Drudge was first to report it, but now the general press is reporting that O'Reilly is out at Fox.
Oddly, he is currently at the Vatican having an audience with the Pope while on vacation.
Seeking penance?
Glad to hear it. He's a malevolent asshole.
I haven't been following this. So what did he do this time?
Quote from: thelakelander on April 19, 2017, 04:06:50 PM
I haven't been following this. So what did he do this time?
Sexual harassment of multiple women, that both he and the network reached settlements on.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/business/media/bill-oreilly-fox-news-allegations.html
Didnt always agree with him and I have read some of his books. But you cant treat people like that and expect nothing to change.
Using up and coming talent as your personal pimp service reeks of the old Hollywood casting couch days.
His defense was always, "no one has called HR to file a complaint".
Look, if the only way you can snag a date is under the pretense of "professional development" then you need to lose 40 pounds and get a facelift and a personality.
Otherwise, do what Larry King did, marry someone and give the spouse such a large allowance to spend and a solid prenup, then it doesnt matter how old you are.
BTW, O'reilly does not have enough sense to write books. A ghost writer actually did the work of research and writing. The industry / publisher, and that idiot placed his name on the books because the average bimbo brained america television addict is impressed by all the ignorant assholes who happen to be on television.
This arrogant fool was canned for sexual "stuff", but he should be executed, along with a few other right wing idiots responsible for the predicament into which our nation has fallen. Am I bitter? Fuck no. Just aware and angry.
Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and others of their ilk are all just highly paid performance artists spouting whatever conspiracy theories, right-wing tripe, and fake news to sell time to advertisers who will buy time to sell their products to ignorant morons who eat-up their every word. They have as little respect for these UFO spotters as I have for Fox. That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and others of their ilk are all just highly paid performance artists spouting whatever conspiracy theories, right-wing tripe, and fake news to sell time to advertisers who will buy time to sell their products to ignorant morons who eat-up their every word. They have as little respect for these UFO spotters as I have for Fox. That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
What are you? Ted Koppel?
https://www.youtube.com/v/-M5FHcCO9Zc
Quote from: ronchamblin on April 19, 2017, 06:55:37 PM
BTW, O'reilly does not have enough sense to write books. A ghost writer actually did the work of research and writing. The industry / publisher, and that idiot placed his name on the books because the average bimbo brained america television addict is impressed by all the ignorant assholes who happen to be on television.
This arrogant fool was canned for sexual "stuff", but he should be executed, along with a few other right wing idiots responsible for the predicament into which our nation has fallen. Am I bitter? Fuck no. Just aware and angry.
It seems to be a trend Ron, think James Patterson. He isn't a writer anymore, he is merely a brand. I met Patterson once, on Waikiki Beach of all places.
Quote from: spuwho on April 19, 2017, 10:03:28 PM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and others of their ilk are all just highly paid performance artists spouting whatever conspiracy theories, right-wing tripe, and fake news to sell time to advertisers who will buy time to sell their products to ignorant morons who eat-up their every word. They have as little respect for these UFO spotters as I have for Fox. That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
What are you? Ted Koppel?
https://www.youtube.com/v/-M5FHcCO9Zc
I have many friends who have turned into Fox News Zombies. They sit around all day soaking-up the constant rightwing propaganda coming to them on Fox, and now hate anyone who doesn't agree with them. I've seen one time great people who are now bitter weird, I'll believe anything Fox says, morons. There are millions of them. It's almost a cult. Very sad.
Let's not forget O'Reilly also "allegedly" beat his then-wife: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/2/bill-oreilly-loses-custody-of-his-children/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/2/bill-oreilly-loses-custody-of-his-children/)
Glad vermin like him and Bill Cosby are exposed for who they are, even if it's much too late for their many victims.
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
Lets remember that Fox News did not let him go because of the millions paid out for multiple instances of sexual harassment. That has been known for years. He's out because the sponsors of the show were jumping ship at an alarming rate. This is about money, not morals.
And I do get a kick out of those preaching morals the loudest like O'Reilly having falls from grace.
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
That's what all the narrow minded Fox News watchers say.
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 20, 2017, 09:20:32 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
That's what all the narrow minded Fox News watchers say.
That's me. I am the narrow minded person who thinks Fox News has not done more harm than ISIS.
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/d7d8ff352d1e0add2fa38b20f1ecaa07/tumblr_inline_n9ycfabiR21qij8k6.jpg)
And the average IQ of TV talking heads just rose a few points.
Sad that it took the network losing sponsors, rather than, you know, the actual sexual harassment to give him the boot.
They should have given his time slot to Sheppard Smith.
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:31:23 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 20, 2017, 09:20:32 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
That's what all the narrow minded Fox News watchers say.
That's me. I am the narrow minded person who thinks Fox News has not done more harm than ISIS.
He did say to the US. Not the world in general.
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:31:23 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 20, 2017, 09:20:32 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
That's what all the narrow minded Fox News watchers say.
If you read my statement, I said "to this country". What happens if America loses sensible healthcare, the environment is destroyed, the education system is destroyed? Fox News and the current administration is hard at work making sure that happens. We are doing ISIS's work from within. We already spend more than any other country on defense, but we need to "rebuild" our military. We will pull out of the agreements on climate change, not because of any scientific facts, but because of politics. Rush Limbaugh and O'Reilly know more than scientists. We will do away with Obamacare. Not because we have anything better, but because it's Obama's. We will build a high wall on our Southern border to keep people out, even though just as many bad come through Canada. We will ban travelers from many Arab countries, but continue to allow people from Saudi Arabia-the country where most 9-11 terrorists were from. Let's make a point to talk about Obama's vacations and golfing, but overlook Trump's. And while we are at it, let's complain about the liberal media, and call them fake. Isis hasn't needed to attack America. We have Fox and Trump to rot gullible people's minds without the need for travelling to the U.S. Let's allow Fox and Friend's dream for America take us back to the 18th century. Brilliant!
That's me. I am the narrow minded person who thinks Fox News has not done more harm than ISIS.
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/d7d8ff352d1e0add2fa38b20f1ecaa07/tumblr_inline_n9ycfabiR21qij8k6.jpg)
Quote from: Jim on April 20, 2017, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:31:23 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 20, 2017, 09:20:32 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
That's what all the narrow minded Fox News watchers say.
That's me. I am the narrow minded person who thinks Fox News has not done more harm than ISIS.
He did say to the US. Not the world in general.
Because ISIS has not inspired any terrorism here in the good old USA...
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/17/world/mapping-isis-attacks-around-the-world/
QuoteOctober 20, 2014 -- Martin Rouleau-Couture runs over two soldiers, killing one, outside a government office in Saint-Jean-sur-Richilieu, Quebec. Rouleau-Couture had converted to Islam and expressed support for ISIS online. He may have been responding to ISIS spokesman Abu Muhammad al-Adnani's call to arms, according to the Institute for the Study of War. ISIS mentioned Rouleau-Couture in its English-language magazine Dabiq, claiming the attack resulted from Adnani's call. It also included a picture of Rouleau-Couture in the magazine. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
October 22, 2014 -- Gunman Michael Zehaf-Bibeau opens fire at Canada's National War Memorial and Parliament Hill in Ottawa, killing army reservist Cpl. Nathan Cirillo. Zehaf-Bibeau is killed by House of Commons Sergeant-at-Arms Kevin Vickers. Two others, including a security guard, are injured. ISIS mentioned Zehaf-Bibeau in Dabiq, claiming that the attack was the "direct result of (Adnani's) call to action," the Institute for the Study of War reported. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
October 23, 2014 -- A man with a hatchet attacks four police officers in New York. Police said the attacker, a U.S. citizen named Zale Thompson, was self-radicalized. Thompson had searched online for information on beheadings, al Qaeda, ISIS and al Shabaab, according to police. ISIS mentioned Thompson in Dabiq, according to the Institute for the Study of War. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
May 3, 2015 -- Two men open fire outside a Prophet Mohammed cartoon contest in a Dallas suburb. The gunmen, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, wound a security guard before police shoot and kill them. Simpson linked himself to ISIS in a tweet posted before the attack, according to a federal law enforcement source. The keynote speaker at the event was right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who was on an al Qaeda hit list. At least one of the gunmen appeared to have been in contact with an ISIS operative in Syria via social media. ISIS claimed responsibility, describing the attackers as "soldiers of the caliphate," according to the Institute for the Study of War. The institute described the attack as "ISIS-inspired," and U.S. officials said the group probably was being "opportunistic" in claiming responsibility. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
November 4, 2015 -- University of California, Merced, student Faisal Mohammad stabs four people before being shot to death by police. Authorities initially said the attack was simply the work of a disgruntled student, but the FBI concluded four months later that Mohammad had looked at ISIS and other terrorist websites and propaganda before the attack. The agency concluded the attack appeared to be terror-inspired, but said "it may never be possible to definitively determine why he chose to attack people on the UC Merced campus." None of the stabbing victims died.
December 2, 2015 -- Tashfeen Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, shoot 14 people to death and injure 21 others at a gathering of local government health workers in San Bernardino, California. Malik and Farook are gunned down in a shootout with law enforcement.
Malik pledged allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Facebook, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.
The husband-and-wife team had developed extremist views as early as 2013, a time that predates the rise of ISIS, FBI Director Comey has said. And Farook tried to contact other terrorist groups, a senior law enforcement official said.
"Individuals inspired by the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) and with links to al Qaeda conducted the terrorist attack," according to the Institute for the Study of War. "This attack was the first al Qaeda- or ISIS-related in the U.S. by a skilled shooter team using both guns and explosives." The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
January 8, 2016 -- A man identified as Edward Archer is arrested after a Philadelphia police officer is shot and wounded. Officer Jesse Hartnett was hit three times and suffered "some very serious injuries that will require multiple surgeries," Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross said. Despite being seriously injured, Hartnett got out of his patrol car and shot the assailant, who later was apprehended by other officers, Ross said. Archer claims to have committed the attack on ISIS' behalf, telling police: "I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State, and that's why I did what a did." Archer has a criminal history and impending court appearances. He had traveled to Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
June 12, 2016 -- A gunman killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. The shooter, Omar Mateen, was killed by police three hours after taking hostages in the club. Mateen was a 27-year old U.S. citizen of Afghan descent who pledged allegiance to ISIS in a 911 phone call during the siege. Subsequent analysis of his computer shows he was also an admirer of al Qaeda cleric Anwar al Awlaki.
President Obama said there was no evidence the attacker was under direction from a terrorist network, or carrying out any group's larger plot. ISIS media outlet Al-Bayan later described Mateen as "one of the soldiers of the Caliphate in America," but the group provided no evidence of communication with the attacker. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
I know someone will claim some plausible deniability for ISIS or something because they only inspired these acts but the point is it is rhetoric like this about Fox News being worse than ISIS that has us in the current state of political disfunction that we currently find ourselves as a country. So if Fox News is bad, anyone making statements like that is just as bad. That is my last response to this talk because it is not worth my time.
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 10:10:06 AM
Quote from: Jim on April 20, 2017, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:31:23 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 20, 2017, 09:20:32 AM
Quote from: FlaBoy on April 20, 2017, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Snaketoz on April 19, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
That network has done more harm to this country than any ISIS follower could ever imagine doing.
You are an idiot.
Anyone can claim that anyone or anything compelled them to do anything, good or evil. We can kill many native Americans and say it's God's will. It's the way right wingers think. They can't imagine anyone having a differing opinion.
What I'm saying is that without healthcare, without a safe environment, without an educated population, just as many people will be wasted. Everything in this country doesn't have to have a profit motive as the primary reasoning for doing it. Keeping our citizens healthy and educated is preferable to spending a large portion of our economy on offensive weapons. We are dependent on foreigners for our healthcare, engineering, and technology fields. Why can't we educate our own kids to do these things? Why are right wingers so opposed to public financed education? With the guise of terrorists from Muslim countries taking over our country, we are allowing performance artists from Fox and the Trump Whitehouse to do to our country what they claim they are preventing.
I hope you noticed that I have not called you a name. I leave that to all the right wingers I know. When they run out of b/s they start the name calling and threats of violence.
That's what all the narrow minded Fox News watchers say.
That's me. I am the narrow minded person who thinks Fox News has not done more harm than ISIS.
He did say to the US. Not the world in general.
Because ISIS has not inspired any terrorism here in the good old USA...
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/17/world/mapping-isis-attacks-around-the-world/
QuoteOctober 20, 2014 -- Martin Rouleau-Couture runs over two soldiers, killing one, outside a government office in Saint-Jean-sur-Richilieu, Quebec. Rouleau-Couture had converted to Islam and expressed support for ISIS online. He may have been responding to ISIS spokesman Abu Muhammad al-Adnani's call to arms, according to the Institute for the Study of War. ISIS mentioned Rouleau-Couture in its English-language magazine Dabiq, claiming the attack resulted from Adnani's call. It also included a picture of Rouleau-Couture in the magazine. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
October 22, 2014 -- Gunman Michael Zehaf-Bibeau opens fire at Canada's National War Memorial and Parliament Hill in Ottawa, killing army reservist Cpl. Nathan Cirillo. Zehaf-Bibeau is killed by House of Commons Sergeant-at-Arms Kevin Vickers. Two others, including a security guard, are injured. ISIS mentioned Zehaf-Bibeau in Dabiq, claiming that the attack was the "direct result of (Adnani's) call to action," the Institute for the Study of War reported. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
October 23, 2014 -- A man with a hatchet attacks four police officers in New York. Police said the attacker, a U.S. citizen named Zale Thompson, was self-radicalized. Thompson had searched online for information on beheadings, al Qaeda, ISIS and al Shabaab, according to police. ISIS mentioned Thompson in Dabiq, according to the Institute for the Study of War. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
May 3, 2015 -- Two men open fire outside a Prophet Mohammed cartoon contest in a Dallas suburb. The gunmen, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, wound a security guard before police shoot and kill them. Simpson linked himself to ISIS in a tweet posted before the attack, according to a federal law enforcement source. The keynote speaker at the event was right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who was on an al Qaeda hit list. At least one of the gunmen appeared to have been in contact with an ISIS operative in Syria via social media. ISIS claimed responsibility, describing the attackers as "soldiers of the caliphate," according to the Institute for the Study of War. The institute described the attack as "ISIS-inspired," and U.S. officials said the group probably was being "opportunistic" in claiming responsibility. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
November 4, 2015 -- University of California, Merced, student Faisal Mohammad stabs four people before being shot to death by police. Authorities initially said the attack was simply the work of a disgruntled student, but the FBI concluded four months later that Mohammad had looked at ISIS and other terrorist websites and propaganda before the attack. The agency concluded the attack appeared to be terror-inspired, but said "it may never be possible to definitively determine why he chose to attack people on the UC Merced campus." None of the stabbing victims died.
December 2, 2015 -- Tashfeen Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, shoot 14 people to death and injure 21 others at a gathering of local government health workers in San Bernardino, California. Malik and Farook are gunned down in a shootout with law enforcement.
Malik pledged allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Facebook, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.
The husband-and-wife team had developed extremist views as early as 2013, a time that predates the rise of ISIS, FBI Director Comey has said. And Farook tried to contact other terrorist groups, a senior law enforcement official said.
"Individuals inspired by the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) and with links to al Qaeda conducted the terrorist attack," according to the Institute for the Study of War. "This attack was the first al Qaeda- or ISIS-related in the U.S. by a skilled shooter team using both guns and explosives." The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
January 8, 2016 -- A man identified as Edward Archer is arrested after a Philadelphia police officer is shot and wounded. Officer Jesse Hartnett was hit three times and suffered "some very serious injuries that will require multiple surgeries," Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross said. Despite being seriously injured, Hartnett got out of his patrol car and shot the assailant, who later was apprehended by other officers, Ross said. Archer claims to have committed the attack on ISIS' behalf, telling police: "I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State, and that's why I did what a did." Archer has a criminal history and impending court appearances. He had traveled to Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
June 12, 2016 -- A gunman killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. The shooter, Omar Mateen, was killed by police three hours after taking hostages in the club. Mateen was a 27-year old U.S. citizen of Afghan descent who pledged allegiance to ISIS in a 911 phone call during the siege. Subsequent analysis of his computer shows he was also an admirer of al Qaeda cleric Anwar al Awlaki.
President Obama said there was no evidence the attacker was under direction from a terrorist network, or carrying out any group's larger plot. ISIS media outlet Al-Bayan later described Mateen as "one of the soldiers of the Caliphate in America," but the group provided no evidence of communication with the attacker. The attack is believed to have been inspired by ISIS.
I know someone will claim some plausible deniability for ISIS or something because they only inspired these acts but the point is it is rhetoric like this about Fox News being worse than ISIS that has us in the current state of political disfunction that we currently find ourselves as a country. So if Fox News is bad, anyone making statements like that is just as bad. That is my last response to this talk because it is not worth my time.
Quote from: Jim on April 20, 2017, 09:45:48 AM
They should have given his time slot to Sheppard Smith.
LOL, that would be like MSNBC letting go Maddow and making room for Hannity; no chance in hell unless FNC wanna lose it's core audience. Tucker Carlson is the perfect man for that 8pm spot. I honestly don't know why Shep is with FNC; he should go to MSNBC or CNN.
Quote from: I-10east on April 21, 2017, 12:18:01 AM
Quote from: Jim on April 20, 2017, 09:45:48 AM
They should have given his time slot to Sheppard Smith.
LOL, that would be like MSNBC letting go Maddow and making room for Hannity; no chance in hell unless FNC wanna lose it's core audience. Tucker Carlson is the perfect man for that 8pm spot. I honestly don't know why Shep is with FNC; he should go to MSNBC or CNN.
Because Shep is not a clown
Quote from: bill on April 21, 2017, 01:27:33 AM
Quote from: I-10east on April 21, 2017, 12:18:01 AM
Quote from: Jim on April 20, 2017, 09:45:48 AM
They should have given his time slot to Sheppard Smith.
LOL, that would be like MSNBC letting go Maddow and making room for Hannity; no chance in hell unless FNC wanna lose it's core audience. Tucker Carlson is the perfect man for that 8pm spot. I honestly don't know why Shep is with FNC; he should go to MSNBC or CNN.
Because Shep is not a clown
Shep was at his best post Katrina. He walked the flooded streets with a live crew to interview people. Best reporting in the field I have seen in awhile.
Didnt see Maddow, Pelley, Brian Williams came later.
Unfortunately he spends a lot of time behind the prompter.
The days of Morley Safer and Dan Rather in fatigues reporting from the front are long gone. After Bob Simon was captured by the Iraqis, most network field reporters lost their mojo.
Lara Logan was the last one who actually took a risk.
Quote from: Tacachale on April 19, 2017, 04:28:50 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on April 19, 2017, 04:06:50 PM
I haven't been following this. So what did he do this time?
Sexual harassment of multiple women, that both he and the network reached settlements on.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/business/media/bill-oreilly-fox-news-allegations.html
Wow. I read through a few of the allegations yesterday. I'm amazed that a guy in front of the camera like O'Reilly has such weak game and respect for women in the 21st century. I've never followed him much but figured he'd be more polished. Instead he sounds like a big creep. If this represents "fair and balanced" I'd hate to see what being unbalanced equates too!
QuoteAnother former regular guest, Wendy Walsh, recently accused O'Reilly of propositioning her in 2013 to come up to his Los Angeles hotel suite after a dinner in which he promised to help her obtain a contributor deal with Fox News.
After Walsh said she rebuffed his advances, O'Reilly allegedly became irate, threatening her career, and even insulting her black leather purse. Though she continued to appear on the show for several more months, Walsh recalled feeling her Fox News career prospects slipping away. She never became a Fox News contributor.
On Monday, another accuser, represented by lawyer Lisa Bloom claimed O'Reilly called her "hot chocolate" (she is black) and would grunt and leer at her in the workplace.
Additionally, former Fox News commentator Andrea Tantaros, who is in the middle of a legal battle with the network over alleged Ailes harassment, claimed in her lawsuit that O'Reilly had made unwanted advances on her, including inviting her out to his Long Island home where he said it would be "very private."
The conservative pundit's therapist backed the claims, recalling "a number of occasions when Andrea complained to me about recurring unwanted advances from Bill O'Reilly."
Full article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/19/choking-harassing-and-loofahs-women-s-allegations-against-bill-o-reilly-piled-up-for-years-before-his-demise.html
(http://www.thesmokinggun.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/750x970/documents/1013091oreilly16_0.gif)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/oreilly-falafel-suit-turns-five?page=15
Quote from: thelakelander on April 21, 2017, 09:12:56 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on April 19, 2017, 04:28:50 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on April 19, 2017, 04:06:50 PM
I haven't been following this. So what did he do this time?
Sexual harassment of multiple women, that both he and the network reached settlements on.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/business/media/bill-oreilly-fox-news-allegations.html
Wow. I read through a few of the allegations yesterday. I'm amazed that a guy in front of the camera like O'Reilly has such weak game and respect for women in the 21st century. I've never followed him much but figured he'd be more polished. Instead he sounds like a big creep. If this represents "fair and balanced" I'd hate to see what being unbalanced equates too!
QuoteAnother former regular guest, Wendy Walsh, recently accused O'Reilly of propositioning her in 2013 to come up to his Los Angeles hotel suite after a dinner in which he promised to help her obtain a contributor deal with Fox News.
After Walsh said she rebuffed his advances, O'Reilly allegedly became irate, threatening her career, and even insulting her black leather purse. Though she continued to appear on the show for several more months, Walsh recalled feeling her Fox News career prospects slipping away. She never became a Fox News contributor.
On Monday, another accuser, represented by lawyer Lisa Bloom claimed O'Reilly called her "hot chocolate" (she is black) and would grunt and leer at her in the workplace.
Additionally, former Fox News commentator Andrea Tantaros, who is in the middle of a legal battle with the network over alleged Ailes harassment, claimed in her lawsuit that O'Reilly had made unwanted advances on her, including inviting her out to his Long Island home where he said it would be "very private."
The conservative pundit's therapist backed the claims, recalling "a number of occasions when Andrea complained to me about recurring unwanted advances from Bill O'Reilly."
Full article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/19/choking-harassing-and-loofahs-women-s-allegations-against-bill-o-reilly-piled-up-for-years-before-his-demise.html
(http://www.thesmokinggun.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/750x970/documents/1013091oreilly16_0.gif)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/oreilly-falafel-suit-turns-five?page=15
Right there with you Ennis. I am hearing that there are some more serious allegations about him coming up soon, worse that already alleged. Will be interesting to see if those manifest and what they are. O'Reilly did walk away with 25 million via a deal he had recently cut with Fox. Some are saying that his forced departure was actually driven by the loss of revenue via advertisers which is believable considering they have not gotten rid of him long before now and apparently paid out big to cover other accusations while he worked there.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 21, 2017, 03:37:25 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on April 21, 2017, 09:12:56 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on April 19, 2017, 04:28:50 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on April 19, 2017, 04:06:50 PM
I haven't been following this. So what did he do this time?
Sexual harassment of multiple women, that both he and the network reached settlements on.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/business/media/bill-oreilly-fox-news-allegations.html
Wow. I read through a few of the allegations yesterday. I'm amazed that a guy in front of the camera like O'Reilly has such weak game and respect for women in the 21st century. I've never followed him much but figured he'd be more polished. Instead he sounds like a big creep. If this represents "fair and balanced" I'd hate to see what being unbalanced equates too!
QuoteAnother former regular guest, Wendy Walsh, recently accused O'Reilly of propositioning her in 2013 to come up to his Los Angeles hotel suite after a dinner in which he promised to help her obtain a contributor deal with Fox News.
After Walsh said she rebuffed his advances, O'Reilly allegedly became irate, threatening her career, and even insulting her black leather purse. Though she continued to appear on the show for several more months, Walsh recalled feeling her Fox News career prospects slipping away. She never became a Fox News contributor.
On Monday, another accuser, represented by lawyer Lisa Bloom claimed O'Reilly called her "hot chocolate" (she is black) and would grunt and leer at her in the workplace.
Additionally, former Fox News commentator Andrea Tantaros, who is in the middle of a legal battle with the network over alleged Ailes harassment, claimed in her lawsuit that O'Reilly had made unwanted advances on her, including inviting her out to his Long Island home where he said it would be "very private."
The conservative pundit's therapist backed the claims, recalling "a number of occasions when Andrea complained to me about recurring unwanted advances from Bill O'Reilly."
Full article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/19/choking-harassing-and-loofahs-women-s-allegations-against-bill-o-reilly-piled-up-for-years-before-his-demise.html
(http://www.thesmokinggun.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/750x970/documents/1013091oreilly16_0.gif)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/oreilly-falafel-suit-turns-five?page=15
Right there with you Ennis. I am hearing that there are some more serious allegations about him coming up soon, worse that already alleged. Will be interesting to see if those manifest and what they are. O'Reilly did walk away with 25 million via a deal he had recently cut with Fox. Some are saying that his forced departure was actually driven by the loss of revenue via advertisers which is believable considering they have not gotten rid of him long before now and apparently paid out big to cover other accusations while he worked there.
Another atrocity!
It's pretty clear the guy couldn't get a legitimate date.
Now the question people are asking is, which women of Fox actually went for his schitck in order to stick around?
I can only think of one female reporter who was a semi-regular on O'Reilly and still works at Fox.
O'Reilly's a bad guy. He's an old school predator and it appears there was a culture of that in the organization's higher ranks - sadly this was the norm in the media and entertainment industries for a long time. But it seems like we've finally gotten to the point where the public no longer overlooks it like we used to. At least in some cases.
I'm just glad that people now realize that using professional power to harass and coerce sex is wrong...always. When a predator is identified he or she should be recognized as such and not defended.
Quote from: NotNow on April 22, 2017, 11:13:48 AM
I'm just glad that people now realize that using professional power to harass and coerce sex is wrong...always. When a predator is identified he or she should be recognized as such and not defended.
Agree!
Quote from: Tacachale on April 22, 2017, 09:43:31 AM
O'Reilly's a bad guy. He's an old school predator and it appears there was a culture of that in the organization's higher ranks - sadly this was the norm in the media and entertainment industries for a long time. But it seems like we've finally gotten to the point where the public no longer overlooks it like we used to. At least in some cases.
There are so many police investigations into historic sex abuse in the UK - particularly at the BBC. Apparently it was rife. I think news is about to break about a 70s and 80s pop star who is being accused. No idea who he is yet, though.
I'm not impressed with Sheppard Smith at all. If you like biased super leftist neo-liberal thought, he's the man I'll give him that. The same guy when The Louisiana governor was trying to bring the community together after police were ambushed in a shooting said '"All lives matter is derogatory"scolding the governor very inappropriately. That same guy that stuck up for CNN with their Orwellianism when Trump called them fake news; just for the sake of hating Trump of course; if a person he liked said it, it's all good.... I could go on and on.
Quote from: I-10east on April 22, 2017, 06:33:35 PM
I'm not impressed with Sheppard Smith at all. If you like biased super leftist neo-liberal thought, he's the man I'll give him that. The same guy when The Louisiana governor was trying to bring the community together after police were ambushed in a shooting said '"All lives matter is derogatory"scolding the governor very inappropriately. That same guy that stuck up for CNN with their Orwellianism when Trump called them fake news; just for the sake of hating Trump of course; if a person he liked said it, it's all good.... I could go on and on.
"Super leftist" and "neoliberal" are mutually exclusive terms. I think you might not know what "neoliberal" means. For example, Ronald Reagan was a neoliberal. True story.
Internal Memo sent to all Fox employees.
Per Associated Press:
NEW YORK (AP) — The following internal memo was sent to Fox News Channel employees on Wednesday:
"We'd like to address questions about Bill O'Reilly's future at Fox News. After a thorough and careful review of allegations against him, the Company and Bill O'Reilly have agreed that Mr. O'Reilly will not return to the Fox News Channel.
This decision follows an extensive review done in collaboration with outside counsel.
By ratings standards, Bill O'Reilly is one of the most accomplished TV personalities in the history of cable news. In fact, his success by any measure is indisputable. Fox News has demonstrated again and again the strength of its talent bench. We have full confidence that the network will continue to be a powerhouse in cable news.
Lastly, and most importantly, we want to underscore our consistent commitment to fostering a work environment built on the values of trust and respect.
Best,
Rupert, Lachlan, James
Quote from: Adam White on April 23, 2017, 02:33:52 AM
"Super leftist" and "neoliberal" are mutually exclusive terms. I think you might not know what "neoliberal" means. For example, Ronald Reagan was a neoliberal. True story.
Okay you are probably right, it seems like this is a game of semantics though. For instance many on the left say that liberals cannot be fascist when that is BS (most people that are fascist are right wingers though). Authoritarianism is a big part of fascism, and I cannot think of anything more authoritarian than forcing Christian bakers to go against their beliefs (no matter if you disagree with them) and make gay wedding cakes. Modern authoritarianism has mostly been a left thing (even worser in Eastern Europe where it's basically 1984; thought police, cannot defend yourself against intruders etc).
Quote from: I-10east on April 24, 2017, 02:05:13 AM
Quote from: Adam White on April 23, 2017, 02:33:52 AM
"Super leftist" and "neoliberal" are mutually exclusive terms. I think you might not know what "neoliberal" means. For example, Ronald Reagan was a neoliberal. True story.
Okay you are probably right, it seems like this is a game of semantics though. For instance many on the left say that liberals cannot be fascist when that is BS (most people that are fascist are right wingers though). Authoritarianism is a big part of fascism, and I cannot think of anything more authoritarian than forcing Christian bakers to go against their beliefs (no matter if you disagree with them) and make gay wedding cakes. Modern authoritarianism has mostly been a left thing (even worser in Eastern Europe where it's basically 1984; thought police, cannot defend yourself against intruders etc).
Well, it
is semantics as it is about the meaning of words. And neo-liberalism refers to a particular economic approach that has been pursued by politicians of all stripes since at least the 80s: Reagan, Thatcher, Clinton, Bush, Obama, etc. That's not to say there aren't variations here and there, of course. Clinton's shift to the right and embrace of neo-liberalism (as embodied by the DLC) is what got him elected. And it's what got Blair elected in 1997. In fact, pretty much every social democratic party in Europe has rejected Keynesianism and embraced neo-liberalism.
Super-leftist would be (IMO) Marxists and their ilk. But, given the fact that the center of American politics lies much, much farther to the right, I'd totally understand how a moderate social democrat like Bernie Sanders could appear to be super-left wing. But, as far as I can tell, he is quite critical of neo-liberalism.
Quote from: I-10east on April 22, 2017, 06:33:35 PM
I'm not impressed with Sheppard Smith at all. If you like biased super leftist neo-liberal thought, he's the man I'll give him that. The same guy when The Louisiana governor was trying to bring the community together after police were ambushed in a shooting said '"All lives matter is derogatory"scolding the governor very inappropriately. That same guy that stuck up for CNN with their Orwellianism when Trump called them fake news; just for the sake of hating Trump of course; if a person he liked said it, it's all good.... I could go on and on.
So you don't like him because he's the fair and balanced bit of Fox they always talk about?
Salon was reporting that while O'Reilly departed early in his contract, it would have been his last contract.
While Big Bill was 67 years old, his median audience was 72 years old. To renew him would have been silly they said because by the time Trump's term ends half his audience would be essentially "dead".
The only holdout to keeping him was the old man Rupert (86 years old) and he was getting pressure to facilitate his buy out of SkyTV.
He was signing off on the settlements cause he was making lots of dough off Bill. Either way, Bill's retirement was coming due and the women merely accelerated the schedule.
Now he can go back and have people write books for him and do the talk show circuit hawking them.
He apparently will begin a podcast Monday. Since most of his followers are 72 my guess is that not many of them will even know what a podcast is, much less how to tune into one.
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/bill-o-reilly-return-podcast-monday-153801115.html
Quote from: Adam White on April 24, 2017, 07:42:23 AM
Quote from: I-10east on April 24, 2017, 02:05:13 AM
Quote from: Adam White on April 23, 2017, 02:33:52 AM
"Super leftist" and "neoliberal" are mutually exclusive terms. I think you might not know what "neoliberal" means. For example, Ronald Reagan was a neoliberal. True story.
Okay you are probably right, it seems like this is a game of semantics though. For instance many on the left say that liberals cannot be fascist when that is BS (most people that are fascist are right wingers though). Authoritarianism is a big part of fascism, and I cannot think of anything more authoritarian than forcing Christian bakers to go against their beliefs (no matter if you disagree with them) and make gay wedding cakes. Modern authoritarianism has mostly been a left thing (even worser in Eastern Europe where it's basically 1984; thought police, cannot defend yourself against intruders etc).
Well, it is semantics as it is about the meaning of words. And neo-liberalism refers to a particular economic approach that has been pursued by politicians of all stripes since at least the 80s: Reagan, Thatcher, Clinton, Bush, Obama, etc. That's not to say there aren't variations here and there, of course. Clinton's shift to the right and embrace of neo-liberalism (as embodied by the DLC) is what got him elected. And it's what got Blair elected in 1997. In fact, pretty much every social democratic party in Europe has rejected Keynesianism and embraced neo-liberalism.
Super-leftist would be (IMO) Marxists and their ilk. But, given the fact that the center of American politics lies much, much farther to the right, I'd totally understand how a moderate social democrat like Bernie Sanders could appear to be super-left wing. But, as far as I can tell, he is quite critical of neo-liberalism.
They sure haven't rejected the printing money and making more public debt part of "Keynesianism".
Quote from: NotNow on April 24, 2017, 02:42:15 PM
Quote from: Adam White on April 24, 2017, 07:42:23 AM
Quote from: I-10east on April 24, 2017, 02:05:13 AM
Quote from: Adam White on April 23, 2017, 02:33:52 AM
"Super leftist" and "neoliberal" are mutually exclusive terms. I think you might not know what "neoliberal" means. For example, Ronald Reagan was a neoliberal. True story.
Okay you are probably right, it seems like this is a game of semantics though. For instance many on the left say that liberals cannot be fascist when that is BS (most people that are fascist are right wingers though). Authoritarianism is a big part of fascism, and I cannot think of anything more authoritarian than forcing Christian bakers to go against their beliefs (no matter if you disagree with them) and make gay wedding cakes. Modern authoritarianism has mostly been a left thing (even worser in Eastern Europe where it's basically 1984; thought police, cannot defend yourself against intruders etc).
Well, it is semantics as it is about the meaning of words. And neo-liberalism refers to a particular economic approach that has been pursued by politicians of all stripes since at least the 80s: Reagan, Thatcher, Clinton, Bush, Obama, etc. That's not to say there aren't variations here and there, of course. Clinton's shift to the right and embrace of neo-liberalism (as embodied by the DLC) is what got him elected. And it's what got Blair elected in 1997. In fact, pretty much every social democratic party in Europe has rejected Keynesianism and embraced neo-liberalism.
Super-leftist would be (IMO) Marxists and their ilk. But, given the fact that the center of American politics lies much, much farther to the right, I'd totally understand how a moderate social democrat like Bernie Sanders could appear to be super-left wing. But, as far as I can tell, he is quite critical of neo-liberalism.
They sure haven't rejected the printing money and making more public debt part of "Keynesianism".
Perhaps, though that has been a feature of all US Presidential administrations, regardless (in fact, that's a feature of neoliberalism).
And they've all rejected the welfare state, deregulated industry and privatized essential public services.
No, it is Keynesian. "Neo-liberalism" seems to mean a lot of things to different people. And I don't think Obama rejected the welfare state or deregulated industry.
But then, I don't think that Bernie Sanders is a "moderate social democrat" either.
Quote from: NotNow on April 24, 2017, 05:17:39 PM
No, it is Keynesian. "Neo-liberalism" seems to mean a lot of things to different people. And I don't think Obama rejected the welfare state or deregulated industry.
But then, I don't think that Bernie Sanders is a "moderate social democrat" either.
Just because something is a feature of Keynesian economics doesn't mean it can't be shared by other ideologies.
You don't think Obama rejected the welfare state? Just take a look at the ACA. A private solution to a public need. There has been a creeping privatization of public services for decades, regardless who is in power.
As far as Sanders is concerned - there are people out there who don't think the world is round, either. Noam Chomsky (an actual socialist) calls him a New Dealer.
Cute. And you believe that the ACA is a private solution? Really? That is not what I call government control of private business.
I can see the confusion on Sanders. Let's just leave the socialist label on him and skip the back and forth.
^The ACA primarily regulates the private sector, therefore it is a private solution. If the ACA primarily provided healthcare or insurance, it would be a public solution.
Just because something is regulated doesn't mean it is "public." The use of your car is regulated, but you likely wouldn't refer to it as public transit.
Quote from: remc86007 on April 24, 2017, 06:19:32 PM
^The ACA primarily regulates the private sector, therefore it is a private solution. If the ACA primarily provided healthcare or insurance, it would be a public solution.
Just because something is regulated doesn't mean it is "public." The use of your car is regulated, but you likely wouldn't refer to it as public transit.
Agreed. Perhaps the government is overstepping it's authority - who knows. But that's not the issue here. The issue is more about generating profit for private concerns. That's why one politician can be pro-life and pro-gun and another can be pro-choice and anti-gun and they can both be neoliberals.
In any event, we've (or I've, really) derailed this thread. So I'll sign off for the night with this comment:
I remember seeing a picture of O'Reilly prepping in a mirror for an appearance. It might've been at the GOP convention years ago. Maybe you shouldn't read too much into a picture, but he just looked like a self-centered prick. There was something about his face.
He is also known to threaten guests with physical violence - of course, he has security throw them out. I don't advocate violence, but I kind of always wanted him to get a beatdown.
I think O'Reilly and Limbaugh and a few others really lowered the tone in this country. But I guess that's the sort of thing that comes with deregulation!
My experience is that most people who seek the limelight and are as successful as O'Reilly come off as self serving pricks (or bitches). The tone in this country was lower way before O'Reilly and Limbaugh. they were just some of the first commentators from the right.
And yes, the government is overstepping it's authority. Which is the root of many of this countries problems.
Public...private? It's a bit more than "regulation". It's billions in taxes and billions in mandates. Here is just one source:
https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/five-years-after-passage-the-aca-by-the-numbers/
This goes WAAAAAYYYYYY beyond "regulating" industry.
Ya'll have a good night. Sorry for derailing the thread. (Or at least helping.)
Quote from: NotNow on April 24, 2017, 08:09:59 PM
My experience is that most people who seek the limelight and are as successful as O'Reilly come off as self serving pricks (or bitches). The tone in this country was lower way before O'Reilly and Limbaugh. they were just some of the first commentators from the right.
And yes, the government is overstepping it's authority. Which is the root of many of this countries problems.
Public...private? It's a bit more than "regulation". It's billions in taxes and billions in mandates. Here is just one source:
https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/five-years-after-passage-the-aca-by-the-numbers/
This goes WAAAAAYYYYYY beyond "regulating" industry.
Ya'll have a good night. Sorry for derailing the thread. (Or at least helping.)
By the way - it's nice to have you back. Been a long time!
Thanx!
:)
Could be true, could not be. I'm gonna reserve judgement instead of jumping on any bandwagons. If he's found guilty, he should def pay.
Although here's some more allegations of other men at Fox recently:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/media/andrea-tantaros-fox-news-electronic-surveillance-lawsuit/
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/23/trump-pal-sean-hannity-accused-sexual-harassment-fox-news-scandal-grows.html
So all of these, all right wing, all at once. It looks fishy to be honest. Kinda like how a dozen women all of a sudden became courageous many years later all at once before the election against Trump, trotted out by Gloria Allred & made into spectacles. And then...nothing.
Partisanship aside, dollars to donuts there's other things at play here.
Quote from: peestandingup on April 25, 2017, 10:19:38 AM
Could be true, could not be. I'm gonna reserve judgement instead of jumping on any bandwagons. If he's found guilty, he should def pay.
Although here's some more allegations of other men at Fox recently:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/media/andrea-tantaros-fox-news-electronic-surveillance-lawsuit/
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/23/trump-pal-sean-hannity-accused-sexual-harassment-fox-news-scandal-grows.html
So all of these, all right wing, all at once. It looks fishy to be honest. Kinda like how a dozen women all of a sudden became courageous many years later all at once before the election against Trump, trotted out by Gloria Allred & made into spectacles. And then...nothing.
Partisanship aside, dollars to donuts there's other things at play here.
It seems likely this is the result of a particular corporate culture. That's not something that is limited to right wing news organizations - but I wouldn't be shocked to find out that there are all sorts of shenanigans that took place at Fox and that people at all levels of management either turned a blind eye or even encouraged it.
The BBC is in all sorts of hot water over the things that happened there in the 70s and 80s (and possibly beyond).
Quote from: peestandingup on April 25, 2017, 10:19:38 AM
Could be true, could not be. I'm gonna reserve judgement instead of jumping on any bandwagons. If he's found guilty, he should def pay.
Although here's some more allegations of other men at Fox recently:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/media/andrea-tantaros-fox-news-electronic-surveillance-lawsuit/
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/23/trump-pal-sean-hannity-accused-sexual-harassment-fox-news-scandal-grows.html
So all of these, all right wing, all at once. It looks fishy to be honest. Kinda like how a dozen women all of a sudden became courageous many years later all at once before the election against Trump, trotted out by Gloria Allred & made into spectacles. And then...nothing.
Partisanship aside, dollars to donuts there's other things at play here.
That
might be credible if there weren't many women over the course of many years, who both O'Reilly and the network settled with. There have been two people total at Fox ousted so far, so it's not like it's the whole company, although there may be more coming. Fox would hardly be the first media empire where there was a culture of sexual harassment.
Also, the Trump stuff was hardly "nothing". He
admitted to sexually harassing women and teenagers by barging into changing rooms. He bragged in the Access Hollywood recording about doing things that at least 15 different women have accused him of - groping and kissing them without consent. One of the women "trotted out by Gloria Allred" is
still suing him. It's the kind of thing that would sink a candidate in any other race.
The Sean Hannity accusations are interesting because they are coming out "now".
He has been getting a full frontal attack from the NYTimes lately for his reported conversations with Trump.
And honestly, he doesnt strike me as the "womanizing" type.
But he has made a lot enemies on both realms of the political spectrum and so right now, post Ailes and O'Reilly, he has a big bullseye on his back.
In fact he has been saying on his radio show that he has expecting a big personal attack on him once Trump got elected, so maybe this is it.
He said he has been audited by the IRS so many times during the Clinton and Obama Administrations, that he expects them every year now. He admits he "overpays" his taxes just to keep the dogs off his back.
He refuses to attend the DC Press Dinner every year.
This doesnt sound like a guy who would proposition a total stranger knowing the fallout it would bring.
Anything is possible, and I am not saying the woman is lying, I am only saying it doesnt sound right.
Ailes and O'Reilly always came off as arrogant, Hannity, much less so.
Well I guess this is just redrubbing of old stuff.....the accuser is an attorney and said that "under any definitions of the law, he did not harass me"
The reason she was never invited back to Fox News is because she never followed the instructions of the producer and then complained afterward.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/despite-reports-fmr-fox-guest-now-claims-she-was-never-sexually-harassed-by-sean-hannity/ (http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/despite-reports-fmr-fox-guest-now-claims-she-was-never-sexually-harassed-by-sean-hannity/)
Quote from: Tacachale on April 25, 2017, 11:31:26 AM
Quote from: peestandingup on April 25, 2017, 10:19:38 AM
Could be true, could not be. I'm gonna reserve judgement instead of jumping on any bandwagons. If he's found guilty, he should def pay.
Although here's some more allegations of other men at Fox recently:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/media/andrea-tantaros-fox-news-electronic-surveillance-lawsuit/
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/23/trump-pal-sean-hannity-accused-sexual-harassment-fox-news-scandal-grows.html
So all of these, all right wing, all at once. It looks fishy to be honest. Kinda like how a dozen women all of a sudden became courageous many years later all at once before the election against Trump, trotted out by Gloria Allred & made into spectacles. And then...nothing.
Partisanship aside, dollars to donuts there's other things at play here.
That might be credible if there weren't many women over the course of many years, who both O'Reilly and the network settled with. There have been two people total at Fox ousted so far, so it's not like it's the whole company, although there may be more coming. Fox would hardly be the first media empire where there was a culture of sexual harassment.
Also, the Trump stuff was hardly "nothing". He admitted to sexually harassing women and teenagers by barging into changing rooms. He bragged in the Access Hollywood recording about doing things that at least 15 different women have accused him of - groping and kissing them without consent. One of the women "trotted out by Gloria Allred" is still suing him. It's the kind of thing that would sink a candidate in any other race.
Hey, I hear ya. And I'll be the first to call them all raping bastards if these women can prove it. But I'm automatically leery of things like this these days, which is sad because it actually does happen a lot. And its actual rape or harassment, not "someone prominent said an off color thing to me this one time 20 years ago so I'm gunna sue em & call it harassment" kinda deal. I had a colleague get his entire professional career ruined because he didn't promote a woman (who was seriously awful at her job. like, awful & unqualified for the promotion in every way), she lawyered up, raised a stink about sexism, they demoted him & she's still there. She flat out lied. And all because the place is public & they didn't wanna look bad. I wont say what it is, but everyone here knows it. People are so quick to claim racism, sexism, or whatever other "ism" these days as well. Its actually gotten quite crazy.
Regarding the other anchors, it looks to me like a coordinated effort if I'm being honest. Regardless, its safe to say that the media, organizations, Hollywood, a ton of government agencies, the "system", whatever you wanna call it did NOT want Trump to win under any circumstances. He was an easy target sure, but they literally hit him with everything but the kitchen sink. To where it dove into crazy shit like him pissing on a Russian hotel bed that Obama slept on with hookers surrounding him in a "super secret intel document" (wink wink), or pushing the Russian hacker & collusion narrative 24/7 (notice that went away too), on & on. Fox was basically the only major network that pushed back against any of this (namely their high profile evening lineup), has much higher ratings, etc. I'm not saying any of its true (they could all be a vile pack of rapists for all I know), but it wouldn't shock me given what's already taken place & this is the next attack wave.
Regarding his "grab em by the pu**y" comment. That was like a decade ago, he was recorded secretly & talking like a lot of guys talk. I'm not taking up for him (it was pretty gross), but I'm also not gonna pretend a lot of guys don't talk like that when they think no one else is listening. Hell, I've said similar things before around friends when I'm just joking around. But that doesn't mean I'd ever harass a women or touch her if she didn't want me to. Never have, never will. My point is, I don't think pointing to that as some admission of a harassing womanizer holds much water. We all knew Trump was a crass potty mouth well before that, which is why it didn't seem to matter anyway.
Anyways, that's my thoughts on all this for now. One thing's for sure though, when the norm gets broken such as it has with this election, things sure do get nuts. Up is down, left is right, who the hell knows what to even believe anymore.
I had about 30m to listen to Hannity today and he said the attacks have gotten ridiculous so he has decided to lawyer up and pursue legal action now.
He was only upset because it didnt come out like a ball rolling down a hill, it came out on several press and websites at the exact same time. That has him convinced that some entity is working on this.
Quote from: peestandingup on April 25, 2017, 06:22:45 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on April 25, 2017, 11:31:26 AM
Quote from: peestandingup on April 25, 2017, 10:19:38 AM
Could be true, could not be. I'm gonna reserve judgement instead of jumping on any bandwagons. If he's found guilty, he should def pay.
Although here's some more allegations of other men at Fox recently:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/media/andrea-tantaros-fox-news-electronic-surveillance-lawsuit/
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/23/trump-pal-sean-hannity-accused-sexual-harassment-fox-news-scandal-grows.html
So all of these, all right wing, all at once. It looks fishy to be honest. Kinda like how a dozen women all of a sudden became courageous many years later all at once before the election against Trump, trotted out by Gloria Allred & made into spectacles. And then...nothing.
Partisanship aside, dollars to donuts there's other things at play here.
That might be credible if there weren't many women over the course of many years, who both O'Reilly and the network settled with. There have been two people total at Fox ousted so far, so it's not like it's the whole company, although there may be more coming. Fox would hardly be the first media empire where there was a culture of sexual harassment.
Also, the Trump stuff was hardly "nothing". He admitted to sexually harassing women and teenagers by barging into changing rooms. He bragged in the Access Hollywood recording about doing things that at least 15 different women have accused him of - groping and kissing them without consent. One of the women "trotted out by Gloria Allred" is still suing him. It's the kind of thing that would sink a candidate in any other race.
Hey, I hear ya. And I'll be the first to call them all raping bastards if these women can prove it. But I'm automatically leery of things like this these days, which is sad because it actually does happen a lot. And its actual rape or harassment, not "someone prominent said an off color thing to me this one time 20 years ago so I'm gunna sue em & call it harassment" kinda deal. I had a colleague get his entire professional career ruined because he didn't promote a woman (who was seriously awful at her job. like, awful & unqualified for the promotion in every way), she lawyered up, raised a stink about sexism, they demoted him & she's still there. She flat out lied. And all because the place is public & they didn't wanna look bad. I wont say what it is, but everyone here knows it. People are so quick to claim racism, sexism, or whatever other "ism" these days as well. Its actually gotten quite crazy.
Regarding the other anchors, it looks to me like a coordinated effort if I'm being honest. Regardless, its safe to say that the media, organizations, Hollywood, a ton of government agencies, the "system", whatever you wanna call it did NOT want Trump to win under any circumstances. He was an easy target sure, but they literally hit him with everything but the kitchen sink. To where it dove into crazy shit like him pissing on a Russian hotel bed that Obama slept on with hookers surrounding him in a "super secret intel document" (wink wink), or pushing the Russian hacker & collusion narrative 24/7 (notice that went away too), on & on. Fox was basically the only major network that pushed back against any of this (namely their high profile evening lineup), has much higher ratings, etc. I'm not saying any of its true (they could all be a vile pack of rapists for all I know), but it wouldn't shock me given what's already taken place & this is the next attack wave.
Regarding his "grab em by the pu**y" comment. That was like a decade ago, he was recorded secretly & talking like a lot of guys talk. I'm not taking up for him (it was pretty gross), but I'm also not gonna pretend a lot of guys don't talk like that when they think no one else is listening. Hell, I've said similar things before around friends when I'm just joking around. But that doesn't mean I'd ever harass a women or touch her if she didn't want me to. Never have, never will. My point is, I don't think pointing to that as some admission of a harassing womanizer holds much water. We all knew Trump was a crass potty mouth well before that, which is why it didn't seem to matter anyway.
Anyways, that's my thoughts on all this for now. One thing's for sure though, when the norm gets broken such as it has with this election, things sure do get nuts. Up is down, left is right, who the hell knows what to even believe anymore.
It's possible that the Ailes, O'Reilly and Hannity accusations are making the news now due to some coordinated effort. But with both Ailes and O'Reilly (not Hannity so far as I can see), they go back many years and involve many different women. With O'Reilly at least, it's even been making the news (https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2004-10-28-oreilly-settles_x.htm) for over 10 years, just not with this kind of impact. Perhaps there's a coordinated effort, but I think it's just as likely that it's due to the fact that the public and media have started to change how we deal with sexual abuse, or some combination of the two. We've started taking victims seriously. Bill Cosby is the case in point on that.
There are certainly false accusations out there (I've seen it myself as well), and it's understandable for a company to back an employee if they think there's nothing to the accusation. But when it's happening multiple times, with multiple women all reporting the same things, it's much less likely that they're
all lying. At that point you have to ask what's more likely - that multiple unrelated women are falsely accusing someone over the course of years, or that the problem's with the guy at the center of it.
As for Trump, my point with the recording isn't that he said vile things. It's that
what he said - not just that he thinks he can "grab 'em by the pussy", but that he likes to "just start kissing them... I don't even wait" - is exactly like all the accusations that he groped and kissed women without consent. If he didn't have over a dozen women saying he did things exactly like what he jokes about there, it would be easier to overlook as simple locker room banter. It's beyond the fact that there are 15 unrelated women accusing him of sexual misconduct, the serial locker room peeping, and his general boorishness when it comes to women.
Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh... 8)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 26, 2017, 01:49:45 PM
Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh... 8)
At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.
Quote from: Tacachale on April 26, 2017, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 26, 2017, 01:49:45 PM
Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh... 8)
At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.
I agree. The world was a very different place in the early 90s.
Quote from: Adam White on April 26, 2017, 02:06:29 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on April 26, 2017, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 26, 2017, 01:49:45 PM
Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh... 8)
At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.
I agree. The world was a very different place in the early 90s.
Hell, it was different just a few years ago. In 2004, Bill Cosby was accused of sexual assault and it was reported in the media, but it was mostly forgotten until 2015. Now, he's a pariah. The way the media reported hacked celebrity photos also changed dramatically just between the two leak from 2011 and 2014. It went from being kind of a big joke with the blame on the celebrities for taking them, to being reported as a serious invasion of privacy and crime.
Quote from: Tacachale on April 26, 2017, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 26, 2017, 01:49:45 PM
Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh... 8)
At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.
Probably true, I agree. If Broaddrick's been lying all these years, and still gets this emotional after all this time, she's got a hell of an acting coach: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHh73fkDUIs&t=2m7s
There's nothing for her to really gain by doing this, unless she just wants attention (which I guess is possible).
(http://i.imgur.com/0ZlxO5R.jpg)
Fox News anchor Kelly Wright has joined a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination and harassment at the cable-news network. Wright—who has been with the network since 2003, mostly anchoring Saturday's America's News HQ—alleged that he "has been effectively sidelined and asked to perform the role of a 'Jim Crow'—the racist caricature of a black entertainer." Additionally, he claimed he had been shunned from appearing on recently ousted prime-time star Bill O'Reilly's show; and that Fox News co-president Bill Shine "has demonstrated an obsession with race when it comes to discussions with Mr. Wright, including regularly asking him, 'How do black people react to you' and 'How do you think white viewers look at you?'" He further alleged that when he tried to show a series of positive stories about the black community, he recalled being told "it showed blacks in 'too positive' a light." Wright's addition means the lawsuit now contains 13 racial minorities who are current or former Fox News employees alleging racial discrimination at the network. Fox News responded to the allegations with a statement:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/04/25/fox-news-anchor-sues-for-racial-discrimination?via=desktop&source=copyurl
Quote from: Adam White on April 26, 2017, 02:06:29 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on April 26, 2017, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 26, 2017, 01:49:45 PM
Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh... 8)
At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.
I agree. The world was a very different place in the early 90s.
Actually.....the Bush 1 Campaign already knew about Clinton's "women" in detail and started to leak it to the press to discredit him during the 1992 election season.
Clinton's Campaign had done the exact same research on Bush 1 and fired a return shot on a made up story about one of his best female friends from years past as "something more" which of course wasnt true.
Bush 1 had his campaign call off the dogs and you never heard another word about Clinton's women until the Lewinsky affair broke wind.
Handled differently? The Bush 1 Campaign gave the press enough to do on their own and they did......nothing.
This was when the media landscape changed and the Limbaughs and other "media bias" folk came out loud and clear.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 26, 2017, 02:42:31 PM
and that Fox News co-president Bill Shine "has demonstrated an obsession with race when it comes to discussions with Mr. Wright, including regularly asking him, 'How do black people react to you' and 'How do you think white viewers look at you?'" He further alleged that when he tried to show a series of positive stories about the black community, he recalled being told "it showed blacks in 'too positive' a light."
Don't take this the wrong way, but wouldn't those be relevant questions ratings-wise?
If black people aren't reacting very well to him and white viewers aren't paying him any attention then wouldn't you suggest he change how he does things if he wants to stay on the air?
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 26, 2017, 10:33:27 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 26, 2017, 02:42:31 PM
and that Fox News co-president Bill Shine "has demonstrated an obsession with race when it comes to discussions with Mr. Wright, including regularly asking him, 'How do black people react to you' and 'How do you think white viewers look at you?'" He further alleged that when he tried to show a series of positive stories about the black community, he recalled being told "it showed blacks in 'too positive' a light."
Don't take this the wrong way, but wouldn't those be relevant questions ratings-wise?
If black people aren't reacting very well to him and white viewers aren't paying him any attention then wouldn't you suggest he change how he does things if he wants to stay on the air?
I would imagine but those are not my questions, they are from an article that I posted the link to beneath them. But you are correct that rating do drive viewership and honestly I have no clue what the attraction to FOX is, but I can say the same about another number of media outlets these days.
They're going after Jesse Watters now for a rather innocuous comment. http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/fox-host-jesse-watters-announces-vacation-following-backlash-over-ivanka-trump-remark/ar-BBAqQ56?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
I also don't understand what people consider "backlash" these days. Like, Twitter backlash?? Because half that shit is fake outrage, bots, phony accounts, etc. I'd never put much weight into that. Plus, Twitter has been known to promote (bump up trending topics) of things that appeal to them, and squash trends that they don't like.
I remember reading a few Trump tweets, and beside the fact that almost every high up reply was negative, many were worded the exact same way on his other tweets. But those were what you saw when you read the replies.