A Thread dedicated to the hatred of Bill O’Reilly.

[hollomap]

Am I the only one who hates this guy?????? I mean seriously his idiosyncrasies know no bounds! What a ***!

[PayingAttention]

Originally Posted by hollomap

Am I the only one who hates this guy?????? I mean seriously his idiosyncrasies know no bounds! What a ***!

If you mean are you the only one who thinks this guy is a compete jerk and is peddling xenophobic hate around the airwaves and respresenths the very worst of American broadcasting?

No, you are not the only one.

There are at least two of us!

[TheBalance]

Love the guy. I call him the Balance (as I am doing for this hate thread) because he is the opposite of the far left.

Besides, who wouldnt like a guy who helps children and holds judges accountable for letting child molesters go and a variety of other noble things he's done to help preserve traditional principals that made this country what it is today.

He can be a little too extreme but thats why I think of him as the balance

There I provided some sort of substance in my opinion as you have not.

Just my 2 cents

[Slartibartfas]

I don't like left extremists, and certainly like right extremists either. To be honest I can live good without a "balance" of that sort on both sides.

[TheBalance]

Sure in your perfect world

[Slartibartfas]

No, no perfect world needed, simply because left extremism doesn't get better if you have right extremism as well.

So if you add right extremism to left extremism the situation does not get better it gets worse. (The same is true for the other way round).

[Skye]

Originally Posted by TheBalance

Love the guy. I call him the Balance (as I am doing for this hate thread) because he is the opposite of the far left.

Besides, who wouldnt like a guy who helps children and holds judges accountable for letting child molesters go and a variety of other noble things he's done to help preserve traditional principals that made this country what it is today.

He can be a little too extreme but thats why I think of him as the balance

There I provided some sort of substance in my opinion as you have not.

Just my 2 cents

The Balance

Well said! Here is my half-cent.....

People who hate O'Reilly often watch him because of the buzz they get. Perhaps that is his intent - to catch your thoughts and keep you on top of things even if it is to disagree with him violently.... some news is so soft pedal we forget it before the announcer finishes the story.

Reaction breeds thought which is what news does. If we ever stop hearing or feeling then we have no need of news. Why would anyone want to hear only the news they agree with? What would be the point unless people have stopped learning to think for themselves and have to be told how things are?

I like to read and see news people I know are going to slant their stories to see how far they get before the story becomes a fable, only to be reworked the following day. It's all a game for our attention anyway.

If you want to be well informed you need to listen to all sides and make your own individual choices as to what seems credible and what is just another jazzed up thrown together stop in your tracks screamer.

[Slartibartfas]

^^ Skye, I would not throw news and opinion together as you do. Both have their value, but lets keep that two things apart from each other. You see the quality of a TV channel or a paper at such things.

[Skye]

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

^^ Skye, I would not throw news and opinion together as you do. Both have their value, but lets keep that two things apart from each other. You see the quality of a TV channel or a paper at such things.

See your point Slartibartfas - I was addressing the OP - that of an opinion piece program such as the Bill O'Reilly show, not regular Jack and Jill news talk.

I was also speaking in general terms - there are solo newscasts or opinion shows which you are referring to I think - and then regular newscasts giving us the local and national tragedies, disasters, happy stories, and current events right?

The trouble with what I see are the stories which are obviously slanted hiding within the news - the scare stories about the "end is near" when the next day nothing is mentioned about the impending "end" which had everyone riveted the day before.

O'Reilly/Olbermann/Chris Matthews are opinion piece programs and we know what we are going to get.

Lite news is tucked in at key hours hopefully to suit family viewing and these are variable depending upon what happened during the day - but the bias still exists ....and I am reminded of how extreme CBS and ABC are during their news half hour - they often broadcast a diatribe primarily on one issue against the administration - an agenda pursued like mad dogs. After I hear some of these 'news items' I wonder who decided they were news. These are opinion piece news items...ie: " the house is only a house until it is burning." Attention getters.

When a broadcasting company has both a regular television address and a cable address they can give easier to digest news features while doing all their heavy hitting and agenda driven essays on the cable channels.

Regarding newsprint - a simple headline can tell you the slant or bias immediately before you get to the story - if it is an 'opinion piece'. Kindly however newspapers often divide up their political issues and their happy talk into sections for our reading pleasure.

[Slartibartfas]

Originally Posted by Skye

See your point Slartibartfas - I was addressing the OP - that of an opinion piece program such as the Bill O'Reilly show, not regular Jack and Jill news talk.

I was also speaking in general terms - there are solo newscasts or opinion shows which you are referring to I think - and then regular newscasts giving us the local and national tragedies, disasters, happy stories, and current events right?

The trouble with what I see are the stories which are obviously slanted hiding within the news - the scare stories about the "end is near" when the next day nothing is mentioned about the impending "end" which had everyone riveted the day before.

O'Reilly/Olbermann/Chris Matthews are opinion piece programs and we know what we are going to get.

Lite news is tucked in at key hours hopefully to suit family viewing and these are variable depending upon what happened during the day - but the bias still exists ....and I am reminded of how extreme CBS and ABC are during their news half hour - they often broadcast a diatribe primarily on one issue against the administration - an agenda pursued like mad dogs. After I hear some of these 'news items' I wonder who decided they were news. These are opinion piece news items...ie: " the house is only a house until it is burning." Attention getters.

When a broadcasting company has both a regular television address and a cable address they can give easier to digest news features while doing all their heavy hitting and agenda driven essays on the cable channels.

Regarding newsprint - a simple headline can tell you the slant or bias immediately before you get to the story - if it is an 'opinion piece'. Kindly however newspapers often divide up their political issues and their happy talk into sections for our reading pleasure.

I can only comment on the situation where I live. I don't watch news on private TV channels. They are shit. Not even so much because of some bias but because their quality is so low. Its not much more than McNews.

I principally get most of my news from newspapers. I read many of them regularly, especially the conservative DiePresse, the leftist DerStandard und the ultrapopulist but largest tabloid called Krone (the last not to get the news, but to think what the average joe gets confronted with). Its often extremely interesting to compare the focus of both papers as the naturally often differ in that.

Moreover I like to watch the news of the public TV stations, the Austrian (ORF) as well as the German (ARD, ZDF). For the opinion there exist some reasonable shows on the Bavarian television and some also from ORF.

How ironic is it that you have to go the public TV stations to get real news? I am fully aware of potential bias there, but that bias manifastates itself rather in a lack of coverage than a biased coverage. If some stories get too little coverage in the public news, you will find them even more prominently in the newspapers.



Maybe looking O'Reilly is for you like reading the Krone is for me?