• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Bill O'Reilly; The No Spin Zone

SFG75

Well-Known Member
I doubt many of our overseas TBF members know of him, but in the states, he operates one of the most popular political evening talk shows, which is of course, The O'Reilly Factor. You can also view an extensive collection of his editorial columns courtesy of jewishworldreview.com. While I agree with him about 5% of the time, I am hooked on watching his show. O'Reilly's no-nonsense, straight-forward style of debate is what separates him from other journalists. I also love how he will interrupt a politican when they start to "spin" a tough question like they always do on sunday mornings. I'd give anything for Bob Schieffer to have half the guts O'Reilly does in this regard.

I just finished his book The No Spin Zone and was pleasantly surprised by a few things. While he does agree with Dr. Laura on certain family issues, he does not agree with her contention that in this day and age, it is not necessary for a family to need two incomes to make ends meet. The book also contains snippets of the best lines from his debtes with politicians and celebrities. His exchange with Al Sharpton and Susan Sarandon are really enjoyable if you like topsy-turvy, mix-it-up politics. If you are conservative, you will enjoy this book for his views and the fresh take that he delivers on current events items. If you are liberal, you will enjoy of learning of what the other half thinks, as well as seeing a good use of debating style and strategy in print.

Any thoughts?
 
SFG75 said:
O'Reilly's no-nonsense, straight-forward style of debate is what separates him from other journalists.

It's difficult to make an accurate judgement from another country, but from what I have seen of American news coverage (we get CNN, Fox, and Jon Stewart's Daily show over here, plus I've seen some coverage when on holiday over there) I'd say one of the things that separates him from other US TV political journalists is that they have such insipid interviewing styles. To use an old catch-phrase "Where's the beef?"

I haven't seen a US equivilant of British political intervewers like Jeremy Paxman or John Humphrys although I'm sure they must exist somewhere, don't they?

Here's a famous example of Paxman at work (he's letting a guy hang himself here rather than going for the throat himself).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhFaESyr0Rw

The politician went on to lead his party, but this clip dogged him for the rest of his career.

Regards,

K-S
 
I'd always heard about the Howard interview, and now i've finally seen the infamous bit - thank you Kenny.:)

I haven't seen a US equivilant of British political intervewers like Jeremy Paxman or John Humphrys although I'm sure they must exist somewhere, don't they?

I'm eager to find out about this too... I have my doubts...surely we would have heard something if an interviewer over there had grilled a politician like Paxman does.

SFG, what is the USA's international news reporting like? Sorry to bombard you with the questions, just curious.
EDIT: just realised this probably isn't the right place for the question. Perhaps we'd better wait until the 'Mature Forum' opens ;)
 
As a UK resident, and of a liberal bent, my only knowledge of O'Reilly is through sources such as Al Franken, and as a result I have a preconceived notion of him as a two-dimensional right-wing hack (of the Ann Coulter etc school) who can't stand anyone disagreeing with him. I don't think I'm prepared to give him my money by buying his book just to check if I'm right...
 
Shade said:
As a UK resident, and of a liberal bent, my only knowledge of O'Reilly is through sources such as Al Franken, and as a result I have a preconceived notion of him as a two-dimensional right-wing hack (of the Ann Coulter etc school) who can't stand anyone disagreeing with him. I don't think I'm prepared to give him my money by buying his book just to check if I'm right...
O'Reilly does seem an obnoxious sod. Makes huge pronouncements as though his is the only valid point of view. I can't like someone that is so.....nasty about someone elses pov, its not necessary to stomp someone into the ground to make your point.
 
Kenny Shovel said:
It's difficult to make an accurate judgement from another country, but from what I have seen of American news coverage (we get CNN, Fox, and Jon Stewart's Daily show over here, plus I've seen some coverage when on holiday over there) I'd say one of the things that separates him from other US TV political journalists is that they have such insipid interviewing styles. To use an old catch-phrase "Where's the beef?"

Exactly!. They allow politicians to spin and spin, all the while, just looking forward to asking another question. Jon Stewart got into an interesting tangle on CNN for stating the exact same thing about reporting. If I remember correctly, the CNN anchor made a comment about the "lightness" of Stewart's reporting, but then Stewart ripped into the "beachball questioning" that is rife on CNN.:D

Here's a famous example of Paxman at work (he's letting a guy hang himself here rather than going for the throat himself).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhFaESyr0Rw

I haven't heard of the other fellows, but thank you for posting the youtube.com portion. I would say that Paxman is O'Reilly's brother separated at birth, though O'Reilly would've interrupted him more, if not shut him down completely after the third babbling session. American impertinence perhaps?:p If Paxman was on in my country, I would definitely watch him-a good interviewer who hounds the guest, without taking it personal.

The politician went on to lead his party, but this clip dogged him for the rest of his career.

He still has nightmares in all likelihood; ". . .did you threaten to overrule him?";) :p :p
 
SFG75 said:
Jon Stewart got into an interesting tangle on CNN for stating the exact same thing about reporting. If I remember correctly, the CNN anchor made a comment about the "lightness" of Stewart's reporting, but then Stewart ripped into the "beachball questioning" that is rife on CNN.:D
I've seen that clip on youtube. It seems to be a constant theme on Stewart's show, and from the clips he uses to illustrate it, perhaps fair comment.

SFG75 said:
I would say that Paxman is O'Reilly's brother separated at birth, though O'Reilly would've interrupted him more, if not shut him down completely after the third babbling session. American impertinence perhaps?:p If Paxman was on in my country, I would definitely watch him-a good interviewer who hounds the guest, without taking it personal.
From what I can tell the difference seems to be that O'Reilly goes after people whose opinion differs to his own, and as he has his own show he can therefore editorialize.
Paxman fronts the BBC's flagship nightly news programme, and he tends to go after everyone. The real clue to his style comes about 30 seconds into that clip were he repeats the question but whilst not looking at Howard. He does this a lot, using his body language to show lack of interest or respect in the person. Sometimes he goes too far, but you do get the feeling he's asking the difficult questions you'd like to ask politicians, which ultimately is his job.
 
Kenny Shovel is right. Paxman is non-partisan (though I understand he is close to some Labour figures, and like many in the media, probably veers more to the left than the right in personal politics, but he keeps that offscreen) - he just wants to get answers. Once he claimed (though he has since denied he was serious) that his main mode of interviewing was to think "Why is this bastard lying to me?" He also says that the reason he went on at Howard so long was because the next item that was due up had been delayed and he had nothing else to ask him. This may be true or it may be disingenuous; certainly Kenny is right when he says that Paxman's body language, even if he is just looking in his notes for the next item, often reeks of 'why-are-you-still-here-you-obnoxious-little-oik?' There's another great clip of him 'doing a Howard' on Labour MP Barbara Follett when she fails to name any of the companies she claims would pull out of investing in London if (then Labour public enemy number one; since regathered to the bosom of the party) Ken Livingstone became mayor. It's somewhere on the BBC Newsnight page but I can't find it right now.

Again, like Kenny, my take on Bill O'Reilly (based on limited information) is that he only bullies people he genuinely disagrees with, and believes everything he says. How undignified is that?
 
Shade said:
I have a preconceived notion of him as a two-dimensional right-wing hack (of the Ann Coulter etc school) who can't stand anyone disagreeing with him.
Your preconception is absolutely correct, even though not all hacks, even right-wing, are as downright rude, bullying, offensive, loud, smug and arrogant as Bill. A total zip in my book.
 
Shade said:
There's another great clip of him 'doing a Howard' on Labour MP Barbara Follett when she fails to name any of the companies she claims would pull out of investing in London if (then Labour public enemy number one; since regathered to the bosom of the party) Ken Livingstone became mayor.
I remember that one too, I think they ran it on 'Have I Got News For You'...

Peder said:
A total zip in my book.
I've had a quick search on the interweb and I can't find a definition of this anywhere. Are you making your own words up again Peder?

Kenny "Still confused by 'toes'" Shovel
 
Kenny Shovel said:
I've had a quick search on the interweb and I can't find a definition of this anywhere. Are you making your own words up again Peder?

I wondered if he was equating "zip" to "zero", which is sometimes slang for a person with zero redeeming qualities.
 
mehastings said:
I wondered if he was equating "zip" to "zero", which is sometimes slang for a person with zero redeeming qualities.
Ah, that would make sense. In that case, regarding my question, [PederImpression]fuggeddaboudit![/PederImpression]
 
Kenny Shovel said:
Ah, that would make sense. In that case, regarding my question, [PederImpression]fuggeddaboudit![/PederImpression]
Kenny,
You give football scores as 2 to nil. I believe.
We would give the same soccer score as 2-zip. In New York anyway :).
And indeed the man's redeeming qualities are nil. That's what drives his ratings up. :eek: /shaking head/
Peder
 
I believe it is fair to say that O'Reilly is a conservative. I wish I could find the URL from C-SPAN where he and Al Franken were at a bookfair and got into it. There is some bad blood, a lawsuit, and some interesting "shut up" type of remarks that were exchanged.
 
If you're looking for a fair, rather hard-hitting television journalist on this side of the Atlantic, the closest you'll probably come is Tim Russert.
 
SFG75 said:
I believe it is fair to say that O'Reilly is a conservative. I wish I could find the URL from C-SPAN where he and Al Franken were at a bookfair and got into it. There is some bad blood, a lawsuit, and some interesting "shut up" type of remarks that were exchanged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpOSgT-osHk&search=o'reilly franken

That's the fullest account I could find. It is carried by a partisan media watchdog, so it's difficult to determine how much was edited out at the end and beginning (at least 35 minutes), but there you have it.
 
unKeMPt said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpOSgT-osHk&search=o'reilly franken

That's the fullest account I could find. It is carried by a partisan media watchdog, so it's difficult to determine how much was edited out at the end and beginning (at least 35 minutes), but there you have it.

Ahhhh, thank you!. These guys definitely won't go golfing together. Though if they did, it would be interesting to see when they would fly into a rage and go at each other, clubs in hand and above head.:eek:
 
o'reilly is a controversy monger who's business is to add fuel to the fire. If you really study him for awhile you will discover that he never says anything substantial.

I'm sure his book is full of crap just like it's author.
 
Coach Morse said:
o'reilly is a controversy monger who's business is to add fuel to the fire. If you really study him for awhile you will discover that he never says anything substantial.

I'm sure his book is full of crap just like it's author.

I do believe that he doesn't ride conservatives he disagrees with as hard as he does liberals. He'll have twenty or thirty episodes on Jesse Jackson, but hardly one or two on the Phelps family from Kansas who protest at military funerals with signs that read "Thank God for IEDs." He likes to think of himself as an independent, but the evidence and who talks about most often show otherwise.
 
From The Guardian

News show feud boils over into open warfare

Responding well to criticism has never been among Bill O'Reilly's strong points. The star of America's most-watched cable news show, shown daily on Rupert Murdoch's Fox News channel, has a habit of yelling at guests who disagree with him to "shut up".

He rails at the "far-left internet smear sites" who take him to task for remarks such as his open invitation to al-Qaida to attack the liberal stronghold of San Francisco. And he once threatened a caller to his Fox radio show with "a little visit" from the company's security personnel.

But now a long-running feud between O'Reilly and his less-watched rival, Keith Olbermann, has boiled over into open warfare between networks. At a meeting of the prestigious Television Critics' Association in California, Olbermann, who works for the MSNBC network, donned an O'Reilly mask and gave a Nazi salute, provoking a furious response from Fox's chairman, Roger Ailes.


"Clearly he has no viewers except those he gets when he attacks Fox News," said Mr Ailes, a former image consultant for the first president Bush. Olbermann's Nazi gesture, he said, had gone "over the line".

The confrontation came after several months of on-air goading by Olbermann, a professional ironist whose style contrasts sharply with O'Reilly's populism and "no-nonsense" approach. The MSNBC presenter has given O'Reilly his Worst Person in the World award no fewer than 15 times, and frequently returns with glee to a sexual harrassment case the Fox host settled out of court in 2004.

Legal documents in the harrassment case included a transcript of a telephone call O'Reilly had made to his producer, Andrea Mackris, in which he described a sexual fantasy involving a shower and a loofah. But at one point he forgot the word "loofah", referring instead to "the falafel thing". Olbermann now has only to mention "falafel" on his show to heap more derision on his rival.

Olbermann's attacks are somewhat surprising in the straightlaced world of American TV news, but more surprising still has been Fox and O'Reilly's inability to resist taking the bait. Ten years after the conservative channel was born, it has surged far ahead of both its rivals, CNN and MSNBC. O'Reilly regularly draws 2.5 million viewers while Olbermann struggles to reach 350,000.

Nonetheless, O'Reilly tried to organise a petition to get his far less prominent rival fired, and chided him while on air for descending to personal attacks. But that only led to detectible surges in Olbermann's audience, who observed that if O'Reilly did not indulge in personal attacks himself, "he would be a mime".

"You don't punch down," Olbermann told the New York Times, expressing mystification at O'Reilly's responses. "If you're in my position, you punch upwards."

Fox has long faced disdain from liberals for promoting itself under the slogan "Fair and balanced", despite the unmistakeable rightwing bias of its coverage. Hannity & Colmes, a flagship show purporting to pitch a conservative against a liberal in a fair fight, in fact features a smooth-talking, well-groomed right-winger versus a tongue-tied centrist. O'Reilly, for his part, has said he wishes Hurricane Katrina "had only hit the United Nations building, nothing else", and claims that the Guardian "might [as well] be edited by Osama bin Laden".

But the channel's insistence on striking back at its enemies is not just a matter of O'Reilly or Mr Ailes being unable to control their tempers. In a recent statement, a spokeswoman for Fox, Irina Briganti, sought to attack Olbermann by referring to his disputes with previous employers.

"Because of his personal demons, Keith has imploded everywhere he's worked," Ms Briganti said. "From lashing out at co-workers to personally attacking Bill O'Reilly and all things Fox, it's obvious Keith is a train-wreck waiting to happen ... In the meantime, we hope he enjoys his paranoid view from the bottom of the ratings ladder and wish him well on his inevitable trip to oblivion."

Fox refused to make any further comment on the feud yesterday.

Those Fox News controversies in full:

2002 Following a change in White House rhetoric, Fox adopts a channel-wide policy of referring to suicide bombers as "homicide bombers"

2003 Fox reporter Geraldo Rivera agrees to leave Iraq, to avoid expulsion by the US military, after drawing a map in the sand to show viewers highly sensitive information about the locations of American forces

2004 Leaked internal Fox memos list "talking points" for reporters on air. George Bush's "political courage and tactical cunning" should be noted "in our reporting throughout the day" on Iraq, executive John Moody writes

2005 CNN founder Ted Turner, reflecting on Fox's ratings, compares the channel to Nazi propaganda, noting Hitler also "got the most votes". "Ted is understandably bitter, having lost his ratings, his network, and now his mind," a Fox spokesman responded. "We wish him well."
2006 An on-screen title banner introducing a foreign policy discussion segment reads: All-Out Civil War in Iraq: Could It Be a Good Thing?
 
Back
Top