The O’Reilly Factor = Truth? Give me a break. I am responding to the Spotlight on Bill O’Reilly that was featured in The Daily Free Press on Jan. 16. The article kept emphasizing that Mr. O’Reilly “keeps it honest” and is fixated on “truth.” As I will get to later, I am very offended by his careless use of the word “truth.”
No one can deny that journalism is inherently biased and is notorious for portraying distorted and sensationalistic versions of the truth. Anyone who has watched Fox News Channel can tell you that it is no less guilty, if not more guilty, of this slanted misrepresentation than any other news channel. In every feature that they do, using an objective voice, they show how Republicans should be credited for the good in this country and how Democrats are responsible for all that is going badly. I’m sorry, but any news coming my way that is shrouded with such a heavy partisan viewpoint cannot be based in truth, regardless of whether is it pro-Republican or pro-Democrat. This brings me to the “O’Reilly Factor,” a show claiming to report the truth, expose “spinmeisters” like Clinton and “embarrass the government so that they have to do the right thing.” It’s funny how Mr. O’Reilly spends much of the show “embarrassing” politicians who just happen to be Democrats. Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly, for enlightening me. I didn’t realize only half the politicians in Washington are spinmeisters and corrupt. This is politician bashing under the guise of objectively exposing the “truth” — sure sounds like “honest work.” The phenomenal leaders of this country, the honest and compassionate ones, of course are Republicans. If it smells like a fish, I doubt there’s a cake bakin’. This journalism is on the brink of Republican propaganda. There is an obvious partiality on Fox News Channel and the “O’Reilly Factor,” and it is utterly offensive for Mr. O’Reilly to claim that what he reports is the complete truth. How can we forget the loudest barking dog for the Republican party, Rush Limbaugh, and not be somewhat suspicious of what Mr. O’Reilly has to say? In the article, he stated, “You will find fast that journalism is motivated by money … ” How much are top Republicans paying you to bark louder than Rush Limbaugh? Is $20 million dollars enough?
Again, I want my intentions for writing this to be clear. Thought I may not agree with Mr. O’Reilly’s opinions, I do believe in his right to voice them. There is no question of that. My problem is his audacity in claiming to be the voice of truth. Doesn’t the beauty of truth rest in its neutrality? Any of these phrases — my opinion, my assumption, my belief, I think, I consider — are more appropriate. Please do not use the word “truth” so lightly and claim it to be the foundation of your show. This undermines the value of words spoken by real champions of truth, as these voices never need to even utter the word.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
