O'Reilly would fire "rabid dog" Gabler for Fox News Watch comments
In a discussion with Fox News Watch host Eric Burns, Bill O'Reilly said he would fire "rabid dog" media commentator Neal Gabler as a Fox News Watch contributor. O'Reilly accused Gabler of promoting "an idiot conspiracy theory" from a "far-left blog," suggesting that it was "not bad PR" if the Bush administration dragged out the story of Cheney's hunting accident to deflect attention from more substantive news. O'Reilly added that "this is the second time this guy did this -- the first time he smeared me about the Christmas controversy."
On the February 20 broadcast of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly said that, given the chance, he would fire "rabid dog" media writer Neal Gabler as a contributor to Fox News' media critique program Fox News Watch. In a discussion with Fox News Watch host Eric Burns about comments made by Gabler during the February 18 edition of that show, O'Reilly advised Burns to "come down hard on this Gabler guy" for promoting "an idiot conspiracy theory" from a "far-left blog" that led Gabler to suggest it was "not bad PR" if the administration dragged out the story of Cheney's hunting accident to deflect attention from the more substantive news of the week.
O'Reilly went on to say that Gabler "shouldn't be on" Fox News Watch, noting that "this is the second time this guy did this -- the first time he smeared me about the Christmas controversy." As Media Matters for America previously noted, during the December 3, 2005, edition of News Watch, Gabler claimed that Fox News' coverage of a purported battle over public acknowledgement of Christmas was excessive; declared the so-called "war on Christmas" a "demagogic campaign"; and referred to O'Reilly and Fox News hosts Sean Hannity and John Gibson as "demagogues" who seek to "rally the masses."
Gabler's February 18 comments -- concerning Vice President Dick Cheney's accidental shooting of hunting partner Harry Whittington on February 11 -- were made during a discussion of news coverage of the incident with Burns, nationally syndicated columnist and Fox News host Cal Thomas, and political analyst and Newsday columnist James P. Pinkerton. Thomas said, "I think it's a conspiracy, Neal, and you ought to pick up on this. This was a brilliant strategy by the vice president to reveal the pettiness of the press." Gabler responded, "But Jay Rosen [author of the PressThink weblog] also says this could be a conspiracy. And in this very sense. Look at what this did. This got [newly published photos of alleged abuses of prisoners at] Abu Ghraib off the front pages; it got [Senate testimony about shortcomings in the federal response to Hurricane Katrina by Homeland Security Secretary Michael] Chertoff off the front pages. While we're here talking about the idiocy of him shooting his friend, we're not talking about the major, major problems that this administration is having. That's clever PR. That's not bad PR." But when O'Reilly showed the clip of the segment during The O'Reilly Factor, he cropped out the reference to Rosen and accused Gabler of picking up conspiracy theories from a "far-left blog" -- presumably a reference to Rosen. When Burns defended his hosting of the program during which Gabler made his comments, by pointing to an impending commercial break, O'Reilly advised, "I would have edited it, to tell you the truth. I would have edited [Gabler's comments] out."
In a February 16 PressThink post, to which Gabler was apparently referring, Rosen claimed that Cheney's handling of the shooting was an example of what he called "rollback" -- a "larger aim" by the Bush administration "to roll back the press as a player within the executive branch, to make it less important in running the White House and governing the country" -- but Rosen also wrote that he "found something disingenuous about the performance of the White House press" in its coverage of the Cheney shooting incident.
From the February 20 broadcast of Fox News's The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Now, there are all kinds of irresponsible statements being made about the vice president, one of which occurred this weekend on the Fox News program News Watch.
GABLER (Fox News Watch video clip): This could be a conspiracy. And in this very sense. Look at what this did. This got Abu Ghraib off the front pages, it got Chertoff off the front pages. While we're here talking about the idiocy of him shooting his friend, we're not talking about the major, major problems that this administration is having. That's clever PR. That's not bad PR.
O'REILLY: Now, Gabler was referring to a conspiracy theory and one of those nutty far-left blogs. Joining us now from The Factor's New York studio, Eric Burns, host of the News Watch program. Hey, Eric, you gotta come down on this Gabler guy. I mean, he's just out of control, and I'll tell you why. Your program is a watchdog program of the media. And here you have Gabler picking up a far-left blog, an idiot conspiracy theory, spitting it out there. And you guys sit there -- not just you, but everybody else -- like Humpty Dumpty. What's going on?
BURNS: Now, Bill, if you would have continued to play the clip, you would see what the problem was. The problem was we were up against a commercial break. Jim Pinkerton jumped in at that moment to take issue with him. And Neal went back and forth with him very briefly. We were running over time and I had to jump in.
O'REILLY: But didn't you say, when you came, I -- listen, I'm up against the breaks all the time. And it's electronic breaks, so people know we have to hit 'em or we go off the air. But look, you should have come back and said to Gabler, look, you have -- this is a watchdog program. I like your program, Eric. I think you do a nice job. All right? But you got a guy like Gabler, and this is the second time this guy did this -- first time he smeared me about the Christmas controversy. We called him up, he's too cowardly to come on. You let him slide with that. And now you got him coming in here with this insane conspiracy thing. And I'm -- you know, I'm watching Fox News because I think Fox News is tough on these things. It's not a left-wing blog, all right? And you let this guy get away with it.
BURNS: No --
O'REILLY: And you shouldn't have.
BURNS: You're telling me that I let him get away with it, Bill. He's not my responsibility --
O'REILLY: You're the host.
BURNS: -- and what's -- no, no, but look, what's different between my show and your show is I've got four people on my program. And I will tell you that in both cases, both of the cases you referred to, at least two of the others, and maybe three, were ready to jump in. As a matter of fact, on the comment he made about you being what did he say, a demagogue or demi-god --
O'REILLY: Yes, the usual personal attacks that this guy traffics in all the time.
BURNS: I forget who it was, but somebody jumped in there. There was no way to jump in in this case. And in fact, because --
O'REILLY: All right.
BURNS: -- we have a produced open [video sequence] for the second segment, I can't come back to the topic.
O'REILLY: But don't you understand -- I would have edited it, to tell you the truth. I would have edited that out. Because look, here's the danger. Here's the danger. This guy Gabler, who you shouldn't have on your program, by the way -- if I -- and I don't run Fox News, but I'd fire him in a heartbeat and I'd bring in a responsible person. He traffics in personal attacks, this guy. He brings in insane stuff. You know, you're supposed to -- your show is supposed to be the watchdog of the media. And then you have a rabid dog in there. And it's just not playing.
BURNS: Look, Bill, I -- if the purpose of my being here is for you to tell me that I should host the show differently, that's something we can discuss at some other point.
From the February 18 broadcast of Fox News Watch:
THOMAS: Well, a Rasmussen poll shows only 27 percent of the public believe that it was really an important story. I think it's a conspiracy, Neal, and you ought to pick up on this. This was a brilliant strategy by the vice president to reveal the pettiness of the press and once again turn the American people against them. How's that?
GABLER: Well, first of all, [Fox News anchor] Brit Hume did not ask the major question [in his February 15 interview of Cheney]: Why'd you wait 14 hours? But Jay Rosen also says this could be a conspiracy, and in this very sense, look at what this did: This got Abu Ghraib off the front pages; it got Chernoff off the front pages. While we're here talking about the idiocy of him shooting his friend, we're not talking about the major, major problems that this administration is having. That's clever PR. That's not bad PR.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
O'Reilly is saying "Wahhhhh!!! That mean guy is picking on my favorite president, after calling me a liar about the "war on Christmas! He should be fired!"
I have a better idea, Fox should fire the liar. Namely Blowhard O'Reilly.
If Bill 'I used to host Entertainment Tonight, dammit!' O'Reilly had his way, the only people on news would be him, Sean 'I felt a calling (that's a scary thought..)' Hannity and Ann 'You are next on my list, Dali' Colter. (Snoop Dogg music playing in the background...) He-spins-so-much-you'd-think-he-was-a-dj...
Neal Gabler is one of the reason's I watch News Watch. It is one of the few shows where far right people such as Pinkerton and Thomas mix with people who disagree with them. O'Reilly has become unhinged in the last year and for this I credit MMFA because you have shown him up for what he is. Like most bullies, he can dish it out but can't take it. I am suprised Gabler is still on FNC but I do ahve to give them credit for keeping him. By the way Eric Burns looked almost pained on the show. I guess he and Gabler are going to the O'Reilly media list.
I watch *Fox News Watch* every Saturday...it's without a doubt, IMO, the BEST program Fox has to offer. And it's ALSO the ONLY program on Fox that can HONESTLY label itself Fair&Balanced. Also, Eric Burns is a top notch host.
Neal Gabler is an unabashed Liberal. But a rapid dog? Nope. The guy is intelligent&articulate and says what's on his mind. As do ALL the panelists. There is rarely any shouting...just informative&interesting discussions&debates concerning the "media". Though I'm a Conservative I didn't find Gabler's suggestion that the administration " dragged out the story of Cheney's hunting accident to deflect attention from the more substantive news of the week." necessarily so far-fetched as to DISMISS it out of hand. Sadly, nothing THIS White House does shocks me anymore.
I only watch O'Reilly occasionally these days, BUT did catch part of his interview with Burns. It was embarrassing. O'Reilly sounded like an A#S. Of course O'Reilly wants Gabler fired...he's not a trained wuss like MOST of the OTHER Liberals Fox has on the payroll.
Right. You can imagine a young O'Reilly on the playground wiping his bloodied nose... "one day I'm gonna get you guys"
Look at him now.
"But don't you understand -- I would have edited it, to tell you the truth. I would have edited that out."
Yes, Bill we understand perfectly. But do you?
Most of this clip was the typical, tiresome tirade, but, "I would have edited it out" raised my eyebrows.
I'm surprised he didn't edit the comment itself out, but then, he probably doesn't realize how much he revealed, and how many suspicions he corroborated. He actually admitted that he personally judges the substance of his guests' opinions, and censors what he deems too wacky to be heard the public.
It's noteworthy too that he didn't seem to understand his guest's response - that now that that possibly wacky comment had been tossed into the free marketplace of ideas, O'Reilly was able to respond, and counter it. The concept just didn't seem to compute.
Anyone else out there get the feeling that O'Reilly's just gonna snap one day? Finally hear something that breaks the thread upon which the little self-restraint he has so desparately hangs? I dunno....just seems like if his own veins don't burst and kill him first, he's going to wind up killing someone else. The dude needs help.
I caught that admission too.
The truth. The Faux employs censorship as a means to spread disinformation and reliable it as complete and ell balanced.
...that the liberals are trying to ruin him and get him off the air. the first one to play the victim.
Call me crazy, but if Faux News wants to live up to it's ridiculous motto, Gabler's comments weren't so bad. Do other major news outlets so willingly edit comments unsupportive of the sympathetic stance toward this administration? Last week the Cheney had a beer comment was edited and now O'Reilly wants to edit a comment he doesn't like. If ridiculous statements were always edited out of FNC's programming, we wouldn't know who O'Reilly was.
Let's pretend he's the craziest left wing, rabid dog out there for a second (I'm pretending now). WHY IS IT OK FOR ANNE COULTER TO BE ON ANY SHOW... EVER!? I'm sorry, if you're going to say he should be fired and is irresponsible, then Coulter then you're undermining the phrase "fair and balanced".
that was supposed to say "is more irresponsible than Coulter"
I have liked Gabler since he has been on "Fox News Watch" and is really the strongest most assertive liberal they have on that channel. I mean Juan Williams and wimpy Colmes-give me a break!!!!!!!!! I have been surprised that Gabler wasn't uninvited a long time ago-because he pretty much says what he thinks. He would not be the first person uninvited for being so critical. But trust old whining puling Bill to cry the loudest! He talked about robust debate? What does that mean to him-talking over people-muting-editing?
He's the only liberal on Fox who actually has balls. Fox prefers their liberals to be watered down like Colmes, Beckel, and Juan Williams. I also can't help but laugh out loud at the hypocricy when Bill accuses others of engaging in personal attacks.
... when discussing the new Abu Graibe photos, O'Reilly proudly announced that he would NEVER show such photos, because in his estimation, Americans SEEING them would aid the enemy.
When his guest suggested this new batch showed some things that were NEW, O'Reilly insisted that, no, these were JUST THE SAME.
Question: How did he KNOW? His guest should have pointedly asked him if he had VIEWED and REVIEWED these new photos for content. O'Reilly, believing himself a "reporter" with true grit, would answer YES OF COURSE I looked at all then new photos, and there was nothing new.
Then, the coup de gras: Why do you feel, as a citizen of the United States, that it's OK for YOU to see these photos, but you would keep them from being seen by your audience? Do you believe yourself superior to other American citizens, able to view these photos and come away with a CORRECT impression, while other Americans will get the WRONG impression? So you feel you must manipulate what the people can see, based on if you think they can "handle" it?
Unbelievable that O'Reilly would be telling his audience that they are just too stupid or irresponsible to see the things HE sees. That he will feed his audience with an eyedropper, showing ONLY those things he deems will leave them with the CORRECT mindset, after editing, censoring, and cherry-picking.
This is a demagogues defining propaganda. Wonder if he even realizes?
Doesn't anyone find O'Reilly a classic case of projecting his behaviors on others?
I can't think of a better way to describe O'Reilly vis-a-vis the "War on Crhistmas".
Besides, getting hammered by the guy should be a badge of honor for any normal human..... I'd ready to offer free tee-shirts saying "I must be doing something right. O'Reilly doesn't like me." to anyone who gets O'Reilly to make some insulting comment about the individual. Only thing holding me back is that I'd have to sent them to 80% of the people lower case, no class o has ever met.
Bill's defenders. Every other talking head on the right has someone coming to their defense, except poor Billy. Even Ann "The Looney" Coulter has someone. Does that mean that Bill is even more off the wall than Ann Coulter? He leads these phony paranoid crusades and no one sticks up for him. Maybe his ratings only reflect America's fascination with Geeks. Everyone tunes in to watch to see if he's really going to bite off the head of the chicken, and he never disappoints.
Anyone who complains about "personal attacks" (like OReilly did here) automatically is the loser in any argument. What a cowardly way to go. What a way to obfuscate any issue and kill real discussion.
Do we complain about Coulter's "personal attacks"? No, we pounce on her ridiculous statements. A person accused of "personal attacks" probably didn't make any ridiculous statements.
O'Reilly tells Burns, "I would have edited it, to tell you the truth. I would have edited Gabler's comments out.' I guess O'Reilly meant he would have done the same thing he did to Jeremy Glick, (a young man whose father was killed in the 9/11 attacks). That is to having their microphones shut off .
O'reillly is demagogic about secularism:he creates a straw man inthat he say we secalar progressives are for things we might not be for . He was rude to Newdow b but courteous to Jacoby. I like this blog!
Idon't see Beckel as timid.He is as mean asConason.Idon't care forB's saying we atheists have faith.What nonsense.
O'REILLY IS AHYPOCRITE.I WISH PAUL KURTZ COULD TAKE HIM ON . LET'S HAVE GROUND SWELL FOR PAUL!BILL DEMAGOGUES ABOUT SECULAR PROGRESSIVES AND THE ACLU.
Bill O'Reilly has hit bottom and is starting to dig. He's proof that evolution CAN go in reverse. Got a full 6-pack, but lacks the plastic thingy to hold it all together. Sorry, couldn't resist. Seriously, how deluded is this man that he can say stuff like "He traffics in personal attacks, this guy. He brings in insane stuff" without seeing the irony? This much we know: Subsitute the name "Bill O'Reilly" for whoever he's smearing and you've got a pretty accurate portrait of TV's biggest gasbag.
who cares , what happen . How about gore , in saudi arabia , w/his million dollar love ya arab buddies speech . say hello to george soros and pete lewis . ASK THEM FOR SOMEMORE BUCKS . gabler , la's gift to fox etc . just another goofy media star . edward morrow or h l mencken he's not . Try getting out of the beltway , and see the real America . try covering something besides nyc , la and dc .