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.
What Glick episode are you referring to?
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.
"O'Reilly may be moderate politically, but that doesn't mean unbiased these days."
===
He couldn't GET nore biased IMO.