O'Reilly does a Brian Williams x10

[Cow Poke]

Actually, back to this. Except for Teal, I don't see anyone defending O'Reilly in the least. Even then she only thinks that he was not lying. Of course, there's still the possibility that I'm misunderstanding her.

To be clear - I am NOT defending O'Reilly --- simply asked if he should be held to the same standards as a commentator that Williams was held as a news reporter.

[Cerebrum123]

To be clear - I am NOT defending O'Reilly --- simply asked if he should be held to the same standards as a commentator that Williams was held as a news reporter.

I didn't think you were.

[sylas]

To be clear - I am NOT defending O'Reilly --- simply asked if he should be held to the same standards as a commentator that Williams was held as a news reporter.

My perspective: I hold both to the same standard. The difference for me is simply that in one case (the commentator) is less surprising when they fail to meet that standard. My higher expectations for the news reporter are not actually a different standard, but a greater expectation that they are more likely to hold to it.

Cheers -- sylas

[rogue06]

I saw an interesting article earlier this month (see also here) about how scientific research has found people's memories of major/traumatic events in their lives (such as the Challenger disaster, and September 11) are often really really inaccurate, especially with regard to where they were at the time. The average accuracy tends to be <50%, with a quarter of people having 0% accuracy in their recollections, yet the people are highly confident their memories are accurate. The more an event affects the person emotionally, the less accurate their memories of it are likely to be..

It seems that this would be a bit of a stretch to call it a traumatic event for Williams since the evidence appears to indicate that by being right behind the helicopter that was shot down means being approximately an hour away with a different group. This is nearly the equivalent of watching the towers collapse during 9/11 on TV in Chicago and telling everybody you were in NYC watching them come down in person (directly behind the helicopter) after telling people you were even at ground zero (in the helicopter).

[rogue06]

You don't understand: Williams should be mocked in post after post, but O'Reilly's offence must be excused and diminished.

I certainly have not defended O'Reilly although I do hold a news reporter and anchorman to a higher standard than a commentator. Sort of like I would hold a police officer to a higher standard concerning lying about what he saw than I would other people.

[Leonhard]

What people are saying is kinda what's confusing me. Everyone seems to agree that he did something as bad Williams.

But its "okay", or "not that bad", because: 1) Its kinda expected in the media now (Cow Poke) 2) He's a commentator so its not much of a problem. (Rogue06).

If I mischaracterized either Cow Poke or Rogue06, I'm sorry, but beyond that I don't get why O'Reilly shouldn't be called out on it. This is what it sounds like you're saying.

Unlike Williams, O'Reilly hasn't apologized as far as I know.

[Cow Poke]

What people are saying is kinda what's confusing me. Everyone seems to agree that he did something as bad Williams.

But its "okay", or "not that bad", because: 1) Its kinda expected in the media now (Cow Poke) 2) He's a commentator so its not much of a problem. (Rogue06).

If I mischaracterized either Cow Poke or Rogue06, I'm sorry, but beyond that I don't get why O'Reilly shouldn't be called out on it. This is what it sounds like you're saying.

Unlike Williams, O'Reilly hasn't apologized as far as I know.

Lemme try it this way.... O'Reilly is a bloviator - he has DENNIS MILLER, for crying out loud, and that "Watters World" (sp?) guy. He's an entertainer - I don't look to him for NEWS.

On the there hand, Brian Williams was supposed to presenting FACTS to us. Not opinion, or goofy "interviews on the street", or Right Wing Spin.

O'Reilly SHOULD apologize - but he'll get a lot more ratings if he doesn't, so, I imagine he'll milk this for all its worth. Besides, his friends don't care and his enemies won't believe him.

[Leonhard]

I can respect that then that's your opinion of it. I would add that O'Reilly is a hypocrite for calling out other 'bloviators' for not having set foot in a warzone, unlike him. And if people find that entertaining, and attractive, they can be allowed to eat it up for all I care.

Fact is, he lied, and should apologize, which we all agree on as Christians interested in truth.

[Juvenal]

I'd go a bit further, myself. O'Reilly is in the same niche as Rush, so of course we hold him to a different standard. O'Reilly is an entertainer, while Williams was supposed to be a journalist. More simply, O'Reilly gets paid to lie amusingly, while Williams got paid to tell the truth convincingly.

And I still want to know why folks were saying Maddow is a racist.

[Leonhard]

See these commentators, O'Reilly and Rush, and the way they're allowed to represent the Conservatives in the US, is why I find American conservatism so profoundly unappealing. The allowance for them to say outrageous things, even outrageously false things, inflammatory things, lies... and that's just not worth more than a shrug of the shoulders?

Aside from getting liberals angry (entertaining as that can be), what are O'Reilly and Rush really good for?

[seer]

See these commentators, O'Reilly and Rush, and the way they're allowed to represent the Conservatives in the US, is why I find American conservatism so profoundly unappealing. The allowance for them to say outrageous things, even outrageously false things, inflammatory things, lies... and that's just not worth more than a shrug of the shoulders?

Aside from getting liberals angry (entertaining as that can be), what are O'Reilly and Rush really good for?

Really Leonhard, have you listened to liberal commentators?

[rogue06]

Lemme try it this way.... O'Reilly is a bloviator - he has DENNIS MILLER, for crying out loud, and that "Watters World" (sp?) guy. He's an entertainer - I don't look to him for NEWS.

On the there hand, Brian Williams was supposed to presenting FACTS to us. Not opinion, or goofy "interviews on the street", or Right Wing Spin.

O'Reilly SHOULD apologize - but he'll get a lot more ratings if he doesn't, so, I imagine he'll milk this for all its worth. Besides, his friends don't care and his enemies won't believe him.

The part I bolded.

A radio talk show host here in Atlanta (his show was nationally syndicated until he retired) took great pains to emphasize this point. He often reminded listeners to check out the facts for themselves whenever he commented on news stories. Something that more people should do.

[rogue06]

Really Leonhard, have you listened to liberal commentators?

I used to listen to Mike Malloy when he was in Atlanta during the mid 80s. This was before he went way off the deep end. He was back then pretty good at presenting his case trying to rely on facts and not emotionalism.

[Cow Poke]

See these commentators, O'Reilly and Rush, and the way they're allowed to represent the Conservatives in the US,

"allowed to represent"? Should they be censored? Free speech restricted?

is why I find American conservatism so profoundly unappealing. The allowance for them to say outrageous things, even outrageously false things, inflammatory things, lies... and that's just not worth more than a shrug of the shoulders?

You DO believe in free speech, no? (I honestly don't know the answer to this)

Aside from getting liberals angry (entertaining as that can be), what are O'Reilly and Rush really good for?

Entertainment. Ratings.

[Leonhard]

Really Leonhard, have you listened to liberal commentators?

Yes, I have.