Skip to comments.O'Reilly really is biased
Posted on 12/03/2004 9:48:02 AM PST by Canuckistan
I was just thinking about the Jeremy Glick episode. O'Reilly may be moderate politically, but that doesn't mean unbiased these days.
His problem is that he isn't neutral when it comes to the United States. He is pro-American. To the left, that's biased.
O'Reilly has an opinion show, bias is irrelevant. The entire purpose of the show is to give an opinion in the first place.
Bill O. is perfectly, and strategically aligned with the business philosophy of Fox News. And they pay his paycheck. Bill's "both sides" viewpoint is the result of this and Bill likes to make lots of money which they pay him to do exactly what he does. The viewer/listener data says their strategy is correct.
At the same time, Bill O. does not have the internal collateral to be brazen or bold on selected issues due to his "less than intelligent" messing around (verbally) with the little money-grubber that extorted some bucks from him -- he fell for it, and he paid -- now he has to toe the mark.
Regardless, Bill is deeply principled to the better. That is far more than we get from liberal Washington. Bill will also never be a Rush Limbaugh. For obvious reason.
But its the "no-spin" zone right? It't the premise of the show that he'll argue without spinning.
Anyhow, I was just realizing that left-wingers think patriotism is bias.
No spin is not the same as not having an opinion though. Spin is trying to make something out of what it isn't.
What Glick episode are you referring to?
The No Spin refers to not allowing "others" to spin. He doesn't spin too often either. And no spin doesn't mean no opinion. It's all opinion...right or wrong...you either have a good opinion or a bad one. He just does his best to keep people from dodging the question...that is what spin is.
This is the transcript:
And a poor quality video can be found here: (windows media)
Its the fifth from the bottom. The transcript in the above post is better. Frankly, I'm with O'Reilly on this one.
I debated Jeremy Glick when we were part of a panel talking about the middle east. I knew what to expect from the guy since the O'Reilly episode. Since it was several people, you had to wait your turn to talk. I remember making the guy squirm in his seat. He nearly hit the ceiling when I said,
" I find it curious that everybody wants to bash the U.S. and Israel over the Palestinean issue when there are Palestinean refugee camps over in Syria that nobody here wants to talk about....for that matter I tend to wonder if the Palestineans are just being used as pawns just to up the ante against Israel," Jeremy Glick nearly keeled over and the middle eastern panelists in the Baghdad and Lebanon studios started railing off. Even though our point of view was greatly outnumbered on the panel...we were heard all over the middle east. Let's just say it was freeped well.
I don't know who was in charge of pre-interviewing Glick.(Andrea Mackris, perhaps?) but they did a real crappy job. They should have known where Glick was coming from to begin with and then book a someone who lost a parent on 9/11 to counter Glick's B.S. It would have immediately disarmed him.
Dang you had me all excited for new Jiminy Glick episodes!
"O'Reilly may be moderate politically, but that doesn't mean unbiased these days."
He couldn't GET nore biased IMO.
That's great! The use of the Palestinian "refugees" has been abominable, from what I've heard. Interestingly, they are the only refugee population who's childeren also count as refugee's, thanks to the UN. Isreal is creating more "refugees" every day by continuing to exist.
After watching the O'Reilly clip, and listening to Glick on a radio show (also on Thought Crime) I get the impression that he hoped to get the reaction from O'Reilly that he got. He didn't have to debate what he said, got lots of sympathy and publicity, and cast a big shadow over O'Reilly's viewpoint. Kind of like a martyr to his cause. I think he outfoxed O'Reilly.
"He couldn't GET nore biased IMO"
I'm no authority on it - the Glick episode is the only one I've seen.
"He couldn't GET nore biased IMO."
I watch The Factor on a pretty regular basis, and have heard O'Reilly say, a number of different times, that he will listen to and respect any logical opinion supported by fact. I'd say that's a pretty fair stance.
The guy offers his opinion on issues and backs that opinion up w/ facts. He WILL change his mind if proven wrong, I have seen it happen. BO is fair. He simply has strong convictions, and offers many good points. I watch him regularly, and believe he is one of the last journalists who truly stands for anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.