With Anchorwoman Dead, Can O'Reilly Be Next?

I knew Anchorwoman's awful ratings would prompt Fox to put the show on a short leash. But even I never imagined the network would cancel the series after just one airing -- bowing to the realities of low viewership where arguments about ethics and taste failed.

My only concern now: Did the show flame out because it got so much bad press before it aired? Or does this just prove that young people could give a crap about the news, even when its presented inside a comedy/parody/reality show?

And now that Anchorwoman's down, maybe the tsunami of bad karma produced by the show can be directed to the next spoke in our Media Axis of Evil, Bill O'Reilly.

Courtesy of my man Amani Channel, here's one of the best rebuttals to O'Reilly's barely-concealed prejudice that I've ever seen. 

Comments

[Doug]

Oops, my bad. Yeah, Jay Smooth is in the video.

[Eric Deggans]

thanks for the comment, Doug. I too hate to see knee jerk categorizing of views, because i think the conservatives who often do this are being played by their own side -- fooled into supporting politicians whose policies they really wouldn't agree with if they took time to review their full record.

At any rate, i wanted to make another thing clear: the guy in the video isn't amani -- Mr. channel just sent me the link, for which i am grateful.

[Doug]

Thanks for the video there Eric. I'm sure this guy (Amani Channel) is dismissed as having a "far left wing liberal agenda" and accused of purveying a "constant stream of left-wing propaganda". But it just sounds like someone's analysis. Opinionated analysis, yes, but I don't see where this increasingly ridiculous "liberal/conservative" pigeonholing even applies at all. But I guess I'm just another Times reader poisoned by the "leftist spin" that "has been the norm for so long."

Really folks, these arguments are so hollow. I think there are many robo-commenters here.

[EXCELSIOR]

My biggest problem with o'Reilly is his dishonesty and unfair behavior, not his opinions...which I also think are wrong...

Should Nancy Grace be off the air for the same reasons.

[Alan]

My biggest problem with o'Reilly is his dishonesty and unfair behavior, not his opinions...which I also think are wrong...

You have a far left wing liberal agenda to silence those that disagree with you and who point out the hypocrisy of the left. Plain and simple. I don't think anyone would call the ST. Pete Times fair or balanced. Go Bill

[Eric Deggans]

If I was an unethical and dishonest columnist, I would expect anyone who cared about good journalism to complain about my coverage and insist I either improve my work or lose my job (indeed, O'Reuilly has criticized my criticisms of him in exactly that way).

My biggest problem with o'Reilly is his dishonesty and unfair behavior, not his opinions...which I also think are wrong...

[reedkeys]

I am constantly surprised that the free speech police want to silence conservatives like Bill O'Reilly and the rest of his Fox News buddies but have no problem with the constant stream of left-wing propaganda coming out of the mouth of people like Keith Olberman or Bill Moyers. I thought free speech was for EVERYONE not just those you agree with. If you have a different point of view, you are free to express it (and, oh, by the way, last time I checked you had a column in a major newspaper to do it in). If your arguments aren't as persuasive as someone you so obviously disdain like Bill O'Reilly you can't cry foul and run home to mommy. Suck it up and thank the good Lord that someone powerful doesn't think your cheap swipe at Bill O'Reilly is forbidden speech and you need to be silenced!

[Eric Deggans]

O'Reily and i have a long, tangled history. i have been outlining for years the way in which he twists and disregards facts to make his own opinions.

For example, the bail the judge set in the case at hand, at $30,000, was many thousands of dollars higher than the guidelines recommended to judges for similar cases.

Storms doesn't know anything about the court system or the challenges it faces in processing criminals who haven't yet committed extremely serious crimes but may be capable of such actions. She didn't how many other criminals might be in the system with similar records, or what's being done to evaluate them. All she could do was parrot O'Reilly's alarmism.

As someone who also deals in opinion for a living, I know that its important to offer work that tells people something new about an issue in addition to expressing an opinion. Unfortunately, o'Reilly rarely does that.

I'm sure we'll never agree on this issue. But my opinions about o'Reilly's work is based a thorough knowledge of his history...

[EXCELSIOR]

Is this the post to which you refer: "O'Reilly or Anchorwoman: Which Is the Greater Threat to Journalism's Future?"
If so, that is pretty weak evidence. Are facts incorrect occasionally? Sure, on all shows. Doing a program like this every night must be difficult, especially when you are pulling stories from around the country. Regarding the phillips case, I'm confused as to your meaning. He sent a camera crew - that is somehow dishonest? He spoke with a State Senator from the local area - that is somehow dishonest? You say Storms is uninformed - from the transcript she seems to know the basic facts about the case. O'Reilly mentioned the wrong case - OK you are right there. He had no idea what the legal boundaries in teh case were - based on who's view? The judge had the authority to hold him, he did for four months. The he let him go. O'Reilly asks why. He then lambasts the judge because he doesn't like his answer. Sounds like what he bills his show as - some news (I did not notice any glaring factual errors in the transcript or your article) and then analysis. He wants to talk to the judge - didn't the local press have a news conference with him? Why can't a national show ask? Are the techniques crass? Well yes but sometimes that happens when you go after a story.
What changed? Was it the treatment you received from national media about some of your comments (see Aug 10 blog)? Is this personal?
You used to understand what O'Reilly was doing as little as 2 weeks prior.
"What is working at 8 p.m. is the opinion of Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, the big winner, and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, the up and comer." That's right, opinion.

[Eric Deggans]

If you read my previous post on O'Reilly, you will see I laid out some very specific examples of how he had presented inacurate, unfair and un-informed commentary.

I think O'Reilly is dangerous because he is a bully who seems willing t say or do anything to press his point. Not because his opinions don't agree with mine...

[Excelsior]

Good, I am glad I got you dander up, Eric. Just what I wanted.
You are exactly right. You are an opinion columnist.
O'Reilly's show is a news analysis program (like the editorial page). (Just like the show you are going on this weekend. Good luck by the way.) They say they blend O'Reilly with investigative reporting; usually not well executed, honestly.
The shows on the air starting at 8pm are not news programs. It is no different with Olbermann and Grace/Beck etc. If you want O'Reilly off the air because some people are too ignorant to understand what is news and what is analysis, you need to ban all similar shows.
If not, you only seem like a partisan who wishes to get rid of something you don't like because it may not appeal to your world view.

[Jim]

O'Reilly certainly isn't a journalist. And thank God that "Anchorwoman" show is cancelled. Real journalism is under assault on many fronts in this country and some people, including myself, are very concerned about it.

[Eric Deggans]

Well, here's how I would set the record straight:

I am a journalist who is an opinion columnist. And I write a opinion-oriented blog. Practicing journalism doesn't mean you automatically forfeit the right to express an opinion.

But if you're going to work as a news reporter, or write news reports, then expressing opinion is something you avoid.

As a journalist, I have an obligation to be fair, accurate and ethical. I have an obligation to make sure the reader is not misled by my reports. I should be transparent about my fact gathering efforts, and represent opinions wich clash with mine fairly.

Unfrtunately, I don't think O'Reilly does any of that well. Which is why I do't think he is a journalist -- or at least not an ethical one...

[Excelsior]

So, just to set the record straight, Eric is not a journalist either. He is a commentator for the Saint Petersburg Times.

I don't think a journalist would write, "And now that Anchorwoman's down, maybe the tsunami of bad karma produced by the show can be directed to the next spoke in our Media Axis of Evil, Bill O'Reilly."

[Eric Deggans]

FROM THE MODERATOR:

Comments containing profanities will usually be deleted. The recent commenter who posted messages with a string of profanities has been informed directly what he/she must do to see a post remain up on the site.

I'm sure we can all talk about this without falling completely in the gutter...

[Patrick]

Bill O'Liely's recent focus on gangsta rap has everything to do with the fact that his so-called "timetable" for Bush was up this week and he doesn't want to revisit his own words.

Several months ago he stated quite clearly that if certain benchmarks were not met by the Admin, he would publicly turn his back on Bush.

So Bill, where's the payoff? Oh yeah, that's right, you left it with the Loofah.

[John]

Put Don imus up against them all!!!!!
Now that's truth in journalism.

[Alan]

O'Reilly's Show gets great ratings you whiny liberals needs to deal with that. Olbermans Show which is filled with lies and gets low ratings will fall before Bill's

[David]

Don't give up, Rupert & Co.

Transfer Lauren to the Wall Street Journal. Now we're talking comedy gold!