“Bill O’Reilly has already addressed several claims leveled against him. This is nothing more than an orchestrated campaign by far left advocates Mother Jones and Media Matters. Responding to the unproven accusation du jour has become an exercise in futility. Fox News maintains its staunch support of O’Reilly, who is no stranger to calculated onslaughts.”
—-Fox News, in a statement announcing that it was standing behind its beleaguered cash cow and star, Bill O’Reilly, who has been shown convincingly to have misrepresented his exploits on several occasions.
What an awful, slimy, deceitful statement. Yecch. It must have taken a veritable pack of weasels, plus some lawyers, to draft that. Let’s unpack it. Hold your nose:
“Bill O’Reilly has already addressed several claims leveled against him.
Sure he has, mostly by screaming insults and spinning his words. Bill Clinton “addressed” accusations about Monica too. Addressing isn’t disproving.
“This is nothing more than an orchestrated campaign by far left advocates Mother Jones and Media Matters.”
Sure it is. The Left is mad that Brian Williams, one of its most prominent liberal mouthpieces in the media, got caught lying , which Mother Jones and Media Matters don’t mind as long as it advances the glorious revolution. So it put out a hit on one of the “other side’s” darlings. I’m sure O’Reilly wasn’t the only conservative commentator they were seeking dirt on, aren’t you? The point is, they found what they were looking for. The motive of the diggers shouldn’t matter to Fox. Fox should care that Bill O’Reilly misleads its audience. Instead, it uses the ad hominem fallacy to disprove the accusation by attacking the messenger. To Fox viewers, “far left advocates” is the equivalent of “consorts of Satan.”
“Responding to the unproven accusation du jour has become an exercise in futility…”
But they are not unproven. The discrepancies are real. It’s an “exercise in futility” because O’Reilly is caught, and Fox knows it.
“…because Fox News maintains its staunch support of O’Reilly, who is no stranger to calculated onslaughts.”
To conclude, a grand finale featuring another version of “everybody does it”: “this is insignificant, because it happens all the time.”
Media Matters broke the latest O’Reilly tall tale (we have already learned about his falsely stating that he was “in a war zone” when he was in fact covering a riot, and his published claim that he was outside the door when a man shot himself with a shotgun, when in fact he had flown to the locale because of the suicide). He implied on more than one occasion that he witnessed the execution of four nuns during El Salvador’s civil war in 1980, while at other times said he arrived after the executions. Media Matters included documentation of O’Reilly saying he’d seen “guys gun down nuns in El Salvador” and “was in El Salvador and I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head” while serving as a CBS correspondent. In his book The No Spin Zone, though, O’Reilly said that he covered the civil war in El Salvador a “few weeks” after he began at CBS in 1981. The well-documented execution of the nuns occurred in December of 1980. Media Matters also says there is a recording of a 2009 interview on WVVH-TV in which he said he arrived in El Salvador “right after” the murders.
Now O’Reilly has “responded” to that in the following ridiculous fashion. He says that when he said, “I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head” he was referring to having seen photographs of the nuns who were executed in El Salvador in 1980, and not claiming he actually saw the murdered nuns. Ah. So if I tell you that I saw mobsters “get gunned down by a rival mob,” it’s perfectly reasonable and honest because I saw pictures of the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre. Here…
…now you can honestly say you saw the massacre too, according to Bill.
Bill O’Reilly is an embarrassment to Fox, and Fox is disgracing itself.
Facts: Deadline Hollywood