• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Bill O'Reilly Bans People From Fox News Channel?

D

dampier

Twice now, Bill O'Reilly has told his radio and TV audience that he has personally seen to it that David Brock and/or anyone associated with the Media Matters organization have been "banned" from either appearing on his show or -ANY- show or newscast aired on Fox News Channel.

I'm not interested in the political reasons for this - everyone knows O'Reilly and Media Matters despise each other, but I am interested in whether a talk show host on a news channel has been granted the actual power to see to it that individuals or organizations he doesn't like are not allowed to appear on an entire news channel. At first I figured this was O'Reilly swagger and hyperbole, but he claims he is 100% serious.

Is their precedent for this on networks or other news organizations be it for political or other reasons? It would seem counterproductive to a news channel.
 
Mr Brock has written the show to be on I believe three times. His letters to the O'Reilly show are published for the world to read on Media Matters. I dont agree when you say Media Matters "despises" O'Reilly....I believe he is just "low-hanging" fruit for people who are in the business of debunking information or clearing up inaccurate information personally reported by O'Reilly.

Im not sure why Bill thinks its important to "ban" Media matters. No Spin (IMHO) should mean that the person or organization would get to respond to the myriad of nasty things said. Wouldn't that be fair ....and dare I say balanced too? Im also ignoring the political views....just focuing on the ease of providing information on debunking him on his own words or choosing to display his words for the world to view and listen to. Anyone on Media Matters can provide comments to agree, support, or disagree with how the article is posted.

If you want to see Bill O'Reilly at his absoulute worst behavior...there is a video on Media Matters and I think posted elsewhere of his appearance on the CNBC Tim Russert show....he can barely control his rage when challenged by Paul Krugman. I actually saw the original show when it aired. I thought it was a bad performance by o'reilly by behavior only.

Ill see if I can post the link. If not, anyone can go to media matters to find it. Or one can go to crooks and liars or use google to search for the video. It was posted in several locations.


> Twice now, Bill O'Reilly has told his radio and TV audience
> that he has personally seen to it that David Brock and/or
> anyone associated with the Media Matters organization have
> been "banned" from either appearing on his show or -ANY-
> show or newscast aired on Fox News Channel.
>
> I'm not interested in the political reasons for this -
> everyone knows O'Reilly and Media Matters despise each
> other, but I am interested in whether a talk show host on a
> news channel has been granted the actual power to see to it
> that individuals or organizations he doesn't like are not
> allowed to appear on an entire news channel. At first I
> figured this was O'Reilly swagger and hyperbole, but he
> claims he is 100% serious.
>
> Is their precedent for this on networks or other news
> organizations be it for political or other reasons? It
> would seem counterproductive to a news channel.
>
 
>>
> > Is their precedent for this on networks or other news
> > organizations be it for political or other reasons? It
> > would seem counterproductive to a news channel.
> >
>

Going back to the 1950's I'm sure the news divisions of CBS and NBC pulled some of these stunts to keep certain individuals off their programming...they just werent as blunt abou it....
 
> Mr Brock has written the show to be on I believe three
> times. His letters to the O'Reilly show are published for
> the world to read on Media Matters. I dont agree when you
> say Media Matters "despises" O'Reilly....I believe he is
> just "low-hanging" fruit for people who are in the business
> of debunking information or clearing up inaccurate
> information personally reported by O'Reilly.

Well, Brock's appearances in the media suggests he at least doesn't respect the guy. :) But I'm not interested as much in the political side of this as I am as to the history of channels or networks that have a policy, public or otherwise, for banning individuals from their airwaves. I don't know if this is unprecedented, or just another in a long line of prior incidents.
 
> >>
> > > Is their precedent for this on networks or other news
> > > organizations be it for political or other reasons? It
> > > would seem counterproductive to a news channel.
> > >
> >
>
> Going back to the 1950's I'm sure the news divisions of CBS
> and NBC pulled some of these stunts to keep certain
> individuals off their programming...they just werent as
> blunt abou it....
>
Agreed. Going back to the civil rights era, many local stations "effectively" banned certain newscasters from their stations.

The KEY as noted is they weren't "as blunt" about it.

Actually I think promoting it is a ratings things. I find O'Reilly to be less concerned with ideals and more concerned about ratings. It seems to me he'd change his tune to fit whatever would get him a higher rating.<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
 
> > Mr Brock has written the show to be on I believe three
> > times. His letters to the O'Reilly show are published for
> > the world to read on Media Matters. I dont agree when you
> > say Media Matters "despises" O'Reilly....I believe he is
> > just "low-hanging" fruit for people who are in the
> business
> > of debunking information or clearing up inaccurate
> > information personally reported by O'Reilly.
>
> Well, Brock's appearances in the media suggests he at least
> doesn't respect the guy. :) But I'm not interested as
> much in the political side of this as I am as to the history
> of channels or networks that have a policy, public or
> otherwise, for banning individuals from their airwaves. I
> don't know if this is unprecedented, or just another in a
> long line of prior incidents.
>
I'm sure every network has a list of people they don't want on for one reason or another, whether the reasons are political, personal, or both. FNC just tends to be more blatant about it than the rest. (Have Al Franken or Jeremy Glick ever been on another FNC show after they pissed off O'Reilly? They have to be on the list also.)

And David Brock's just a complete attention prostitute anyway. Does anyone on either side of the political spectrum respect him anymore?
 
> Well, Brock's appearances in the media suggests he at least
> doesn't respect the guy. :) But I'm not interested as
> much in the political side of this as I am as to the history
> of channels or networks that have a policy, public or
> otherwise, for banning individuals from their airwaves. I
> don't know if this is unprecedented, or just another in a
> long line of prior incidents.
>

Can't disagree with your post....i don't know of many instances where an organization is "banned"
 
> > >>
> > > > Is their precedent for this on networks or other news
> > > > organizations be it for political or other reasons?
> It
> > > > would seem counterproductive to a news channel.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > Going back to the 1950's I'm sure the news divisions of
> CBS
> > and NBC pulled some of these stunts to keep certain
> > individuals off their programming...they just werent as
> > blunt abou it....
> >
> Agreed. Going back to the civil rights era, many local
> stations "effectively" banned certain newscasters from their
> stations.
>
> The KEY as noted is they weren't "as blunt" about it.
>
> Actually I think promoting it is a ratings things. I find
> O'Reilly to be less concerned with ideals and more concerned
> about ratings. It seems to me he'd change his tune to fit
> whatever would get him a higher rating.

He forgets that the "O" in O'Reilly doesn't stand for omnipotent. All his self-perceived power has gone to his head again. It usually flows the other direction where it is appropriately disposed.
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom