you don't think i am being dodgy) but he is a "Media Personality,"since you included his other workhorse duties such as the print and radio.

There is a fine line of a personality appealing to other personalities especially in the art of the media.People think that if they relate to a person,then it is ok for them to think for you.

 

[Phlegmak]

Sigh. No...I cant make a judgement on whether Bill O is a liar as I have not seen him lie when I watch his show. Of course I can make a judgement on what I have personally seen or heard. Me being with him 100% of the time has no logic basis at all, but him not lying while I have viewed him does.

HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW HE'S NOT LYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've already asked you that and explained clearly why you can't know.

Here it is again.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4549951&postcount=93

Let's stop there for a second. If you have no knowledge or little knowledge of a subject that he's talking about, how would you know he's lying? How would you know he's telling the truth? I saw the clip about the Paris Business Review. I had no knowledge of that publication before him saying it. If I hadn't seen immediately after that he just made that up, I wouldn't know either way if he's telling the truth or not. How can you be so confident that he's telling the truth?

As I stated before, you may not care for his style of journalism and/or think he is a terrible journalist. But to actually say he is not a journalist is a pretty darn bad case of denial.

You're accusing other people of denial!?! Jesus!

Funny, I have never seen you rant about M. Moore. But then again, I am not with you 100% of the time

Obviously, it is not necessary for me to rant about every person I dislike. I don't rant about Idi Amin, but I hate him too.

EDIT: FORGET IT. You selectively ignore anything that's reasonable and endlessly create strawmen. It's very easy to create an indestructible opinion when you are unwilling to examine all evidence to the contrary. If you truly believe what you have said in this thread, you are not being reasonable. (The underlined part used to say something else. I edited it due to a request from a moderator. It used to have the same meaning as it does now, but 1% harsher.)

 

[Phlegmak]

Adding more fuel to the fire.

Huge "error" repeatedly shows up on O'Reilly's show. It's impossible to know if this was just a mistake on their part, or an amazingly stupid lie.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/10/04/bill-oreilly-labels-rep-foley-a-democrat/

 

[El_Machinae]

Is there any audio evidence about whether O'Reilly mentioned Foley's party affiliation? To not include that would be biased, in my opinion.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Sigh. No...I cant make a judgement on whether Bill O is a liar as I have not seen him lie when I watch his show. Of course I can make a judgement on what I have personally seen or heard. Me being with him 100% of the time has no logic basis at all, but him not lying while I have viewed him does.

Sorry, but I have to ask this question.

When you watch the O'Reilly show, are you

a) asleep
b) stupid
c) so partisan that you don't realize / don't care
d) all of the above

 

[Rambuchan]

I watch it sometimes to see how bad things have got. So: none of the above.

 

[Adamb0mb]

Sorry, but I have to ask this question.

When you watch the O'Reilly show, are you

a) asleep
b) stupid
c) so partisan that you don't realize / don't care
d) all of the above

wow... Foley the democrat. Fox wouldn't be so blatant as to lie about his affiliation so it must be utter incompetence.

 

[MobBoss]

Sorry, but I have to ask this question.

When you watch the O'Reilly show, are you

a) asleep
b) stupid
c) so partisan that you don't realize / don't care
d) all of the above

I am not sure which is worse. Your zero tolerance for any nitnoid mistake that Foxnews makes or your blatent disregard to recognize that such mistakes do indeed happen in the new media (not just by Fox btw).

You make it sound like it was intentional and authorized by Bill O himself, whereas the truth of the matter is some tech somewhere just made a mistake. It was only shown once that I know of and corrected in a later broadcast of the show. /big whoopee.

 

[El_Machinae]

Do you have any evidence it was corrected? I've seen claims that it was shown three times in two different segments.

 

[JollyRoger]

I am not sure which is worse. Your zero tolerance for any nitnoid mistake that Foxnews makes or your blatent disregard to recognize that such mistakes do indeed happen in the new media (not just by Fox btw).

You make it sound like it was intentional and authorized by Bill O himself, whereas the truth of the matter is some tech somewhere just made a mistake. It was only shown once that I know of and corrected in a later broadcast of the show. /big whoopee.

It was the second day in a row that Foley was "accidently" identified as a Democrat by Faux - the first day by voice, the second day by graphics. As far as graphics go, Faux had the graphic correct before and then it was incorrect. Maybe if O' Reilly didn't have a history of molesting his staff, they would be able to pay more attention to detail.

As for content in general, I am sure you are aware of how hard hitting O' Reilly has historically been on Judges, newspapers, and various state & local politicians for being soft on child predators. Given that history, his treatment of this story shows that he himself has become soft on child predators.

 

[Phlegmak]

O'Reilly contradicts own statements on ACLU defending religious organizations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfTnghfe0nI&mode=related&search=

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Moderator Action: Keep the topic on O'Reilly, not on Fox News in general. Keep the Foley talk in the other thread.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=188269

 

[Phlegmak]

It was on O'Reilly's show; therefore, it is valid to discuss here.

 

[Phlegmak]

More fuel for the fire.

Some goober has actually put together an opera based on Bill O'Reilly and his sexual harrassment lawsuit. What a waste of time.

http://www.sweetjesusihatebilloreilly.com/archive/111306.html
http://www.mackrisvoreilly.com/home.html

 

[dutchking]

'nuff said!
BtW, click for a larger view......That's what I think of the white house and how they get the television stations to release that fake crap...

 

[CartesianFart]

What is pathetic is that since this thread was made, people in Civ Ot still continue to reference a television personality as the sole criteria of a thoughtful debate.

Sometimes, I get the impression that some of these people parrot off of O'Reilly.

 

[A Viking Yeti]

Journalism
1. The collecting, writing, editing, and presenting of news or news articles in newspapers and magazines and in radio and television broadcasts. -American Heritage Dictionary

News
1.a Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television. -American Hritage Dictionary

O'Reilly claimed that the 'Paris Business Review' stated loses of billions due to O'Reilly's call to boycott French goods in response to the Iraq war. Going further as to claim that France had lost over 138 million in business revenue since the last year. That newspaper doesn't exist and his claims are false. He claimed multiple (4, across several episodes) times that the Inside Edition, a show he'd previously hosted, had won a Peabody Award(s). This was not true and he retracted his statements. Just a few months later, in response to criticism about his accuracy, O'Reilly stated that there wasn't a single transcript in which he stated that he won that award.

If journalism is reporting news, and news is a composite of recent events, then it stands to reason that journalism cannot be the coverage of events that don't occur. To MobBoss: when you cite a foreign news paper that doesn't exist, making claims that are in no way factual (trade between the US and France increased in the time frame O'Reilly claimed the 138 million dollar drop), it's not news, or, therefore, journalism.

Now, if he's somehow mistaken (maybe the phantom French article appeared to him in a dream), then he may not be a liar, just an idiot. I mean, a two month time frame seems like a reasonable span of time to actually LOOK UP the validity of your statements (especially when someone claims they're false). So, he either new they were false and said them anyway (liar), or didn't know they were false and didn't bother to look up any sort of citation (irresponsible idiot). In any case, if he repeatedly makes claims as to events that don't happen, then it's not news, or journalism. At best, it's yellow journalism, or the fabrication of events in order to acquire media attention and ratings.