Misplaced Pages

Public image of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:16, 13 December 2008 editCroctotheface (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers10,855 edits revert--it's clearly a denial; it's not necessary to go beyond even what they said in their reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:19, 12 February 2021 edit undoBrainulator9 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,778 edits adding shellTag: 2017 wikitext editor 
(362 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
#REDIRECT ]
Over the years, there have been several issues highlighted in American political commentator ]'s print and broadcast work. He has drawn criticism from several individuals and groups including ], ],<ref name="Bill Moyers">{{cite web|url=http://www.freepress.net/node/41488|title=Bill O'Reilly Thinks You're Crazy|publisher=Free Press|accessdate=2008-08-28|author=Silver, J}}</ref> ] in addition to ], ], ], ], and ].


{{Redirect category shell|
==Analysis of Bill O'Reilly and his Methods==
{{R from merge}}
===Indiana University study===
In early 2007, researchers from the ] School of Journalism published a report in the ] ''Journalism Studies'' that analyzed the Talking Points Memo segment that opens most '']'' broadcasts. Using analysis techniques developed in the 1930s by the ], the researchers compared O'Reilly's comments and style to a 1939 study of Father ]. Among the conclusions, the study found that O'Reilly used ] far more often than Coughlin and that he was three times more likely to be a "name caller". The report also found "a consistent pattern of O'Reilly casting non-Americans in a negative light. Both ]s and foreigners were constructed as physical threats to the public and never featured in the role of victim or hero."<ref>{{cite web|author = Indiana University|url= http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/5535.html|title = Content analysis of O'Reilly's Rhetoric find spin to be a 'factor'}}</ref><ref>Mike Conway, Maria Elizabeth Grabe, and Kevin Grieves, "," ''Journalism Studies'' 8:2 (2007).</ref>

O'Reilly criticized the study. He asserted that "the terms '],' '],' '],' '],' '],' 'traditional' or ']' were treated as name-calling if they were associated with a problem or social ill." The study's authors responded that O'Reilly was incorrect and that, as the study itself said, "We did not count 'liberal, conservative, centrist' as name-calling unless they were linked to a derogatory qualifier. O'Reilly's reference to "] left" is an example of what we counted as name-calling. Or is the reference to folks of a particular political persuasion as a ] on a ] mission fair and balanced reporting?"<ref name="LATimes-Conway">Mike Conway, Maria Elizabeth Grabe and Kevin Grieves, ], , May 16, 2007. Retrieved May 18, 2007.</ref> O'Reilly also claimed that Indiana University has received millions of dollars from ]' ].<ref>O'Reilly B, , ''Foxnews.com'', May 4, 2007. Accessed May 10, 2007.</ref> The authors responded they had "received no funding for this study". <ref name="LATimes-Conway" />

] producer Ron Mitchell also wrote an op-ed criticizing the study. He echoed O'Reilly's charge that too many terms were counted as name-calling and pointed to "buried headline" as an example. He also accused the authors of seeking to manipulate their research to fit a predetermined outcome. Mitchell argued that by using tools developed for examining propaganda, the researchers presupposed that O'Reilly propagandized.<ref>Mitchell R, , ''LATimes.com (Opinion)'', May 10, 2007, Accessed May 10, 2007.</ref> He also pointed to a section in which the authors describe making changes to their "coding instrument" because the first attempts generated "unacceptably low scores." The authors responded that their study had been extensively vetted through two rounds of anonymous peer review prior to publication and that the methodology that Mitchell criticized was accepted scientific practice put in place to prevent bias, not to create it.<ref name="LATimes-Conway" /> Specifically, a Media Matters response piece said that Mitchell misunderstood what a "coding instrument" is. The methodology called for individual researchers ("coders") to analyze broadcasts and code their findings into a database. The mention of "unacceptably low scores" did not mean that initial methods found too few instances of O'Reilly calling names; instead, it referred to "unacceptably low" consistency between coders analyzing the same data.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200705110001?f=h_latest |title=Media Matters - Peas in a pod: In LA Times op-ed, O'Reilly producer misrepresented IU study to defend host |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

===FAIR's Peter Hart===
Peter Hart, a media analyst for ], co-authored ''The Oh Really Factor: Unspinning Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly.''<ref>{{cite web | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2008-05-20 | url = https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/592/t/6157/shop/item.jsp?storefront_KEY=56&t=&store_item_KEY=285 | title = ''The Oh Really? Factor: Unspinning Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly'' }}</ref> In the 2004 documentary '']'', Hart states that '']'' is a "perfect example" of what is wrong with Fox News Channel, alleging that the ] gets favored treatment over the ].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.outfoxed.org/docs/outfoxed_transcript.pdf | title = Outfoxed - transcript pgs 49-50 | accessdate = 2007-05-05 }}</ref>

=== Selective Editing ===
In an ] broadcast on the ], ] criticized O'Reilly for selectively and misleadingly editing a ], ] interview of ] by ]. In the interview Biden proposed the submission of legislation for an independent commission to look into wrongdoing in the ]'s prison system at ], ] and elsewhere.<ref>{{cite news | year = 2005 | work = ] | url= http://shows.airamericaradio.com/alfrankenshow/node/2803 | title = GOP Woes Lead to Finger-Pointing; Bin Laden Resurfaces in Attack Ads | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref> When O'Reilly analyzed the same interview on ''The Factor'', the broadcast edited out all references Biden made to appointing an independent commission and only presented Biden's call to shut down Guantanamo Bay. O'Reilly accused Biden of misusing the prison abuse story and then presented the missing part of Biden's remarks as his own opinion: "The ] 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 ]ists and their enablers will win another victory." Franken criticized this as a misrepresentation by O'Reilly.<ref>{{cite web | title = Franken vs. O'Reilly | url = http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2671823 | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref>

=== Marvin Kitman and his O'Reilly biography===

In January 2007, ] released a biography ''The Man Who Would Not Shut Up: The Rise of Bill O'Reilly'', written by longtime '']'' TV critic Marvin Kitman. O'Reilly initially cooperated with the author by giving him 29 interviews. According to Kitman, O'Reilly was going to help promote and publicize the book until, just prior to publication, they had a disagreement over the inclusion of a chapter covering Andrea Mackris' 2004 sexual harassment lawsuit against O'Reilly.<ref>{{citenews | first=Frank | last=Lovece | coauthors= | title=O'Reilly bio may surprise fans and foes |date=2007-01-18 | publisher=Newsday.com | url=http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:hsc2TXHKEY0J:www.newsday.com/features/booksmags/ny-etkit5055225jan18,0,883143.story+%22Marvin+Kitman%22+biography+reilly&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=42&gl=us | work= | pages= | accessdate =2007-06-22 }}Accessed via Google cache</ref> After the book came out with the chapter included, Kitman asserts that O'Reilly, instead of promoting the book, attempted to bury it by "intimidating" and "terrorizing" Fox News reporters to keep them from giving Kitman interviews.<ref name="Olbermann-Kitman">{{cite web|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17419934/ |title='Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for March 1 - Countdown with Keith Olbermann - MSNBC.com |publisher=MSNBC |date=2007-03-02 |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

In an interview with Keith Olbermann, Kitman criticized O'Reilly as "kind of a hypocrite" by pointing out O'Reilly's belief that journalists should not attempt to flatter or indulge the people they cover. "Throughout all my interviews," Kitman said, " was telling me that nobody could ever tell him what question to ask, or what to say." However, when the subject was O'Reilly himself, Kitman said that "it turned out that he‘s not so much in favor of telling it like it is, but like it isn‘t".<ref name="Olbermann-Kitman"/> Kitman also said he found it strange that O'Reilly sought to suppress the book when it cast him in a generally favorable light. When speaking to Olbermann, Kitman said, "This is the only book that‘s ever said anything positive about Bill, except for the six he wrote about himself."<ref name="Olbermann-Kitman"/> Several critics agree that the book's portrayal is fair.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6396133.html |title=Social Sciences - 12/15/2006 - Library Journal |publisher=Libraryjournal.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6387979.html |title=Nonfiction Reviews: Week of 11/6/2006 - 11/6/2006 - Publishers Weekly |publisher=Publisher Weekly |date=2006-11-06 |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

===Conflicting comments on teen pregnancy===

O'Reilly criticized the news media for addressing the matter of Vice Presidential nominee ]'s seventeen year-old, unwed daughter's pregnancy. O'Reilly claimed it was a strictly private family matter and that Palin could not be responsible for her daughter's actions. The ]'s Editorial Page Editor ], ] and the ] each noted that O'Reilly himself had several months earlier criticized another unwed pregnant teenager, ], sixteen at the time, labeling her a "pinhead" and calling her parents irresponsible.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/jon-stewart-hits-karl-rov_n_123852.html|title=Jon Stewart Hits Karl Rove, Bill O'Reilly, Dick Morris On Sarah Palin Hypocrisy}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/tucker/stories/2008/09/03/tucked_0903.html|title=Concern, care for Palin’s teen should extend to all}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=Sarah-Palin-Gender-Card|title=Sarah Palin Gender Card}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/cynthia-tucker-vs-bill-or_b_124032.html|title=Cynthia Tucker vs. Bill O'Reilly: Does Palin Deserve Criticism for Daughter's Pregnancy?}}</ref><ref>http://newsone.com/elections/article/jamie-lynn-spears-and-bristol-palin-show-limbaugh-and-oreillys-hypocrisy</ref>
In response to Tucker's criticism, O'Reilly sent a producer to confront her outside her home. During the brief confrontation, Tucker defended her column and her opinion that O'Reilly is a "hypocrite."<ref>{{cite video|people=]|date2=2008-09-08|title=]|publisher=]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/ajc/bookman/entries/2008/09/06/on_this_peaceful_pleasant_atla.html|title=Bill O’Reilly’s Faux bravado}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003846022 |title=Cynthia Tucker and Bill O'Reilly Battle Over Views of Palin and Daughter's Baby |publisher=Editorandpublisher.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref>
<ref>http://.creativeloafing.com/freshloaf/2008/09/04/cynthia-tucker-and-bill-oreilly-are-a-feudin/</ref>

==Critics and Rivals==

O'Reilly has been involved in numerous controversies and rivalries with various people and organizations. Some of the more notable are ], ], ] and ].

===Media Matters for America===
Media Matters for America describes itself as a politically ], ]-based, ] that reports and criticizes what it describes as "conservative ] in the U.S. media."<ref>{{cite web | url = http://mediamatters.org/about_us/ | title = Our Mission: Who We Are | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref> O'Reilly is often the subject of Media Matters' online reports.

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 he claims is funded by George Soros.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171328,00.html | title = Unresolved Problem: Political Smear Sites | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref> Media Matters maintains that it has never received funding from Soros "either directly or through another organization."<ref></ref>
Media Matters founder ] says that he has repeatedly requested that O'Reilly debate him on O'Reilly's program and that O'Reilly has refused. Media Matters also says that O’Reilly has not been able to specifically challenge the accuracy of Media Matters’s reporting.<ref>{{cite web | url= http://mediamatters.org/items/200412160011 | title = Letter from David Brock to Bill O'Reilly | date = ] | first = David | last = Brock | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref>

===Al Franken===
].]]
]'s 2003 book '']'' included a picture of O'Reilly on the cover and a chapter devoted to him inside. In his book, Franken accused O'Reilly of distorting facts both to serve conservative politics and to improve his public image. The two men participated in a panel discussion at the 2003 BookExpoAmerica (which was televised on ]). Franken described O'Reilly's denial of erroneous statements regarding receiving two ]s. After Franken spoke, the two men argued.

Following the ] argument, ] for ] over the use of the phrase "fair and balanced" in the book's title. O'Reilly has generally said that he was not involved in the lawsuit. In an interview with '']'', O'Reilly was asked if he "regrets pushing the lawsuit against Al Franken", to which he replied, "Not at all."<ref>{{cite web|last=Stengel |first=Richard |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,490678,00.html |title=10 Questions For Bill O'Reilly - TIME |publisher=Time.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref> When the case reached court, the presiding judge denied Fox's request for ] and described the case as "wholly without merit, both factually and legally".
<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CE5DE1439F930A1575BC0A9659C8B63
|title="In Courtroom, Laughter at Fox And a Victory For Al Franken"
|accessdate=2008-06-19
|last=Saulny
|first=Susan
|date=2003-08-03
|publisher='']''
}} }}
</ref>
Fox then dropped the suit. O'Reilly later said he had considered personally suing Franken for ] but was told that, as a public person, the ] would be too high to sustain a lawsuit.

===Keith Olbermann===
{{seealso|Countdown with Keith Olbermann#O'Reilly vs. Olbermann}}
Olbermann's show '']'' on ], which airs opposite ''The O'Reilly Factor'', is highly critical of O'Reilly. Olbermann frequently names O'Reilly in the "Worst Persons 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 ], a former producer of his show. Mackris sued O'Reilly for ] and the suit was ] out of court. O'Reilly also sued Mackris for attempted ], but dropped the case when her suit was settled. O'Reilly never refers to Olbermann specifically, usually just saying "NBC News" instead.



===2008 Financial Bailout: Criticism of Right wing radio===
O'Reilly criticized conservative radio hosts for opposing the $700 billion ]. He said, "Most talk radio is conservative-dominated, ideologue, Kool-Aid–drinking idiots." Conservative radio host ] fired back by calling O'Reilly "another mainstream, moron, phony journalist".<ref></ref><ref> of ] and ]</ref>

===Dispute with Bill Moyers and Free Press===
]]]
During the ], O'Reilly sent producer ] to question ]. According to critics, the conduct and goal of Porter Barry was to "ambush" Moyers and set up an attack piece.<ref name="KO Ambush">{{cite video|title=Countdown with Keith Olbermann|people=Olbermann, Kieth|publisher=msnbc|date2=2008-06-10}}</ref><ref name="Bill Moyers"/><!--and we are leaving out the critics side of the argument on a article titled criticism? How is that objective coverage?!--> In his questioning, Porter repetitively asked why Bill Moyers did not agree to go on O'Reilly's show and said that he had played "games" with O'Reilly. Moyers denied playing games and Porter did not specify what those "games" were. <ref name="actual video"><!--Video Is In Countdown Cite, therefore NOT a OR. It is just for directness, also was on FP site (although they replaced it with KO's)-->{{cite video|title=NCMR Footage (Via youtube)|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_2IZT4VgDY|publisher=Uptake/Free Press}}</ref> In response to Barry's questions asking why he wouldn't go on Bill's show, Moyers said that: {{quote|"Rupert Murdoch said the best thing that will come out of the Iraq War would be gasoline at $20 a barrel. Now today when I came here I looked at it and it was 130 and something dollars, when is Rupert going to explain why the war didn't give us $20 a barrel."|Bill Moyers}}
and that he would
{{quote|"come on the O'Reilly show first after Rupert Murdoch has explained why we are not getting $20 a barrel of oil for the Iraq War he said would deliver. Secondly I will come on Bill O'Reilly's show after he accepts my invitation to be on my show unedited. I'll give him a whole hour. You go back and take that message. But let's see if the message gets on the air. And if it doesn't, you know, if you want a job, I may have some recommendations for you."|Bill Moyers}}<ref name="KO Ambush"/>
Furthermore, Moyers called O'Reilly a "pugilist", not a journalist, and claimed that another of Bill O'Reilly's producers had ambushed him previously.<ref name="actual video"/>
After speaking with Moyers, several reporters questioned Porter Barry using what they claimed were the same tactics he used on Moyers, as the producer left.<ref name="actual video"/><ref name="KO Ambush"/>
''The O'Reilly Factor'' did not air the interview, and instead called the NCMR a "far-left fiesta",<ref>{{cite video|title=The O'Reilly Factor|people=O'Reilly, Bill|date2=2008-06-09|publisher=Fox News}}</ref> in addition to previously calling Free Press "crazy" and "fascist".<ref name="Bill Moyers"/>
In response, ], which supports the NCMR, launched a campaign saying O'Reilly was not a journalist, and that he should stop calling himself one. <ref name="Bill Moyers"/>

==Notable controversies==
Bill O'Reilly has been involved in several controversies throughout the years.

=== Malmedy massacre controversy ===
On ], ], retired four-star general ] was a guest on ''The O'Reilly Factor''. A topic of debate on the program was a ruling regarding the potential release of more photos from the infamous ] prison in Iraq. Clark defended the release of the additional Abu Ghraib photos saying the country needed to know what happened. While debating with Clark, O'Reilly incorrectly stated a historical fact of ] when he said "General, you need to look at the ] in World War II and the ] that did it." Historically, German troops were actually responsible for the massacre of 84 American soldiers in the town of ], ] during World War II.<ref>Charles MacDonald (1984). A Time For Trumpets: The Untold Story of the Battle of the Bulge. Bantam Books. ISBN 0-553-34226-6.</ref>

On ], ], Clark again appeared on The O'Reilly Factor. While discussing "the apparent murder of Iraqi civilians in ]", O'Reilly once again incorrectly referred to the Malmedy massacre, stating "In Malmedy, as you know, US forces captured ] 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; been documented."<ref name="transcript">{{cite web|url=http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/05/22/olbermann-demanded-b-d-oreilly-apologize-us-troops-refuses-himself |title=Olbermann Demanded B*****d O&#039;Reilly Apologize to Troops, Refuses Himself &#124; NewsBusters.org |publisher=Newsbusters.org |author=Brad Wilmouth (Bio | Archive) May 22, 2008 - 07:53 ET |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref>

The next day, on ], ], O'Reilly addressed a viewer email regarding the inaccuracy. As reported on ''The O'Reilly Factor'', the email came from a ] Texas viewer named Donn Caldwell and stated: "Bill, you mentioned Malmedy as the site of an American massacre during World War II. It was the other way around, the ] shot down U.S. prisoners." O'Reilly responded to this by saying: "In the heat of the debate with General Clark my statement wasn't clear enough Mr. Caldwell. After Malmedy, some German captives were executed by American troops."<ref name="transcript">Bill</ref>

According to Keith Olbermann, "Fox washed its transcript of O'Reilly's remarks" altering the line to "In '']'', as you know, US forces captured SS forces" when the video clearly shows that O'Reilly said "Malmedy" rather than "Normandy."<ref>{{cite news | first=Keith | last=Olbermann | coauthors= | title=]| date=2006-06-01 | publisher= | url =http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHUGCkROwJE | work =MSNBC | pages = | accessdate = 2008-06-06 | language = En}}</ref>

This second instance of O'Reilly misstating the facts of the massacre, combined with his denial of doing so and the apparent cover up in the transcript by Fox News prompted a harsh response on the ], ] edition of ]'s ''Countdown with Keith Olbermann.''<ref>{{cite news | first=Keith | last=Olbermann | coauthors= | title=Keith Olbermann Neuters Bill O'Reilly | date=2006-06-02 | publisher= | url =http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2KU02lsfH8&NR=1 | work =MSNBC | pages = | accessdate = 2007-12-21 | language = }}</ref> Countdown showed video clips of O'Reilly making these incorrect statements from the October 3 and May 30 editions of ''The O'Reilly Factor'' and showed the clip of O'Reilly addressing the viewer email the following day.
Olbermann lambasted O'Reilly, calling him a "false patriot who would rather be loud than right." He also compared the editing of the transcript to ]'s ].

After the airing, Fox News corrected the afore-mentioned transcript on June 2, which was noted in a follow up report on ''Countdown with Keith Olbermann'' the following Monday.<ref>{{cite news | first=Keith | last=Olbermann | coauthors= | title=Keith Olbermann Points Out Bill O'Reilly Yet To Apologize | date=2006-06-05 | publisher=YouTube | url =http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GebrR6BNPsw&watch_response | work =MSNBC Countdown with Keith Olbermann | pages = | accessdate = 2007-12-21 | language = }}</ref> The ''Media Matters for America'' website also posted a report detailing the correction of the transcript that same day.<ref>{{cite news | first= | last= | coauthors= | title=UPDATE: Fox News corrected transcript of O'Reilly's false claim U.S. committed atrocities at Malmédy | date=2006-06-05 | publisher=Mediamatters.org | url =http://mediamatters.org/items/200606030002 | work = | pages = | accessdate = 2007-12-21 | language = }}</ref>

===Jeremy Glick===
On his televised program on ], ], O'Reilly interviewed Jeremy Glick (co-author of ''Another World is Possible''), whose father had been killed in the ]. Glick had signed an anti-war ad that made comments relating the attacks to atrocities in ], ] and ]. After Glick accused O'Reilly of evoking "9/11 to rationalize everything from domestic plunder to ] aggression worldwide", and also of evoking "sympathy with the 9/11 families" to do the same, O'Reilly became visibly angered with Glick and said, "That's a bunch of crap. I've done more for the 9/11 families by their own admission &mdash; I've done more for them than you will ever hope to do". At one point in the interview, O'Reilly told Glick to "shut up" and said, "I don't really care what you think." The short and heated segment ended with O'Reilly giving the command to his staff to cut Glick's microphone.<ref>Jack Shafer, ], , Aug. 28, 2003. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2007.</ref><ref>John Colapinto, ], , Aug. 11, 2004. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2007.</ref>

In an interview with '']'', Glick said that O’Reilly said to him after the interview, “Get out of my studio before I tear you to fucking pieces.” Glick also says that he insulted O’Reilly’s show off-camera.<ref></ref> O'Reilly aired the segment, which was recorded "live to tape"<ref>{{cite web|author=Nox Solutions |url=http://www.billoreilly.com/audienceletters;jsessionid=E6A7BB766D6BF7005C74537CFC7437CF |title=BillOReilly.com: Behind the Scenes Q & A |publisher=Billoreilly.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>, then said 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." Afterward, O'Reilly apologized for Glick's appearance on the show and then accused Glick of touting ], falsely claiming that Glick said the Bush administration planned the 9/11 attacks. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200509220012?f=s_search |title=Media Matters - O&#39;Reilly again falsely accused former guest of claiming that Bush &quot;orchestrat[ed&#93; 9-11&quot |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref>

===Barbara Boxer comments===
In January 2005, O'Reilly criticized ] ] for allegedly calling ] unpatriotic. Boxer had said, "I personally believe that your loyalty to the mission you were given, to sell this war, overwhelmed your respect for the truth." Media Matters criticized O'Reilly for misquoting her several times as referring to Rice's "respect for the troops".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200501250001?f=s_search |title=Media Matters - O'Reilly hatchet job on Boxer filled with lies |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref> When several callers attempted to correct the error on O'Reilly's show, he rebuked them.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200502010001?f=s_search |title=Media Matters - O'Reilly rebuffed two callers' attempts to correct his misquotation of Boxer |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

=== Peabody Award ===
O'Reilly incorrectly claimed at a ], ] speech at ] in ], ], that '']'', a show he had previously anchored, had won a ]. After watching subsequent broadcast of the speech on ], Al Franken performed a search on ] and found three previous occasions dating back to ], ] 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".<ref name="fair-oreillyness">{{cite news | url = http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1070 | title = Bill O'Reilly's Sheer O'Reillyness | first = Seth | last = Ackerman | coauthors = Peter Hart | work = Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author = Franken, Al | title = ]|publisher = Dutton Books|year = 2003|id = ISBN 0-525-94764-7}}</ref> After Franken called O'Reilly for a statement, O'Reilly acknowledged that he had made an error and issued a correction on his show. ''Inside Edition'' had in fact won a ] and not a Peabody.<ref name="polk">{{cite news | url = http://www.brooklyn.liu.edu/polk/prev/prev90.html | title = The George Polk Awards for Journalism | publisher = Long Island University | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref> 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.<ref name="polk"/><ref>{{cite book|author = Franken, Al | title = ]|publisher = Dutton Books|year = 2003|id = ISBN 0-525-94764-7}}</ref>

Franken called Lloyd Grove, a reporter for ''],'' who called O'Reilly and asked him about his statements. O'Reilly said, "So I got mixed up between a Peabody Award and a Polk Award". Grove published the story on ], ] in his column "The Reliable Source".<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A6352-2001Mar1&notFound=true | title = The Reliable Source | first = Lloyd | last = Grove | work = ] | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref>

Robert Reno of '']'' wrote an opinion piece that used this example to argue that O'Reilly cares more about self-aggrandizement than ]. O'Reilly criticized Reno's article as an example of "attack journalism" and said that "you can't find a transcript where I said ".<ref>{{cite web|last=Maslin |first=Janet |url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE1DC1438F932A3575AC0A9659C8B63 |title=BOOKS OF THE TIMES; Franken Retorts, You Decide - New York Times |publisher=Query.nytimes.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref> He has rejected the characterization that he was lying and maintained that he never said that he personally won any such award. Franken and other critics have pointed to O'Reilly's use of "we" to rebut O'Reilly's contention.

=== Boycott of French goods ===
In March 2003, O'Reilly called for a ] of ] products and services sold in the United States, due to ] ]'s stance on the ].<ref name="mmfa051027">{{cite web | last = Schweber-Koren | last = Raphael | date = ] | title = O'Reilly again trumpeted "annoying" French boycott | url = http://mediamatters.org/items/200510270012 | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2005-12-27}}</ref> In ], ]; O'Reilly said, “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 does not exist. O'Reilly then said about two months later that the boycott caused France to lose $138 million in business compared to the previous year.<ref>{{cite web | author = G.W. | date = ] | title = O'Reilly defended old lies exposed by Jack Mathews and MMFA, told new ones | url = http://mediamatters.org/items/200407080001 | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2007-01-19}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | date = ] | publisher = ] | author = G.W. | url = http://mediamatters.org/items/200405020006 | title = FOX's O'Reilly fabricated evidence of success of purported boycott}}</ref>

The ] and Media Matters for America have said that French exports to the US increased during the period of O'Reilly's boycott, citing ] figures.<ref>{{cite news | year = 2005 | publisher = Canadian Broadcasting Corporation | url = http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html | title = Sticks and Stones }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | date = ] | publisher = ] | author = R.S.K. | url = http://mediamatters.org/items/200508020002 | title = O'Reilly boycotts truth to spin French boycott; falsely claimed it 'hurt France'}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | year = 2006 | publisher = U.S. Census Bureau | author = U.S. Census Bureau | url = http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/imports/c4279.html | title = U.S. Imports from France from 2001 to 2005 }}</ref>

In May 2007 O'Reilly announced he was ending the boycott upon the election of ] as French President.<ref>{{cite web|last=Pitney |first=Nico |url=http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/08/oreilly-lifts-boycott-of-france/ |title=Think Progress » O’Reilly lifts boycott of France |publisher=Thinkprogress.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

===Controversy about O'Reilly's childhood home and upbringing===
O'Reilly has long said that his inspiration for speaking up for average Americans, or what he calls "the folks", are his ] roots. He has pointed to his boyhood home in ] as a credential. In an interview with '']'', O'Reilly's mother said that her family lived in ],<ref name="lifeoforeilly">{{cite news | url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62722-2000Dec12?language=printer | work = ] | title = The Life of O'Reilly | first = Paul | last = Farhi | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref> which is a few miles from Levittown. Citing this interview, ], ], and others have accused O'Reilly of distorting his background to create a more working-class image.

O'Reilly has countered that ''The Washington Post'' misquoted his mother,<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/story/185118p-160369c.html | work = ] | title = Gloves of fairness are off | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-04 | first = Bill | last = O'Reilly }}</ref> and he said his mother still lives in his childhood home, which was built by William Levitt. O'Reilly placed a copy of the house's mortgage, which shows a Levittown postal address, on his website. Levittown was redrawn into a squarish shape<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.nycroads.com/history/1960_metro-4/ | title = New York Metro Maps (1960) | publisher = nycroads.com | accessdate = 2007-03-04 }}</ref> to conform with the 11756 ], which was introduced in 1963. After this time the O'Reilly home was located in ]. On a 2005 episode of '']'', Franken invited a ] historian onto the show, and she said that O'Reilly's statement about having lived in "the Westbury section of Levittown" was generally accurate and that the house could fairly be described as being in either town. She also said that O'Reilly's neighborhood was not the "hardscrabble" environment he suggested it was.<ref>The Al Franken Show, October 28, 2005.</ref>

O'Reilly has also said, "You don't come from any lower than I came from on an economic scale"<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.observer.com/node/52060 | work = ] | title = Fox News Superstar Bill O'Reilly Wants to Oppose Hillary in 2006! | first = Jason | last = Gay | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-06-19 }}</ref> and that his father "never earned more than $35,000 a year in his life." ] has calculated that adjusted for ], $35,000 in 1978 would be worth over $90,000 in 2001 dollars.<ref name="fair-oreillyness"/> O'Reilly has retorted that his father's $35,000 income only came at the end of his long career, at which point O'Reilly would have been long independent of his parents. <ref>* {{cite book | first=Bill | last=O'Reilly | authorlink=Bill O'Reilly (commentator) | year=2003 | title=Who's Looking Out For You? }}</ref>

=== Inaccurate reporting on "lesbian gangs" ===
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance (]) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (]) have each separately criticized O'Reilly for featuring a story about a "national epidemic" of teenage ] gangs who carry pink pistols and try to indoctrinate young girls into lesbianism. GLAAD and the SPLC outlined ways in which the sourcing for the story was flimsy, false, or omitted pertinent facts.<ref name="glaad1">{{cite web|url=http://www.glaad.org/action/calls_detail.php?id=4031 |title=GLAAD: Update: Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor Offers Unsubstantiated Claims in "Lesbian Gang Epidemic" Segment |publisher=Glaad.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?aid=274&site_area=1 |title=SPLCenter.org: O'Reilly and lesbian gangs |publisher=Splcenter.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref> Rashad Robinson, GLAAD's Senior Director of Media Programs, said, "This type of inaccurate ] perpetuates dangerous stereotypes about lesbians and feeds a climate of ], ] and violence."<ref name="glaad1"/> O’Reilly acknowledged that the story was overhyped, but defended it. "It’s a valid story," he said. "Is it out of control? No." He continued, "I’m not in fear of the lesbians beating me up tonight." Robinson called O'Reilly's response a "non-apology apology" and added that "the story is a complete and total fabrication, and he still has failed to offer one shred of evidence as to why it’s legitimate news."<ref>"," ''Congressional Quarterly'' (16 July 2007).</ref>

===Virginia Tech shooting===
On ], ] a free concert was scheduled in remembrance of the ]. The concert was scheduled, with headline acts including ], ], ], and ].<ref name=vt.edu>. The ]; the bloodiest school massacre in U.S. history, had taken place earlier that year, on April 16, 2007, when student ], killed 32 and wounded more, before committing ]. Retrieved on August 1, 2007.</ref> When it was announced that Nas was to perform, O'Reilly and Fox News Channel denounced the concert and called for the removal of the ]per citing "violent" lyrics on songs including "Shoot 'Em Up", "Got Urself A Gun", and "Made You Look". During his ''Talking Points Memo'' segment for ], ], an argument erupted in which O'Reilly mentioned not only Nas' lyrical content but the fact that Nas had a "gun conviction" on his ].<ref> Bill O'Reilly.com. August 15, 2007.</ref> Responding to O'Reilly, Nas in an interview with ] said:<ref>Reid, Shaheem. . ]: September 6, 2007.</ref>
{{quote|He doesn't understand the younger generation. He deals with the past. The people he represents are ], older, a generation that has nothing to do with the reality of what's happening now with my generation. ... He's not really on my radar. People like him are supposed to be taught and people like me are supposed to let ]s like him know. I don't take him serious. His shit is all about getting ratings or whatever. I wouldn't honor anything Bill O'Reilly has to say. It just shows you what bloodsuckers do: They abuse something like the Virginia Tech for show ratings. You can't talk to a person like that.}}

===American Red Cross and the United Way===
After the ], O'Reilly devoted substantial time on his television show and wrote pieces accusing the ] and ] of failing 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 attacks.<ref>, Richard Johnson with Paula Froelich and Chris Wilson, PapillonsArtPalace.com, November 2, 2001</ref><ref>, Bill O'Reilly, WorldNetDaily, December 13, 2001</ref>
O'Reilly claimed that the organizations misrepresented their intentions for the money being raised by not distributing all of the 9/11 relief fund to the victims.<ref>, Kevin Curran, NewsMax.com, October 31, 2001</ref> Actor George Clooney responded to O'Reilly's claims, accusing O'Reilly of misstating facts (including confusing the United Way with the Red Cross), sloppy reporting and harming the relief effort by inciting "panic" among potential donors.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,1016211,00.html |title=George Clooney Bites Back at Bill O'Reilly - Asia Quake 2004, Bill O'Reilly, George Clooney : People.com |publisher=People.com |author=Sharon Cotliar and Stephen M. Silverman |date=November 07, 2008 |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref> Congressional hearings were called on the matter and an investigation by New York State Attorney General ] took place. Bernadette Healey, the president of the Red Cross, resigned shortly thereafter.<ref>, Grant Williams, Philanthropy.com, October 26, 2001</ref> In a statement before the House Ways and Means Committee in November 2001, Congressman ] 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.<ref>, Hearing on Response by Charitable Organizations to the Recent Terrorist Attacks, Committee on Ways & Means, November 8, 2001</ref>

===Military recruitment in San Francisco schools===
On ] ], the voters of ] approved ], 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."<ref>{{cite web | author = San Francisco Department of Elections | year = 2005 | title = No Military Recruiters in Public Schools, Scholarships for Education and Job Training | url = http://www.sfgov.org/site/election_index.asp?id=33918 | publisher = San Francisco Department of Elections | accessdate = 2005-12-27 }}</ref> 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 ], 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 ] 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 ]? Go ahead."<ref>{{cite news | last = Garofoli | first = Joe | date = ] | title = Talk host's towering rant: S.F. not worth saving | url = http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/11/MNGFMFMNV41.DTL | work =San Francisco Chronicle | accessdate = 2005-12-27 }}</ref> San Francisco Supervisor ] responded, calling for O'Reilly to be fired from Fox.<ref>{{cite web | last = Garofoli | first = Joe | date = ] | title = Local leaders unleash vitriol at O'Reilly TV host should be fired for comments about city, Daly says | url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/11/12/COIT.TMP | work = San Francisco Chronicle | accessdate = 2005-12-27 }}</ref> O'Reilly refused to apologize, saying his comments were "obviously ]."<ref>{{cite web | last = O'Reilly | first = Bill | authorlink=Bill O'Reilly (commentator) | date = ] | url = http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,176009,00.html | title = San Francisco... Part III | publisher = FOX News Network, LLC (foxnews.com, "Talking Points,";;) | accessdate = 2005-12-27 }}</ref> The proposition's author, ], appeared on ''The O'Reilly Factor'' in response and stated that to the people of San Francisco, the proposition itself was "no laughing matter."

===Shawn Hornbeck===
] (a former missing child) was found living with 41 year old ] on ], ]. Hornbeck had been kidnapped by Devlin in 2002 at the age of 11. After being discovered, it was revealed that at some point in that four 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 ]. On ], ]'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 Hornbeck had piercings and that O'Reilly himself had once taught high school. Following his comments, the ] Chapter of the ] announced that O'Reilly's appearance at a fundraiser where he was to give the keynote address was cancelled. He was replaced by ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200702120007 |title=Media Matters - O&#39;Reilly ousted as keynote speaker by National Center for Missing and Exploited Children |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref> The ''New York Daily News'' reported that "O'Reilly responded that he may find it necessary to apologize to Shawn's parents, Pam and Craig Akers - but not until he learns more.
'This is a complicated, disturbing story,' he said. 'No question this monster Devlin made threats and intimidated Shawn. But teenagers have brains, and Shawn had the freedom to get away if he wanted to.' Shawn was 11 when he was kidnapped."<ref> Christina Boyle, ''New York Daily News'' (19 January 2007) p. 23.</ref>

===Harlem restaurant comments===
On the ], ] edition of '']'', prior to having a discussion about racial ]s with fellow Fox News commentator and author ],<ref></ref> O'Reilly mentioned a lunch he had with ] at Sylvia's restaurant in ]. Before Williams joined the discussion, he said that he "couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City. I mean, it was exactly the same, even though it's run by blacks, primarily black patronship." Later on the show, while discussing how white America feels that ]pers dominate black culture, Williams stated, "Oh, and it’s just so awful. It’s just so awful because, I mean, it’s literally the sewer come to the surface, and now people take it that the sewer is the whole story", to which O'Reilly responded, "That’s right. That’s right. There wasn't one person in Sylvia's who was screaming, 'M-Fer, I want more iced tea".<ref></ref><ref name="foxnews1">{{dead link|date=November 2008}}</ref><ref></ref>

O'Reilly also said, "I think that black Americans are starting to think more and more for themselves, getting away from the Sharptons and the ] and people trying to lead them into a race-based culture. They're just trying to figure it out. 'Look, I can make it. If I work hard and get educated, I can make it.'"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270001?f=h_latest |title=Media Matters - CNN's Roland Martin on O'Reilly comment: "] of ] said that the notion that black people are just now starting to value education is "ridiculous" and that the notion that black people let Sharpton or Jackson think for them is "nuts". He suggested that O'Reilly's view was "based upon a stereotype" and called on O'Reilly and others who think like him to "wake up".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0709/25/ltm.01.html |title=CNN.com - Transcripts |publisher=Transcripts.cnn.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

Karl Frisch, spokesman for Media Matters, said O'Reilly's comments were "ignorant and racially charged." O'Reilly responded in his ''Talking Points Memo'' that he believed that Media Matters took him out of context. He defended his comments by saying, "It was an attempt to tell the radio audience that there is no difference black, white, we’re all Americans. The stereotypes they see on television are not true."<ref></ref> O'Reilly said, "Media Matters distorted the entire conversation and implied I was ] for condemning racism."<ref>{{cite news| |url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298120,00.html |title=FOXNews.com - CNN Goes Over to the Dark Side - Bill O’Reilly &#124; The O’Reilly Factor |publisher=Foxnews.com |date=September 26, 2007 |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

In an interview with Keith Olbermann, Eugene Robinson of ''The Washington Post'' said that O'Reilly's initial remarks were "casually racist" and that O'Reilly's attempts to cast himself as the victim of a smear campaign were disingenuous.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270005?f=i_latest |title=Media Matters - Wash. Post 's Robinson on O'Reilly: "]'', ] said that, contrary to O'Reilly's position, "The more context you hear, the worse it gets." Geist also said that O'Reilly might not understand the nature of his comments or why they would spark controversy.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270002 |title=Media Matters - Scarborough: Fox's coverage of O'Reilly's comments suggests he "has nothing to do with" controversy |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

On the ] blog, author ] wrote that the comments "looked and sounded dumb and racist", but O'Reilly "didn't say anything that was earth shatteringly offensive" or anything that others might not say in private.<ref></ref> Also on the Huffington Post, Eric Deggans, chairman of the Black Journalists Media Monitoring Committee, said that O'Reilly's history of using racially charged rhetoric suggests that he stereotyped black people as "either vocal protesters like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson or straight-up thugs like ]" Deggans said that he found it unfortunate that it "took a lunch with Al Sharpton" for O'Reilly to realize otherwise.<ref>{{cite web|author=Eric Deggans |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-deggans/judging-bill-oreilly-wh_b_65914.html |title=Eric Deggans: Judging Bill O'Reilly: Why His Comments About Lunch in Harlem Matter - Media on The Huffington Post |publisher=Huffingtonpost.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

] said the criticism of O'Reilly was “rank dishonesty” and that the original comments "had nothing to do with racist ranting by anybody except by these idiots at CNN."<ref></ref> Williams went on to say it was "frustrating" that the media try to criticize anyone who wanted to have an honest discussion about race.<ref name="foxnews1"/>

On the ], host ] said, "I thought Bill O'Reilly was saying that we should not be surprised." He said O'Reilly's point is that "the small group of people" who think that certain rappers represent all African Americans "need to get out and live life a little bit". Lauer later speculated that O'Reilly would want to get "a do-over" and phrase his comments differently.<ref>, NBC, September 26, 2007.</ref>

Following the controversy, Jesse Jackson made his first appearance on the ''O'Reilly Factor''.<ref></ref> Jackson asked O'Reilly what he had intended by his comments and said that "to underestimate the civility of black people was offensive" but that the controversy over O'Reilly's remarks had obscured other, more important issues.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200709280007 |title=Media Matters - Rev. Jackson to O'Reilly: "[T&#93;o underestimate the civility of blacks was insulting to many people" |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref>

==="Lynching party" comment===
During the ], ] edition of '']'', O'Reilly dedicated the program to a discussion about a ] of ]'s wife, ], who had said at a campaign rally, "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country.” O'Reilly questioned whether Mrs. Obama loved her country and, in response to a caller's comment that she did not, said "I don't want to go on a ] party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200802210008 |title=Media Matters - O'Reilly attacked as "far-left loon" caller who asked if he would apologize for "lynching party" comment |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref><ref>{{cite episode|title=The Radio Factor|series=]|airdate=2008-02-19}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/7325072|title=Michelle Obama Clarifies `proud' Remark}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/02/bill_oreilly_doesnt_want_to_ly.html|title=Bill O’Reilly Doesn’t Want to Lynch Michelle Obama Until He Is 100 Percent Positive She Hates America}}</ref> Columnist Eugene Robinson of the ''Washington Post'' criticized O'Reilly for his remarks. "There's certainly nothing at all funny or remotely appropriate about the use of a lynching reference to talk about Michelle Obama," he said. "It's -- I'm almost speechless."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/departments/syndicates/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003713919|title=Columnist Slams Bill O'Reilly's 'Lynching' Comment}}</ref> On his February 21 broadcast of ''The O'Reilly Factor'', O'Reilly said, "I'm sorry if my statement offended anybody."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200802210014|title=O'Reilly on his Michelle Obama remarks: "I'm sorry if my statement offended anybody"
}}</ref>

===Barney Frank===
O'Reilly was criticized for his conduct during an October 2, 2008 interview with Massachusetts Congressman ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/10/barney-frank-bill-oreilly-coward.php |title=Fresh Intelligence : Radar Online : Barney Frank vs. Bill O'Reilly |publisher=Radaronline.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/fox-news-barney-frank-esc_b_132347.html |title=David Fiderer: Fox News: Barney Frank Escaped Blame for Fannie Mae's Problems Because He Is Gay |publisher=Huffingtonpost.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref> Frank appeared on the O'Reilly Factor to respond to O'Reilly's criticism of him for the ongoing financial crisis. O'Reilly had blamed Frank and others for the crisis, said he wanted to punch him and called him a "big, fat toad."<ref>http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0908/OReilly_blasts_Frank_Big_fat_toad.html</ref> When Frank began to explain his past actions regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, O'Reilly interrupted, began yelling at Frank, and called him a "coward." One media critic described O'Reilly's conduct of the interview as bullying and "aggressive stupidity."<ref name="rawstory1">{{cite web|url=http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Bill_OReilly_shouts_down_Barney_Frank_1003.html |title=The Raw Story &#124; O'Reilly taunts Frank: 'Come on you coward, say the truth' |publisher=Rawstory.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-19}}</ref> Another wrote that O'Reilly "appeared determined to talk over Frank and shout him down, preventing any clear take on whether -- or to what degree -- Frank is actually responsible for the problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or whether O'Reilly was merely looking for a scapegoat to blame for the lost millions of investors."<ref name="rawstory1"/> Frank responded by asking O'Reilly to stop yelling, said O'Reilly's behavior was "boorish" and that his "stupidity" prevented rational discussion of the issue.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view/2008_10_04_Barney_Frank__Bill_O_Reilly_turn_nasty_in_on-air_battle/srvc=home&position=also |title=Barney Frank, Bill O&rsquo;Reilly turn nasty in on-air battle - BostonHerald.com |publisher=News.bostonherald.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/bill-oreilly-and-barney-f_n_131569.html |title=Bill O'Reilly And Barney Frank Face-Off Over Fannie & Freddie |publisher=Huffingtonpost.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref>
After the incident, O'Reilly suggested that his yelling at Frank was an act of political theater to make the point that Frank was a "villain."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newshounds.us/2008/10/08/bill_oreilly_suggests_barney_frank_attack_was_political_theater.php#more |title=News Hounds: Bill O'Reilly Suggests Barney Frank Attack Was Political Theater |publisher=Newshounds.us |date=Reported by Deborah - October 8, 2008 |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref>

===Disputed claims involving the "War on Christmas"===
Media Matters for America has criticized what O'Reilly calls the "]." Media Matters posted several reports on their website with links to news articles from ]’s ], the '']'',<ref>{{cite news | first = Dennis B | last = Roddy | work = ] | url = http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05336/616063.stm | title = Religious stamps not outlawed after all | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-01-19 }}</ref> and the '']'',<ref>{{cite news | first = Neely | last = Tucker | work = ] | url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/19/AR2005121901802.html | title = Have a Holly, Jolly Holiday | date = ] | accessdate = 2007-01-19 }}</ref> as well as one retraction by O’Reilly himself<ref>{{cite web
| publisher = ] | date = ] | author = S.G. | url = http://mediamatters.org/items/200512210005 | title = O'Reilly admits he falsely accused Plano of banning red and green clothing}}</ref> noting that several of O'Reilly’s allegations to support his theory were either false or inaccurate.<ref>{{
cite web | date = ] | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2007-01-19 | author = J.B. | url = http://mediamatters.org/items/200512130005 | title = O'Reilly falsely claimed that 'spiritual' Christmas stamps are no longer being offered }}</ref><ref name="WNEM">{{cite news | year = 2005 | publisher = WNEM TV-5 | author = S.G. | url = http://www.wnem.com/Global/story.asp?S=4235657 | title = Saginaw Township on the ''The O'Reilly Factor'' Radio Program }}</ref> O'Reilly was also criticized by Media Matters for America for telling a Jewish caller to his radio show that if he was offended by the introduction of Christmas in public schools, then he "gotta go to Israel." <ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200412070004?f=s_search |title=Media Matters - O&#39;Reilly to Jewish caller: &quot;[I&#93;f you are really offended, you gotta go to Israel&quot |publisher=Mediamatters.org |date= |accessdate=2008-11-08}}</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{Bill O'Reilly}}

{{blpwatch|from=05/2008|reason=Controversial media figure.}}

]

Latest revision as of 22:19, 12 February 2021

Redirect to:

This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
  • From a merge: This is a redirect from a page that was merged into another page. This redirect was kept in order to preserve the edit history of this page after its content was merged into the content of the target page. Please do not remove the tag that generates this text (unless the need to recreate content on this page has been demonstrated) or delete this page.
When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.