O'Reilly pulled a Brian Williams?

[Shadowrider]

What I would like to know from the Fox News haters is what other news channel do you consider more credible? I've seen more credible and objective reporting out of Pravda than I have from all of our stuff put together except for Fox. O'reilly has been preaching credibility for quite awhile now. So who is more honest?

And yes it seems the haters don't actually watch Fox or they would know the difference between opinion and journalism. O'reilly can suck it on 2A stuff, and yes he's a hot head, he's Irish after all. And he's an elitist, but I can parse that stuff out and still get some credible stuff from him, he's actually pretty damn solid save 2A and there's not enough face palm to cover that.

Oh and for those that didn't watch him tonight, he pretty much proved beyond any doubt that he was good on his reporting. He actually straight up called the Mother Earth guy a liar and promptly proved that he was. Sorry maybe next time...

 

[SM Rider]

In my book omission of known events and facts by Fox and other western media is worse than outright lying.

 

[Lurker66]

What I would like to know from the Fox News haters is what other news channel do you consider more credible? I've seen more credible and objective reporting out of Pravda than I have from all of our stuff put together except for Fox. O'reilly has been preaching credibility for quite awhile now. So who is more honest?

And yes it seems the haters don't actually watch Fox or they would know the difference between opinion and journalism. O'reilly can suck it on 2A stuff, and yes he's a hot head, he's Irish after all. And he's an elitist, but I can parse that stuff out and still get some credible stuff from him, he's actually pretty damn solid save 2A and there's not enough face palm to cover that.

Oh and for those that didn't watch him tonight, he pretty much proved beyond any doubt that he was good on his reporting. He actually straight up called the Mother Earth guy a liar and promptly proved that he was. Sorry maybe next time...

Here's my problem. You have a guy who gets paid to play on words and phrases to fire up his viewers. He's a combination of a cheerleader and a rhetorician. Yes there may be a sliver of truth in what he says but it's purposefully twisted and spun to elicit a emotional response from his viewers. Fox tells him his talking points and pays him to embellish everything.

His viewers become so enamored with his verbage they can no longer discern the sliver of truth versus the ambiguous verbage used to convey non truth.

So then they blindly defend his not exactly lies but definitely not truth as matters of fact......which forms their opinion.


Every news channel has the equivalent of a Bill Oreally. He is very good at his craft.....of not telling the exact truth. So to answer your question about credibility. O'reilly isn't any more credible as Chris Matthews. Both are paid to do the same job.

If i want semi unbiased news, I watch any of the local channels. Our local guys don't get to in depth but they don't usually spin the truth all the way out of purportion.

 

[SMS]

What I would like to know from the Fox News haters is what other news channel do you consider more credible? I've seen more credible and objective reporting out of Pravda than I have from all of our stuff put together except for Fox.

There doesn't have to be a "more credible" outlet in order for Fox to suck.

They used to actually have a little bit of rightful claim on the Fair and Balanced thing…but that got lost somewhere (at one point I'm not exactly sure). Now it seems to be mostly "Obama did this", "Did you hear what Obama did" bullsh$t designed to fire up the ill-informed on our side (Yes Virginia, Left AND Right both have their sheep).

Like their most recent reporting of Marines being ordered to "Surrender" their weapons to Houthis upon their departure from Yemen for example…and the fact that O'Reilly is still on the air is another. He was a blowhard of epic proportions before whatever this latest scandal is about.

Everyone has their favorite sources of info, if you choose Fox, that's cool, but don't kid yourself that you are watching some neutral information reporting network.

 

[Shadowrider]

I'm not one to throw the baby out with the bathwater just because they aren't completely perfect. I know that Fox isn't pure as wind driven snow, but I'm looking for something that beats them in the "credible" department and I'm not hearing of any.

And Lurker, the locals are about as worthless as it gets and they are biased as hell too, all the while giving the viewer the impression that they are strenuously trying to be neutral. All you have to do is listen. Alley Myer's interview of the family of the punk that killed the K9 is a perfect example. She got on Facebook and stated she was just reporting the "facts" (her word, not mine) when the physical evidence that she herself had reported proved contrary to some of the family's statement. Her position wouldn't even allow her to consider what she herself had reported! Not to pounce on her I'm just using her as a fairly recent example, there were others during the last Moore tornado too. About all I watch local is the weather and that's usually a videocast on the net.

 

[ignerntbend]

One of the funniest things here is that O'Reilly's audience seems to think that this is a "he said she said" situation, as if Corn is writing about something cousin Earl overheard in a bar fifteen years ago.
If you want to see one example of how O'Reilly has lied about his experience in active combat zones, read "The No Spin Zone." Your local library may still have it on a dusty shelf somewhere.
The fact that he is managing to bluster and blarney his way out of this, is proof enough that lots of folks NEED his demagoguery.

 

[SoonerP226]

and the fact that O'Reilly is still on the air is another. He was a blowhard of epic proportions before whatever this latest scandal is about.

The fact that O'Reilly is still on the air is only evidence that the business guys running Fox News aren't freaking morons--you don't can the guy who's pulling a huge (relatively speaking) audience.

 

[Glocktogo]

I think it's funny that anyone on OSA defends either of these 2 known, proven for a fact liars. Just goes to show that even if you're a known liar somebody will knowingly and willingly still believe it and defend or make excuses for them.

Pathetic.

One of the funniest things here is that O'Reilly's audience seems to think that this is a "he said she said" situation, as if Corn is writing about something cousin Earl overheard in a bar fifteen years ago.
If you want to see one example of how O'Reilly has lied about his experience in active combat zones, read "The No Spin Zone." Your local library may still have it on a dusty shelf somewhere.
The fact that he is managing to bluster and blarney his way out of this, is proof enough that lots of folks NEED his demagoguery.

Who the hell are you two talking about? Seriously, I just reread every word of this thread and it seems like you two are railing against your own imaginations. I'm not going to quote all the posts, but you two need to go back and reread every word carefully. Keep in mind that this thread is titled "O'Reilly pulled a Brian Williams?", which is a negative connotation on O'Reilly. Keep in mind that even those who've pointed out a few moderately exculpatory facts, have still accused O'Reilly of being full of crap. Most have overwhelmingly negative or at least dismissive of O'Reilly. I haven't seen one single positive word about him in this thread, and you two are acting like OSA is on his defense team!

I think your liberal, anti-FOX bias has finally gotten the better of you. It seems like you're upset that we're all agreeing with you on something. How dare we do that!

 

[ignerntbend]

I didn't say the FOX audience I said the O'Reilly audience. There are only a couple of people here who have formed a genuine emotional attachment to Bill O'Reilly. I didn't mention them by name, but, for the record, GTG isn't one of them.

 

[Lurker66]

Who the hell are you two talking about? Seriously, I just reread every word of this thread and it seems like you two are railing against your own imaginations. I'm not going to quote all the posts, but you two need to go back and reread every word carefully. Keep in mind that this thread is titled "O'Reilly pulled a Brian Williams?", which is a negative connotation on O'Reilly. Keep in mind that even those who've pointed out a few moderately exculpatory facts, have still accused O'Reilly of being full of crap. Most have overwhelmingly negative or at least dismissive of O'Reilly. I haven't seen one single positive word about him in this thread, and you two are acting like OSA is on his defense team!

I think your liberal, anti-FOX bias has finally gotten the better of you. It seems like you're upset that we're all agreeing with you on something. How dare we do that!

Who am I talking about. I'll use RickN and Shadow Rider. Both good ppl. Both admit that O'reilly and Fox are biased. Both admit or agree Orielly spins the facts.

Now just listen to what they are trying to say in his on Fox's defence. They are saying that Fox and O'reilly are the best liar or truth spinners.

Now listen to what I'm saying. If you are a liar and truth spinner by their own admission, people (OSAers) ought not give them any more credibility than any other News source or talking head.

So whether it be Brian Williams, Chris Matthews or the worshipped Bill Oreally......none should ever be quoted as saying anything factual......ever.

Oh and please don't agree with me or I'll have to argue the other viewpoint.