Criticism of Bill O'Reilly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Commentator Bill O'Reilly has been involved in numerous controversies. Most commonly these are reactions to controversial statements he has made or interactions he has with guests, such as the Jeremy Glick interview and his controversial claims about a "War on Christmas."

Topics in Journalism
Professional Issues
Ethics & News Values Objectivity & Attribution News Source & Libel Law News & Reporting & Writing Education & Fourth Estate Other Topics & Books
Fields
Advocacy journalism Alternative journalism Arts journalism Business journalism Citizen journalism Fashion journalism Investigative journalism Literary journalism Science journalism Sports journalism Video game journalism
Social Impact
Infotainment & Celebrity 'Infotainers' & Personalities News Management Distortion & VNRs PR & Propaganda 'Yellow' Journalism Press freedom
News media
Newspapers & Magazines News Agencies Broadcast Journalism Online & Blogging Alternative Media
Roles
Journalist, Reporter, Editor, News presenter, Photo Journalist, Columnist, Visual Journalist
v • d • e

Contents 1 Critics and rivals 1.1 Media Matters for America 1.2 Al Franken 1.2.1 Franken book controversy 1.2.2 Referring to Franken by alternative names 1.2.3 Alleged Selective Editing 1.3 Keith Olbermann 1.3.1 Fox Security 1.4 Terry Gross 1.5 Bill Moyers 1.6 Tucker Carlson 1.7 Joe Scarborough 1.8 Larry King 2 Disputes of factual accuracy 2.1 Malmedy massacre 2.2 University of Oregon student newspaper controversy 2.3 Disputed claims involving the "War on Christmas" 2.4 Boycott of French goods and "The Paris Business Review" 2.5 Peabody Award 2.6 Mark Foley's party affiliation 2.7 "Shut up" line 2.8 Controversy about O'Reilly's childhood home 3 Controversial topics discussed by O'Reilly 3.1 Jeremy Glick 3.2 Cindy Sheehan 3.3 Alleged liberal bias in the media 3.3.1 "Hall of Shame" 3.4 Opposing the ACLU 3.5 Penalties on child sex offenders 3.6 Weapons of mass destruction 3.7 Military recruitment in San Francisco schools 3.8 American Red Cross and the United Way 3.9 Ludacris 3.10 Jennifer Moore 3.11 Fox Broadcasting Company Special on O.J. Simpson 3.12 Shawn Hornbeck 4 Other 4.1 Allegations of sexual harassment 4.2 "Hubcaps" incident 4.3 David Letterman 4.4 "Pinhead" 5 See also 6 References

[edit] Critics and rivals

Bill O'Reilly is the host of a cable news program on U.S. television. As such, O'Reilly has been involved in numerous controversies with various people and organizations. Some of the more notable are Media Matters for America, Al Franken, and Keith Olbermann.

[edit] Media Matters for America

Media Matters for America is a politically progressive, web-based, non-profit organization that reports and criticizes what it describes as "conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."^[1] O'Reilly is often the subject of Media Matters' online reports, which criticize O'Reilly for what they describe as partisanship and selective coverage. O'Reilly has referred to Media Matters as "smear merchants," and "the most vile, despicable human beings on the planet," and has expressed distaste for the site because he claims it is funded by wealthy liberal George Soros.^[2]

Media Matters founder David Brock claims that he has repeatedly requested that O'Reilly permit him on O'Reilly's program and that O'Reilly has refused. Media Matters also claims that O’Reilly has not been able to specifically challenge the accuracy of Media Matters’s reporting.^[3]

[edit] Al Franken

[edit] Franken book controversy

Al Franken's 2003 book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look At the Right included what was alleged to be an intentionally distorted picture of O'Reilly on the cover and a chapter devoted to him inside. In his book, Franken accuses O'Reilly of distorting facts to make himself look better. The two men participated in a panel discussion at the 2003 BookExpoAmerica (which was televised on C-Span). Franken told a story about O'Reilly's denial of erroneous statements regarding receiving two Peabody Awards. After Franken's story, the two men argued. The link to the video of the full discussion is provided at the following footnote.^[4]

After their Book TV appearances, Fox News sued Franken for trademark infringement over the use of the phrase "fair and balanced" in the book's title. O'Reilly has consistently said that he was not involved in the lawsuit . Once the case reached court, the presiding judge dismissed the lawsuit as "wholly without merit". O'Reilly later said he had considered personally suing Franken for defamation but was told that, as a public person, the standard of proof would be too high to sustain a lawsuit.

[edit] Referring to Franken by alternative names

O'Reilly has refused to refer to Franken by name, instead calling him Stuart Smalley, the name of an effeminate character he portrayed on Saturday Night Live. Franken's Air America radio program, launched in 2004, was initially titled The O'Franken Factor, which Franken said he chose to "annoy and bait" O'Reilly into suing him, as Franken believed that the trademark infringement lawsuit had brought a lot of publicity to his book. Franken changed the name three months later to The Al Franken Show. Franken has also called O'Reilly "Bill O'Liely".

On June 20, 2005, O'Reilly stated that "those clowns over at the liberal radio network" could be arrested for being traitors, "because they, you know, they're undermining everything (related to the War on Terrorism) and they don't care, couldn't care less." O'Reilly did not suggest who the constitutionally-mandated 'two witnesses to an overt act' of treason ought to be.

In an interview with Ann Coulter in 2003, O'Reilly referred to Franken as "a vile human being", a characterization that Coulter agreed with.^[5]

[edit] Alleged Selective Editing

In an Air America broadcast on the Sundance Channel, Franken alleged O'Reilly "selective edited" a June 5, 2005 interview of Senator Joseph Biden by George Stephanopoulos. In the interview Biden proposed the submission of legislation for an independent commission to look into wrongdoing in the U.S. Army's prison system at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere.^[6] Franken alleged that when O'Reilly cited the same interview on The Factor, Biden's entire explanation of an independent commission policy was edited out and only Biden's call to shut down Guantanamo Bay was presented. O'Reilly then alleged that Biden was misusing the prison abuse story and presented his own very similar opinion: "The Bush administration should set up an independent commission to investigate American detainee policy across the board. The president must take the offensive on this, or else the country's image will continue to suffer and the jihadists and their enablers will win another victory." Franken criticized this as a misrepresentation by O'Reilly.^[7]

[edit] Keith Olbermann

In November 2005 both Keith Olbermann and O'Reilly attended a charity fundraiser thrown by New York Yankees manager Joe Torre. Olbermann noted, "[O'Reilly] never got within 20 feet of me" and said "I swear to God every time I looked up, [O'Reilly] would suddenly look down." Olbermann also alleged that Fox News had been distributing his phone number and hacked into his e-mail.^{[citation needed]}

During a January 2006 "Talking Points Memo," O'Reilly claimed that NBC in general (and MSNBC) were "taking cheap shots at Fox News on a regular basis…for some time" and noted that NBC's "cable operations are dead last [in the ratings]," saying "that is no excuse for unprofessional behavior." O'Reilly also claimed that Fox News has "good relationships with ABC News, CBS News, and generally CNN". O'Reilly also claimed that the 4 am (ET) rerun of the Factor scored better in the ratings than the 8 pm show on MSNBC (Olbermann).

Olbermann's show Countdown, which airs opposite The O'Reilly Factor, is highly critical of O'Reilly. Olbermann frequently targets O'Reilly in the "Worst Person in the World" segment of the program. On Countdown Olbermann had also previously initiated an unsuccessful campaign to "Save the Tapes", referring to the rumor that there exist tapes of O'Reilly making lurid phone sex calls to Andrea Mackris, a former producer of his show. Mackris sued O'Reilly for sexual harassment and the suit was settled out of court. O'Reilly also sued Mackris for attempted extortion. Olbermann often references the lawsuit on Countdown. When doing a segment on O'Reilly, Olbermann occasionally references loofahs and falafel, two items that O'Reilly allegedly suggested using during his alleged telephone conversations with Mackris.

On February 22, 2006, O'Reilly initiated an online petition to have Countdown removed from its timeslot on MSNBC. Olbermann responded two days later on his Countdown program by playing O'Reilly's greatest hits and mocked the whole affair by joining MSNBC staffers in signing the petition.

[edit] Fox Security

O'Reilly's complaints towards MSNBC continue to not mention Keith Olbermann or Countdown. However, when a caller mentioned Olbermann's name on O'Reilly's radio show March 2, 2006, O'Reilly appeared to have promptly disconnected him and responded, "We have your phone number, and we're going to turn it over to Fox security, and you'll be getting a little visit."

O'Reilly then said, "When you call us, ladies and gentlemen, just so you know, we do have your phone number. And if you say anything untoward, obscene, or anything like that, Fox security will then contact your local authorities, and you will be held accountable".

The exact comment of the caller that prompted O'Reilly to disconnect the caller and state that Fox security would be sent to him is unknown because all calls to live radio programs are screened in advance and aired at the discretion of the call screeners, and the station has not released the caller's comments in full.^[8]

This caller had called into O'Reilly's show as part of a campaign organized by an O'Reilly critic named Mike Stark. Stark launched a website, in response to O'Reilly's call for the firing of Olbermann, called "Calling all Wingnuts".^[9] Through this site, Stark organized a call-in campaign that he dubbed "The Wingnut Spinners." Members of this group, which included the aforementioned caller, began to frequently call in to O'Reilly's radio program, at the direction of Stark, to taunt O'Reilly and O'Reilly has claimed that they have harassed him. The legality of the tactics used by Stark's group has been disputed. For example, according to New York City detective Tony Burdy, the tactics of Stark's group can be considered harassment.^{[citation needed]} At least two callers from this group have received a callback from Fox security.^[10]

The legality of O'Reilly's use of security for this purpose has been disputed. For example, Olbermann has stated that it would be unlawful for O'Reilly to send anyone to a listener's home for purposes of intimidation, though O'Reilly has not publicly stated the purpose for which he threatened the caller with a "visit from local law enforcement" other than his on-air implication that the caller had said something "untoward" or "obscene".^[11] Susan Filan, a former Connecticut state prosecutor who appeared on Olbermann's show said, "The only person that's going to get in trouble here is Bill O'Reilly. He's lost the plot entirely. To think that you can commandeer local law enforcement to be your personal henchmen because you don't like something a caller said on the air is absolutely outrageous and absurd. It's an abuse of the media, it's an abuse of law enforcement, and he's now the one engaging in threatening behavior. You can't do that. He's crossed the line."^[12]

[edit] Terry Gross

On October 8, 2003 O'Reilly appeared on the NPR radio show Fresh Air hosted by Terry Gross, two weeks after Franken appeared on the same program.^[13] Towards the end of the interview O'Reilly stated that the interview had consisted of nothing more than Gross asking O'Reilly to respond to statements against him. He stated "We've spent 50 minutes of me defending defamation against me in every possible way." O'Reilly asked Gross "Were you as tough on Al Franken as you were with me?" Gross responded, "No, I wasn't…that was a different interview."^[13] Shortly afterwards, O'Reilly abruptly ended the interview by walking out.

While NPR's ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin criticized O'Reilly's manner and response during the interview, he agreed with O'Reilly that the interview had been biased: "…it felt as though Terry Gross was indeed "carrying Al Franken's water," as some listeners say. It was not about O'Reilly's ideas, or his attitudes or even about his book. It was about O'Reilly as political media phenomenon. That's a legitimate subject for discussion, but in this case, it was an interview that was, in the end, unfair to O'Reilly."^[14] Dvorkin described Gross's interviewing tactics as "unethical" and "unfair" because she continued reading a critical quote of O'Reilly after he had walked out of the room, and he wasn't able to respond. Gross was later supported by an NPR colleague, Mike Pesca, who contended that O'Reilly did, in fact, have the opportunity to respond to a criticism that Gross read to O'Reilly leveled by People Magazine but he defaulted by prematurely abandoning the interview.^[15][16]

Despite the incident, Gross honored a prior agreement and appeared on the The O'Reilly Factor on September 21, 2004 to promote her book. O'Reilly asked her why she hadn't included details of NPR ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin's criticism in her book, to which she responded "I don't know why I left it out…Does Fox News have an ombudsman?" O'Reilly asserted, "We have an ombudsman someplace, I think." "I don't think so," she said. "He's in the closet," suggested O'Reilly. Gross then said, "Give me a call when you find him."^[17]

In O'Reilly's 2006 book Culture Warrior, he admits regret for the manner in which he acted, calling it a mistake.

[edit] Bill Moyers

O'Reilly has criticized Bill Moyers on multiple broadcasts of The O'Reilly Factor, and Moyers has in turn accused O'Reilly of lying. In 2002, O'Reilly said Moyers called him a "warmonger," and implied that Moyers was making money by selling videotapes of his program. The strongest accusation was that Moyers made contributions to the Columbia Journalism Review to "buy" the DuPont-Columbia Award. Moyers responded in print that he never called O'Reilly a warmonger, that his share of distribution money from the show is minuscule, and that the Columbia Journalism Review doesn't pick the winner of the DuPont-Columbia Award.^[18] In 2003, O'Reilly criticized Bill Moyers again, saying that Moyers' position that taxes should be raised is "classic socialism" and that he "can't understand why Bill Moyers just doesn't move to Havana".^[19]

[edit] Tucker Carlson

While not a fierce or long-standing critic, conservative pundit Tucker Carlson has occasionally criticized O'Reilly's statements as being "over the top". One statement Carlson criticized was O'Reilly's claim, on air, that he is an "intellectual" and rejects adopting a macho attitude to solve problems, while on the same program, advocating the "bulldozing", "demolition" and "complete destruction" of Fallujah.^[20]

[edit] Joe Scarborough

On January 3 and January 4, 2007, O'Reilly said NBC News and MSNBC were engaged in "Bush-hating" and "irresponsible" reporting on the execution of Saddam Hussein (in part a veiled attack of Keith Olbermann over a January 2, 2007 Special Comment.^[21]) and further stated that NBC News and MSNBC were liberal-leaning. Joe Scarborough, a former Republican Congressman and host of MSNBC's Scarborough Country, took issue on January 4 and responded to O'Reilly:

“

Bill O'Reilly, just attack Rosie. You're way off base on MSNBC, on NBC, and certainly on me. And I challenge you to debate me anytime, anyplace, anywhere, and find one thing I have said on this program over the past year that is not consistent with the conservative congressman who was against military adventurism when I was in Congress, that was against exploding deficits, that was against reckless spending, and was against turning Congress into the type of swamp that we Republicans have turned it into over the past six years! That doesn't make me liberal, that makes me conservative! That may make you, though, a suck-up, if you defend the Republicans that have done that to this country and to our party over the past six years![22]

”

O'Reilly has not answered the challenge to debate Scarborough. Prior to this incident, Scarborough had said that he defended O'Reilly on many issues.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Larry King

On a recent interview, Larry King, host of CNN's Larry King Live, has criticized O'Reilly and other talk show hosts of his current generation for using their guests as props or punching bags. He calls them "I" hosts, because they are more interested in lecturing their guests than in listening to them. "I hope I never do that," he says, "I'm not saying it's bad. If you watch Bill O'Reilly, that is Bill O'Reilly. It's not my cup of tea, I don't care for it, but I can understand why a lot of viewers do."^[23]

[edit] Disputes of factual accuracy

[edit] Malmedy massacre

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.

On October 28, 2005, O'Reilly incorrectly claimed, in an interview with Fox News Channel analyst General Wesley Clark, that U.S. troops committed the Malmedy massacre. O'Reilly stated "General, you need to look at the Malmedy massacre in World War Two, and the 82nd Airborne who did it." In actuality, it was the German Waffen-SS troops that massacred eighty-four surrendering American soldiers.

On May 30, 2006 O'Reilly again interviewed Wesley Clark. O'Reilly stated "In Malmedy, as you know, US Forces captured SS forces who had their hands in the air and they were unarmed and they shot them down. You know that. That's on the record and documented." Media Matters for America showed that Fox News later edited the transcripts of the conversation, inserting the word "Normandy" where O'Reilly had said "Malmedy." O'Reilly was denounced by MSNBC talk show host Keith Olbermann.^[24][25]

In a later broadcast, O'Reilly responded to a viewer's attempt to correct his previous night's claim, stating "In the heat of the debate with General Clark my statement wasn't clear enough…after Malmedy some German captives were executed by American troops". O'Reilly posted a column almost a year earlier on June 23, 2005 on his website, where he correctly described the Waffen-SS troops as the ones who massacred the surrendering US Army soldiers near Malmedy, and not the other way around.^[26] In this column O'Reilly then used the example that the US Army's 11th Armored Division allegedly responded to the Malmedy massacre in the aftermath by carrying out revenge attacks on captured German soldiers. In his book "The Other Price of Hitler's War: German Military & Civilian Losses Resulting from WW 2," author Martin Sorge wrote about the events that took place after the massacre: "It was in the wake of the Malmedy incident at Chegnogne [sic] that on New Year's Day 1945 some 60 German POWs were shot in cold blood by their American guards. The guilt went unpunished."

[edit] University of Oregon student newspaper controversy

On May 17, 2006, O'Reilly, while discussing controversial cartoons of Jesus published by a University of Oregon student newspaper, The Insurgent, he incorrectly claimed that the University's president Dave Frohnmayer had allowed the university's students to publish the cartoons. In fact, neither Frohnmayer nor the school has control over the content of the student-run university newspapers, because of the 2000 United States Supreme Court case Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth. The Insurgent was apparently responding to rival The Oregon Commentator’s decision to publish controversial cartoons of the Islamic prophet Mohammed, which have sparked Muslim outrage and rioting around the world. O'Reilly never discussed this on his program and attributed the printing of the cartoons to students who "apparently hate Christianity", and had on his show the editor of The Oregon Commentator. During his interview with the editor, O'Reilly made a comparison between the two publications and claimed that The Oregon Commentator is responsible and that The Insurgent was irresponsible. O'Reilly targeted the university president, David B. Frohnmayer, calling him a "coward" and saying that he should be "fired." He later asserted on his radio program that if a student newspaper published anything attacking a minority group such as Muslims, the university would intervene and remove funding, without noting Frohnmayer's position—that the university could not legally control content or deny funding on such a basis.^[27][28][29]

[edit] Disputed claims involving the "War on Christmas"

In the wake of O'Reilly's promotion of an alleged "War on Christmas" (see section below), Media Matters for America posted several reports on their website with links to news articles from Michigan’s WNEM, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette,^[30] and the Washington Post,^[31] as well as one retraction by O’Reilly himself^[32] noting that several of O'Reilly’s allegations to support his theory were either false or inaccurate.^[33][34] In December, 2005, Media Matters noted that one of O'Reilly's sources that he used to support the idea that there existed a "War on Christmas" was a skit on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, one which O'Reilly had stated on his radio program happened "last night" on the Daily Show.^[35] Media Matters provided a video clip and transcript of the Daily Show's response—a program in which Stewart and Samantha Bee noted that the skit O'Reilly had originally referenced had been aired in December 2004, one year prior to O'Reilly's assertion. The main evidence of this was Bee herself who, as opposed to her appearance in the film footage, was visibly in the late stages of pregnancy in December 2005.^[36]

[edit] Boycott of French goods and "The Paris Business Review"

In March 2003, O'Reilly called for a boycott of French products and services sold in the United States, due to President Jacques Chirac's stance on the 2003 invasion of Iraq.^[37] In April 27, 2004; O'Reilly claimed “they’ve lost billions of dollars in France” as a direct result of his boycott, referring to "The Paris Business Review" as his source, a publication that doesn't exist. O'Reilly then claimed about two months later (July 6, 2004) that the boycott caused France to lose $138 million in business compared to the previous year.^[38][39]

On Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, October 18, 2005, O'Reilly confirmed that the boycott is still in place, referring to the French as "our enemies". Approximately a week later, O'Reilly claimed that the French ambassador had been sent to New York "to try to talk me out of" the boycott.^[37] As late as February 2006 O'Reilly said in his show that "those who supported us, like Britain and Denmark, should be rewarded. Those who did not, like France and Spain, must be held accountable." Spain committed troops in Iraq at the beginning of the war, although they were one of the first countries to withdraw their forces.

A survey conducted by Weber Shandwick in May 2003 found that 43% of U.S. citizens reported they were "less likely" to buy French products because of France's opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq.^[40] An O'Dwyer's PR Services Report article of June, 2003 notes that "French sales in the United States represent $28 billion USD a year, making the United States the most important commercial partner of France after the EU."^[41]

The CBC and Media Matters for America have stated that French imports to the US increased during the period of O'Reilly's boycott, citing U.S. Census Bureau figures.^[42][43][44]

[edit] Peabody Award

O'Reilly incorrectly claimed at a February 10, 2001 speech at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Florida, that Inside Edition, a show he had previously anchored, had won a Peabody Award. After watching an airing of the speech a couple weeks later on C-SPAN, Al Franken stated that he performed a search on LexisNexis and found three previous occasions dating back to August 30, 1999 where O'Reilly had repeated the incorrect claim. On at least one occasion, O'Reilly used the first-person pronoun "we" and said the show won (plural) "Peabody Awards".^[45][46] Franken called O'Reilly for a statement and O'Reilly admitted he had made an error, correcting himself and stating that the show had won a George Polk Award and not a Peabody.^[47][48] Further research that Franken documented in his book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them reveals that the Polk award was given one year after O'Reilly's tenure at Inside Edition and for work O'Reilly had not been involved with.^[47][49]

Franken called Lloyd Grove, a reporter for The Washington Post, who called O'Reilly and asked him about his statements. O'Reilly offered an admission of error, saying "...So I got mixed up between a Peabody Award and a Polk Award...". Grove published the story on March 1, 2001 in his column "The Reliable Source".^[50]

On March 8, Robert Reno of Newsday wrote in an op/ed piece, "O'Reilly also has repeatedly boasted of his Peabody Awards... Actually, he has never won a Peabody...he got it confused with the Polk Award...which had been won by "Inside Edition".^{[citation needed]} O'Reilly rejected the characterization and stated that he was misquoted and had never made the attribution of having personally won the award. Franken and other critics have pointed to O'Reilly's use of "we" to question his claims that he never suggested he personally received a Peabody. On the March 13, 2001 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, during a discussion on "attack journalism" O'Reilly said of the incident:

“

Guy says about me, couple weeks ago, "O’Reilly said he won a Peabody Award." Never said it. You can’t find a transcript where I said it. You—there is no one on earth you could bring in that would say I said it. Robert Reno in Newsday, a columnist, writes in his column, calls me a liar, all right? And it’s totally fabricated. That’s attack journalism. It’s dishonest, it’s disgusting, and it hurts reputations.

”

[edit] Mark Foley's party affiliation

On the October 3, 2006 episode of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly discussed the scandal involving former Florida congressman Mark Foley. Though Foley has been a Republican since 1981, the caption below Foley's image read "FORMER CONGRESSMAN MARK FOLEY (D-FL),"^[51] incorrectly identifying Foley as a Democrat. The inaccurate caption was displayed at least twice during the episode.

[edit] "Shut up" line

On November 15, 2002, a viewer criticized O'Reilly's interruption of his guests telling them to "Shut Up". O'Reilly responded to this statement contending that the "Shut up line has happened only once in six years". Appearing on CBS's 60 Minutes, O'Reilly claimed that his research department reviewed every "Factor" episode since its 1996 debut and had come to the conclusion that he said "shut up" six times. Slate.com author Jack Shafer documented 30 different programs where O'Reilly used the "Shut up" line at least once, 13 of which occurred before O'Reilly's contention. Shafer calculated that O'Reilly said the "shut up" line 200 times since his show premiered in 1996. However, almost all of the "shut up" lines documented were not directed at guests and relegated to his commentaries.^[52]

[edit] Controversy about O'Reilly's childhood home

O'Reilly has long claimed that his inspiration for speaking up for average Americans, or what he calls "the folks", are his working-class roots. He has pointed to his boyhood home in lower-middle-class Levittown, New York as a credential. Based on a Washington Post interview, Al Franken^[53] and others have claimed that O'Reilly did not grow up in Levittown, but instead in a neighboring village, Westbury. The source the Post used for their assertion was O'Reilly's mother, who, at the time a profile of O'Reilly was published in 2000, still lived in his childhood home.^[54] The issue was originally brought up by Michael Kinsley in an Op-Ed piece.

O'Reilly has alleged that the Washington Post misquoted his mother,^[55] though he is on the record saying his mother still lives in his childhood home. O'Reilly placed a copy of the deed to the house on his website, which shows that the property had title and a postal address in Levittown.^[56] The date on the deed indicates his parents bought a new or nearly new home in 1951 in the Levittown development,^[57] a mass-produced housing development, constructed by William Levitt between 1947 and 1952, that was to become an archetype for suburbia.

William Levitt typically bought open farmland for development^[58] and it is unlikely that the Levittown development in Westbury resembled the older, westerly parts of the village. The Washington Post confirms that the O'Reilly family home was built by William Levitt,^[54] hence the controversy arises from the redrawing of political boundaries. Levittown was redrawn into a squarish shape^[59][57] to conform with the 11756 Zip Code. Zip codes were introduced in 1963. After this time the home was located in Westbury. The redrawing of political maps resulted in a similar controversy regarding musician Billy Joel's Levittown family home which was annexed by neighboring Hicksville.^{[citation needed]}

O'Reilly has also said, "You don't come from any lower than I came from on an economic scale"^[60] and that his father "never earned more than $35,000 a year in his life." Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting has calculated that adjusted for inflation, $35,000 in 1978 would be worth over $90,000 in 2001 dollars.^[45]

[edit] Controversial topics discussed by O'Reilly

[edit] Jeremy Glick

Further information: Jeremy Glick (author)

On his televised program on February 4, 2003, O'Reilly interviewed Jeremy Glick, an author whose father had been killed in the World Trade Center attacks. Glick had signed an anti-war ad that made comments relating the September 11 attacks to atrocities in Baghdad, Panama City and Vietnam. O'Reilly told Glick that he doubted that Glick's father would approve of his anti-war stance. After Glick accused O'Reilly of evoking "9/11 to rationalize everything from domestic plunder to imperialistic aggression worldwide", and also of evoking "sympathy with the 9/11 families" to do the same, O'Reilly became visibly angered with Glick, stating "That's a bunch of crap. I've done more for the 9/11 families by their own admission — I've done more for them than you will ever hope to do" (O'Reilly may have had in mind his dealings with the American Red Cross and the United Way). The short and heated segment ended with O'Reilly giving the command to his staff to cut Glick's microphone. Returning from the commercial break after the interview O'Reilly stated to his audience, "If I knew that guy Jeremy Glick was gonna be like that I never would have brought him in here. I feel bad for his family, I really do."^[61] commercial break, at one point, O'Reilly stood up from his seat after the continued debate, slammed his fist down on the table, and yelled at his producers to "get him [Glick] out of here before I tear him to fucking pieces!" Glick had mentioned that FOX News stagehands had offered him coffee on the bottom floor of the building as an attempt to calm him down afterwards.

O'Reilly has since maintained that Glick remarked during the interview that George W. Bush orchestrated or had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, claiming, "Glick was saying without a shred of evidence that President Bush, and Bush the elder, were directly responsible for 9/11" and "He came on this program and accused President Bush of knowing about 9/11 and murdering his [Glick's] own father"^[62] although no evidence supports O'Reilly's claim.

Media Matters for America has pointed out that Glick was incorrect in his claim that the president's father, George H.W. Bush, was head of the CIA when the U.S. funneled support to the anti-Soviet Afghan forces. CIA assistance to the Afghan fighters began in 1979; Bush was CIA director from 1976 to 1977.^[63]

In a 2005 interview with Phil Donahue, Donahue brought up Glick when mentioning that O'Reilly wouldn't send his kids to Iraq. O'Reilly responded that his nephew had signed up for the military and that Donahue didn't know what he was talking about, then threatened to kick him out if he made a "personal attack" on him again. In response, Donahue said, "I'm not Jeremy Glick; you can't intimidate me." O'Reilly answered, "You're right; you have more intelligence than he did." O'Reilly did not respond when Donahue asked if he had apologized to Glick for the way O'Reilly had treated him. There is currently no apology on record from O'Reilly to Glick concerning the incident.

The incident was recently alluded to in October of 2006 on MSNBC's Scarborough Country when a story on O'Reilly sparked Joe Scarborough's guest to respond, "This is the same guy who told a person whose father died on 9/11 to 'shut up'."

[edit] Cindy Sheehan

Over a year after her son Casey died, mother turned anti-Iraq War activist Cindy Sheehan began a protest outside of Crawford, Texas, where President George W. Bush was spending time at his Prairie Chapel Ranch. O'Reilly stated that Sheehan's behavior may, in the eyes of some, border on treason.^[64] He later said, "So it's obvious Cindy Sheehan has become a political player, whose primary concern is embarrassing the president. She is no longer just a protester. I don't think she ever has been, by the way."^[65] In an interview with Phil Donahue on September 23, 2005, O'Reilly referred to Cindy Sheehan as "clueless".^[66] He included her on his October 2005 "Cowards List", which he described as comprised of "people who will not stand up and answer questions about their bomb-throwing statements."^[67] On January 4, 2006, he remarked, "She's run by far-left elements who are using her, and she's dumb enough to allow it to happen. It's not a vilification, it's a fact."^[68]

[edit] Alleged liberal bias in the media

O'Reilly regularly accuses the New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, NPR, BBC, CBC and other major press outlets of leaning to the "political far-left" in their reporting. It is his view that these networks and publications undermine the Bush administration's war on terror. (O'Reilly 2005a) O'Reilly is also critical of what he describes as "far-left" columnists, which has resulted in frequent back-and-forth debates between his show and their columns. In one such exchange O'Reilly stated that columnist Bob Herbert of the New York Times is "most likely helping the terrorists" because of his refusal to condemn the ACLU for demanding that photographs of prisoners at Abu Ghraib be released.^[69]

On the media, O'Reilly has made the following argument: "The defense attorneys buy politicians off, especially in small states like Vermont where they give a lot of money, and the liberal media working against Jessica's Law for ideological, crazy, nutty, far-left, insane reasons. And the folks have gotta know who the forces of darkness are."^[70]

[edit] "Hall of Shame"

O'Reilly has begun posting the names of various media outlets that he considers to be "defamatory" on a "Hall of Shame" page on his own website; this list includes:

• New York Daily News (dropped from list)
• The New Yorker
• MSNBC
• US News & World Report
• St. Petersburg Times
• Newsday
• Atlanta Journal-Constitution
• Syracuse Post-Standard
• Kansas City Star
• Roanoke Times
• Barre-Montpelier Times-Argus^[71]

Recently, O'Reilly started a second "Hall of Shame" list of media outlets that he considers "soft on child predators;" this list includes:

• Dayton Daily News
• Rutland Herald (Vermont)
• Bennington Banner (Vermont)
• Brattleboro Reformer (Vermont)
• St. Petersburg Times^[71]

[edit] Opposing the ACLU

O'Reilly has stated that the American Civil Liberties Union is "the most dangerous organization in the United States of America right now,"^[72] especially in their challenging of the Justice Department and the Department of Defense regarding the War on terror. He has also highlighted their pro-bono defense of NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, which is currently being tried for responsibility in the rape and murder of a young boy. The ACLU defends NAMBLA's freedom of speech surrounding their publications and has said that the legal blame in the rape/murder should go to who committed it.^[73] The ACLU has said that they sometimes have to defend "unpopular" speech or speech that they don't agree with, including the KKK's, due to their perception that their only client is the Bill of Rights.^[74]

[edit] Penalties on child sex offenders

Another recurring theme in his work has been the implementation of harsher penalties on child sex offenders. O'Reilly has frequently pointed out poor judicial handling of some cases. Named in memory of Jessica Lunsford, who was abducted and raped before being brutally murdered, "Jessica's Law" refers to the Jessica Lunsford Act passed in Florida that mandates a minimum sentence of 25 years and a maximum of life in prison for first-time child sex offenders. O'Reilly believes that this law will save lives and has called on constituents to write the governors of those states lacking these laws.

In March 2006, O'Reilly criticized a judge in Ohio for giving a sentence of five years probation to a sexual predator who admitted to molesting children, calling for that judge to be thrown off the bench. Ohio's governor and attorney general took the same position. In an editorial, Jeff Bruce, editor of the Dayton Daily News, stressed that while the light sentence shouldn't be ignored, that O'Reilly, the governor, and the attorney general, who Bruce claims in the article had each been the subject of scandal, shouldn't make a rush to judgment about the judge. That night, O'Reilly appeared on the Factor charging Bruce with endorsing the judge's sentence, even though Bruce had not endorsed the judge's sentence in the editorial of Bruce's that O'Reilly was discussing.

[edit] Weapons of mass destruction

On ABC's Good Morning America on 18 March 2003, O'Reilly said "If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush administration again." On February 10, 2004, during a Good Morning America broadcast, O'Reilly said, "My analysis was wrong and I'm sorry. I was wrong. I'm not pleased about it at all…I am much more skeptical of the Bush administration now than I was at that time."^[75] While he continues to support the U.S. presence in Iraq, he remains critical of how the Bush administration is handling some aspects of policy. He believes the U.S. is not relying enough on Iraqi military support and is critical of the administration's failure to secure Iraqi borders. He has also criticized the time it takes to train Iraqi security forces, as compared to U.S recruit training.

[edit] Military recruitment in San Francisco schools

On November 8, 2005, the voters of San Francisco approved Proposition I/College Not Combat, a ballot measure that declared the city's opposition to "the federal government's use of public schools to recruit students for service in the military."^[76] In response, O'Reilly stated on his radio show, "You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right in to Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead. And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it....We're going to say, "Look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."^[77] San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly responded, calling for O'Reilly's termination.^[78] O'Reilly refused to apologize, and claimed that his comments had been "obviously satirical."^[79] The proposition's author, Todd Chretien, appeared on The O'Reilly Factor in response and stated that to the people of San Francisco, the proposition itself was "no laughing matter."

On that same program, O'Reilly played a short clip of his controversial remarks and claimed the full clip could be found on his website; however, the clip available on his website is not complete.^[80]

On February 1st, 2006, O'Reilly responded to a letter sent to him from Malmö, Sweden, mentioning his endorsement of an al-Qaeda attack on San Francisco. O'Reilly once again denied making the statement, and replied "I gave al-Qaeda your address".^[81] O'Reilly's reply was ridiculed by the mailer when he called into Mike Malloy's radio show a year later, eventually resulting in the Swede calling O'Reilly a "son of a bitch" in Swedish.

[edit] American Red Cross and the United Way

In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, O'Reilly devoted substantial time on his television show and wrote pieces alleging that the United Way and American Red Cross failed to deliver millions of dollars in donated money, raised by the organizations in the name of the disaster, to the families of those killed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.^[82][83] O'Reilly asserted that the organizations misrepresented their intentions for the money being raised by not distributing all of the 9/11 relief fund to the victims.^[84] Actor George Clooney defended the United Way from O'Reilly's criticisms of a telethon which ended up raising $129.5 million, plus an additional $12 million in CD and DVD sales, according to Jeannette Reed, spokeswoman for the United Way of New York City. The funds were given to victims and surviving families in the form of cash assistance, she said. Congressional hearings were called on the matter and an investigation by then New York State Attorney General (now governor) Eliot Spitzer, forced the president of the Red Cross to resign for her role in the situation, and then the Red Cross pledged that all funds would go to directly benefit the victims of the September 11 attacks.^[85] In the aftermath, O'Reilly helped the Red Cross develop a revised policy regarding how donations would be distributed. In sworn testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee in November 2001, Congressman J.D. Hayworth asserted that media pressure, most notably from O'Reilly, helped cause the Red Cross to increase payments to affected people and helped cause other charities to participate in an oversight database established by Spitzer.^[86]

On January 6, 2005 about three years after the Red Cross revised its policy on distributing its funds for the 9/11 families, O'Reilly claimed that a fund raising telethon by the United Way for the 2004 tsunami victims would end up the same as the 9/11 funds raised by the Red Cross. On January 10, 2005 George Clooney sent an e-mail to O'Reilly which pointed out that the United Way not the Red Cross sponsored the telethon and claimed that O'Reilly's comments were for personal gain and would cause fewer people to donate to the cause. Clooney also invited O'Reilly to present at the event and personally oversee and help the fund raising. O'Reilly responded later on his nightly show, "That sounds good to me, but I have to see what the format is."^[87]

[edit] Ludacris

On August 27, 2002 O'Reilly started a boycott against Pepsi over their endorsement of rapper Ludacris. O'Reilly's reasons for starting the boycott was due to the fact that Ludacris's lyrics have been known to degrade women and support the use of drugs. Pepsi succumbed to O'Reilly's message and dropped Ludacris from their company.

Furthering the controversy, in response to the signing of the Osbourne family, music hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons organized a boycott against the company. Simmons demanded an apology from Pepsi to Ludacris and a five million dollar donation to one of Ludacris' charities. Eventually Simmons and Pepsi settled on an agreement to stop the boycott, right before it was to officially begin: while Pepsi did not formally apologize to Ludacris, they did agree to donate an undisclosed sum of money to the Russell Simmons Hip-Hop Summit Action Network.^[88]

O'Reilly remained silent over Pepsi's endorsement of the Osbourne family, which some critics described as "racial hypocrisy".^[89][90][91] Further, O'Reilly denied calling for a boycott of Pepsi on February 4, 2003.^[92]

Ludacris' song "Blow It Out" (from the Chicken & Beer album), acted as a response to his critics, namely O'Reilly, who is mentioned by name in the following lyrics:

Shout out to Bill O'Reilly, I'm'a throw you a curve

You mad cause I'm a thief and got a way with words

I'm'a start my own beverage, it'll calm your nerves

Pepsi's the New Generation—Blow it out ya ass!

Ludacris also refers to or addresses Bill O'Reilly by name in his songs "Hoes In My Room" and "Number One Spot." The latter, which was released as a single, even goes as far as to poke fun of O'reilly's sex scandal (which occurred just several months prior to the release of the album featuring "Number One Spot," The Red Light District) with the following lyrics:

Respected highly, HIIII MR. O'REILLY!!!

Hope all is well, kiss the plaintiff and the wifey!

Upon winning the 2007 Grammy for Best Rap Album, Ludacris thanked Bill O'Reilly.

[edit] Jennifer Moore

Jennifer Moore was an eighteen year old girl from New Jersey who was raped and murdered during the end of July, 2006, on New York's West Side Highway. Bill O'Reilly said on August 7, 2006, on his Radio Factor show:

“

These two girls come in from the suburbs and they get bombed and their car is towed because they're moronic girls. Now Moore -- Jennifer Moore, 18, on her way to college, she was 5-foot-2, 105 pounds, wearing a miniskirt and a halter top with a bare midriff. Now again, there you go. So every predator in the world is gonna pick that up at two in the morning. She's walking by herself on the West Side Highway, and she gets picked up by a thug. All right. Now she's out of her mind, drunk.

”

On MSNBC that very same day, both Tucker Carlson and Keith Olbermann commented on the quote. Carlson said:

“

So, she's got a halter top with a bare midriff and she's drunk; therefore, she gets raped and murdered, as if that's natural? That's what happens when you've got a bare midriff and you're loaded? Not in my America, buddy. Pretty low standards. I mean, I don't know if O'Reilly is attempting to blame her for luring this guy in or what, but the fact is, it's sick all the way around. You ought to be able to wear whatever you want on our streets and not get raped and murdered. Period.

”

Olbermann responded by labeling him for Worst Person In The World that night: "But our winner, another notch in his infamous belt tonight, sadly this is not funny in the slightest. Talking about the 18-year-old girl abducted from New York's West Side Highway, later brutally raped and murdered about two weeks ago. O'Reilly's version of it, quote:" Then, reading the quote, and then continuing: "End quote. You sick, sorry excuse for a human being. Bill O'Reilly: today's 'Worst Person in the World.'"

[edit] Fox Broadcasting Company Special on O.J. Simpson

In response to a planned two-part special on O.J. Simpson by Fox Broadcasting Company, O'Reilly threatened to boycott any company that advertises on the television program. "I'm not going to watch the Simpson show or even look at the book," he also said, "If any company sponsors the TV program, I will not buy anything that company sells - ever."

The special talks about Simpson's new book, If I Did It. O'Reilly has said that "If every American walked away from the O.J. garbage, it wouldn't happen."

CEO and Chairman of the parent company, News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch had not responded to the controversy initially. Howard Rubenstein, a spokesman for Murdoch, has said that "I can't reach him (Murdoch) today," "I would have no comment for him." ReganBooks, the publisher of Simpson's new book, is a subsidiary of HarperCollins, which is also owned by News Corporation.^[93] The book and TV special were later cancelled.^[94]

[edit] Shawn Hornbeck

Shawn Hornbeck (a former missing child) was found living with 41 year old Michael J. Devlin on January 12, 2007. Hornbeck had apparently been kidnapped by Devlin in 2002 at the age of 11. After being discovered, it was revealed that at some point in that 4 years Devlin had given Hornbeck the freedom to get on the internet, ride his bike, and have friends over. Many members of the media speculated that Hornbeck apparently did not try to escape because of Stockholm syndrome. On January 16, 2007's edition of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly called this analysis into question. He said that he doesn't believe in the Stockholm Syndrome, and that the boy probably preferred not going to school, and playing video games to living with his parents. O'Reilly said: "The situation here, for this kid, looks to me to be a lot more fun than what he had under his old parents. He didn't have to go to school, he could run around and do whatever he wanted…there was an element here that this kid liked about this circumstance." He then went on to say that Hornbeck was probably maladjusted before being abducted. He supported his comments with the fact that Shawn had piercings and that O'Reilly himself had once taught high school. O'Reilly promised to apologize if he were found wrong.^[95][96] To date (March 19, 2007) He has not yet apologized.

Devlin, the man who was retained as the subject in the Hornbeck case, was charged on February 5, 2007, with 69 counts of forcible sodomy. Over 50 of the charges have Hornbeck as the apparent victim.^[97] In response, rather than disavowing his previous comments, O'Reilly said only, "we all knew this was coming."^[98] Following his comments, the Naples, Florida Chapter of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children announced that O'Reilly's appearance at a $500-per-person fundraiser where he was to give the keynote address was cancelled. He was replaced by John Walsh.^[99]

[edit] Other

[edit] Allegations of sexual harassment

On October 13, 2004, O'Reilly filed a preemptive lawsuit against O'Reilly Factor producer Andrea Mackris, her lawyer Benedict P. Morelli, and Morelli's law firm for extortion, contending Mackris had privately demanded more than $60 million (USD) to settle a claim of sexual harassment. Mackris filed her complaint of sexual harassment later the same day.^[100] In her complaint, she alleged that O'Reilly had made numerous references to "phone sex, vibrators, threesomes, masturbation, the loss of his virginity, and sexual fantasies."^{[101][102][103][104]} The complaint also sought additional damages and described alleged actions of retaliation by Fox, et.al.^[104] O'Reilly filed an answer to the complaints, and the two cases were settled out of court.^[104]

[edit] "Hubcaps" incident

In April 2003, O'Reilly appeared at a fundraiser for Best Friends, a charity benefiting inner-city schoolchildren. O'Reilly was trying to fill time before an African-American singing group called the Best Men was set to perform, and quipped "Does anyone know where the Best Men are? I hope they're not in the parking lot stealing our hubcaps." Some in the audience felt that it was a racially charged comment. O'Reilly claims the remarks were a reference to a common prank in the 1950s, and the event's theme was reflective of that era.^[105][106]

Later, on May 7, 2003, Atlanta-based libertarian radio talk show host Neal Boortz came on O'Reilly's show to discuss a controversial "whites-only" prom at a Georgia high school. O'Reilly decried the incident as non-inclusive, and Boortz repeatedly assured him that the event in question, while organized and promoted by students within the school, actually occurred off-campus. Boortz argued that it was a private gathering, and as such wasn't subject to equal protection clauses or anything of the sort.

The discussion turned sour when Boortz suggested that O'Reilly was cherry picking this issue as a publicity stunt, designed to assuage the recent hubcaps remarks O'Reilly made at a charity fundraiser. Immediately after Boortz brought up the hubcap incident, O'Reilly scolded him: "You know, you're a vicious son of a bitch for bringing that up." Boortz appeared a bit flustered, but mostly laughed off the insult, later buying the rights to www.viciousSOB.com and redirecting it to O'Reilly's website;^[107] the domain has since lapsed.

[edit] David Letterman

On January 4, 2006, O'Reilly appeared on the Late Show with David Letterman. O'Reilly had previously praised Letterman as "a smart guy who can spot a phony with telescopic accuracy" and as having "the toughest interview show on television."^[108] When O'Reilly began a discussion on the alleged War on Christmas, Letterman replied, "I think that this is something that happened here, and it happened there, and so people like you are trying to make us think that it's a threat." Letterman accused O'Reilly of making up some of his claims on particular points on the Iraq War, and O'Reilly replied with, "Then I could write for your show." When O'Reilly attacked the motivations of Cindy Sheehan, Letterman took exception, saying O'Reilly had never lost a family member in a war, and therefore O'Reilly could not speak for Sheehan's motivations. O'Reilly then asked how those who did lose a member in the war would feel about Sheehan calling terrorists "freedom fighters." Letterman eventually said, "I'm not smart enough to debate you point-for-point on this, but I have the feeling that about 60 percent of what you say is crap."^[109] When asked by O'Reilly to give examples, Letterman stated that he never watched his show. The next day on his television program, O'Reilly criticized Letterman and called him "a card-carrying member of the secular-progressive movement."

O'Reilly appeared on Letterman's show again on October 27, 2006. O'Reilly repeatedly claimed that he and Letterman were friends who are "in the same bowling league". He and Letterman debated U.S. foreign policy.^[110]

[edit] "Pinhead"

On his show and in his writing, O'Reilly frequently has called those with whom he disagrees "pinheads." His targets include Mike McGough of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial page,^[52] college professors,^[111] "elite" universities in general,^[112] and film critics.^[113] O'Reilly's critics frequently quote his use of the word; some have mocked him by branding themselves "pinheads."

[edit] See also

• Bill O'Reilly
• Fox News Channel
• The O'Reilly Factor

[edit] References