Comments on: Obama v. O’Reilly: The Press at its Best
By Grumpy on 09-12-08
I don’t know, Dan, the interview I saw ( I’ve only seen the one) struck me as predictable. Everbody knows where O’Reilly stands, and everyone should know by now where Obama stands. The press keeps saying there are a lot of “undecided’s” out there, and these sorts of interviews will help sort things out for them, but every single person I know has already made up their mind who they are going to vote for – the first time I can ever remember that happening in a presidential election, and I go back, well, let’s just say I’ve seen quite a few elections. So I’m not convinced there are a lot of undecided’s left straddling the fence out there.
As to the interview techniques of Olbermann vs. OReilly, I think you would need to compare Olbermann interviewing McCain to get a good comparison to O’Reilly interviewing Obama. We all know if O’Reilly interviews McCain, it will be a rah-rah interview, with O’Reilly doing every thing he can do to help McCain look good. And if Olbermann were to do the interview, he would do everything he could to trip McCain up, get him to make a mistake or say something that would damage his electability. And the reverse if they interviewed Obama. Though I doubt McCain will agree to be interviewed by Olbermann because the infamous McCain temper might show through and his handlers will not let that happen. But they might send Palin, she does better at that sort of thing, and it has the added bonus of if Olbermann where to get the better of her, the McCain camp could disavow what she says. But McCain will not do what Obama did and march into the enemies camp.
As to the “Press” on television, they are no longer journalists. An unfortunate change in my opinion. They are all advocates in one form or another. Rupert Murdock started it all, or capitalized on it, depending on your reference point, but the fact remains that todays “news” is entertainment, not journalism. Americans prefer entertainment and it shows in the ratings, and since ratings determine everything ... we get fluff and sound bytes and indignation instead of substance and insight. The press distills the two campaigns down to “NoBama” and “McSame.” And the sad part is, it works.
By Carl on 09-12-08
I watched all segments of the O’Reilly/Obama interview and I thought Obama was quite impressive. O’Reilly’s “shouting down” etc. didn’t really exist for more than the moment it took to urge Obama to answer the question. All things considered, O’Reilly did Obama and his campaign a service, in that the people that watched the interview may well be steered toward voting for Obama. I won’t simply because I value experience that only a navy fighter pilot can have, and the honor that McCain has shown through out his life.
By elo on 09-12-08
I’m not an O’Reilly fan - but Dr. Tantillo (‘the marketing doctor’ - http://blog.marketingdoctor.tv) just did a post naming O’Reilly this week’s brand ‘winner,’ thanks to his interview of Obama.
Tantillo argues that, through this interview, “[O’Reilly] has broadened Fox’s audience by showing that this network (often characterized by Democrats as biased) might actually be more fair and balanced than they think —still aggressive but fair.”
Here’s a link to the full post: http://blog.marketingdoctor.tv/2008/09/12/brand-winners-and-losers.aspx
By ahzi on 09-13-08
Calling either O’Reilly OR Olbermann “journalists” is, in my mind, a stretch. As a previous commentor noted, Olbermann treated Obama just as O’Really would treat McCain. It’s just more of the same b.s. from the networks - no substance, just a 24-hour news cycle with yesterday’s headlines replaced by today’s and all of it soon, if not immediately, forgotten.
By Roark on 09-13-08
I’d pay to hear Michael Savage interview Obama.
By kd on 09-13-08
Ahzi is right. ‘Commentators” like O’Reilly, Olbermann, Matthews, Limbaugh, that racist homophobe Michael Savage, and just about anyone on Faux News are not real journalists or reporters. They may be “tough” on candidates they oppose, but they don’t gather news, and yelling at someone during an interview is being a terrible reporter.
By Roark on 09-13-08
kd, please cite to me specifically your evidence of Michael Savage being a racist.
By illustr8r on 09-13-08
Any comments on how ABC treated Sarah Palin? Charlie Gibson wouldn’t dare ask such tough questions to The One. In fact-he didn’t.
Obama interview:
How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?
Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]
Anyway, I think voters are finally catching a clue who the media is rooting for in this election. Complain about Fox News but the conservatives on there tell viewers who they politically align with. The rest of the mainstream media doesn’t-they just write and report one way for their champs and twist it another for the ee-vil repubs. Chris Matthews and his “tingle up his leg” and comparing O Dem nomination acceptance speech to “a speech worthy of Abraham Lincoln” -pa-leeze!!!
My dad was a reporter and copy editor for an Ohio newspaper and in his day he said he said he would have been fired for the way the press behaves now. You were required to keep your own political agenda out of the stories that you wrote. He is very sad about the shape that journalism is in now. He WAS a Democrat too. Not now.
By Roark on 09-13-08
Gibson must think we’re all chumps. Everyone and their dog knows that he and his staff edited the hell out of the Palin interview to make it seem as though her answers were incoherent, ambiguous, and disjointed. Doesn’t he realize that this is the internet age and that you can’t pull the wool over peoples eyes as in yesteryear? Anyhow, because of his heavy handed editing debacle he’s become an even more dis-respected laughing stock. People don’t appreciate being played for a fool, or as Judge Judy so eloquently put it,“Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining”.
By annie on 09-13-08
Dan, i liked the interview w/O’Reilly , the little i saw of it. yes, Obama answered some ‘tough’ questions but there was very little there for anyone who is familiar w/Obama’s policies. I thought for the most part it was helpful for people who were either unfamiliar with him for whatever reason, especially those who simple think he stands for nothing, which has been a great talking point for the right, largely unsubstantiated.
illustr8r , here is the difference between gibson’s interview with the two candidates. One of them has been on the public stage running this campaign for a year and a half. he has an extensive website that lists his positions on all his proposed policies and there are hours and hours of videos of him speaking and being interviewed online. the other is a brand new candidate 97.5% of the american public had never heard of a couple weeks ago. since her running mate is the oldest guy to ever run for highest office on the globe and has a history of cancer excuse me for being in the least curious what some of her positions might be if she were to become president. if the mcCain campaign had not made an announcement they were not running on issues (which some of us older quaint folks seem to still care about), and not making palin available for many interviews some people just want to hear her views, we already heard Obamas views on iran , israel and russia the economy a zillion times over the longest presidential campaign in the history of the universe. anyone who doesn’t know his stand on issues hasn’t been paying attention, or doesn’t want to know.
this is the treatment you get when you pick an unknown. she’s getting a crash course on issues, McCain style, and we are getting a crash course on her. don’t whine about it. the people who it matters to (republicans) seem to love her and apparently will excuse her any and everything.
that said, journalism isn’t what it used to be. we are in an era of secret government, lies, and propaganda. the media is owned by the corporations and the american public is getting dumbed down.
abc is owned by disney. last i heard they weren’t ‘liberal’. aren’t they the station that ran the historically reconstructed docu drama 9/11?
By Roark on 09-13-08
“I thought for the most part it was helpful for people who were either unfamiliar with him for whatever reason, especially those who simple think he stands for nothing, which has been a great talking point for the right, largely unsubstantiated.”—-HE DOES STAND FOR SOMETHING; RACIST SOCIALISM.
“One of them has been on the public stage running this campaign for a year and a half. he has an extensive website that lists his positions on all his proposed policies and there are hours and hours of videos of him speaking and being interviewed online.”
—-WOW, THAT’S REALLY…IRRELEVANT.
“if the mcCain campaign had not made an announcement they were not running on issues (which some of us older quaint folks seem to still care about)”
—-YOU MEAN CARING ABOUT ISSUES LIKE RACIST SOCIALISM AND THE DESTRUCTION OF LIBERTY IN OUR CONSTITUTION?
“anyone who doesn’t know his stand on issues hasn’t been paying attention, or doesn’t want to know.”
—-I KNOW WHERE OBAMA STANDS ON THE ISSUES, AT LEAST UNTIL THEY CHANGE A WEEK LATER.
“that said, journalism isn’t what it used to be. we are in an era of secret government, lies, and propaganda. the media is owned by the corporations and the american public is getting dumbed down.”
—-YOU’RE RIGHT. IT HAS GOTTEN BETTER, BECAUSE THE LEFT DOESN’T HOLD A MONOPOLY ON THE PRESS LIKE THEY USED TO, THANKS IN LARGE PART TO THE INTERNET, AND PEOPLE CAN CHECK AND VERIFY THEIR PATENT B.S.
“abc is owned by disney. last i heard they weren’t ‘liberal’.”
—-WHEN WAS THAT?-1959?
By illustr8r on 09-13-08
Admittedly, I may know a little more about Gov. Palin than the average voter because I have family in Alaska. Who, by the way, are disgusted at how the press have treated her since her announcement as VP…and how the press looks down on AK because it is west of the Hudson River. My husband’s grandfather in AK doesn’t care that John McCain is “old” (isn’t McCain’s Mom like 95 or something-so he comes from hearty stock, big C or otherwise). He does care about what an Obama presidency might do the country. He is a WWII vet and says this is the most important election in his lifetime.
When will the mainstream media ask Obama tough questions about William Ayers, how he got HIS million dollar house(Resko), they try to make Gov.Palin out to be a religious nut but what about Obama’s Rev. Wright? What about his program where we the taxpayers pay to turn young people into full time activists? What about the Fairness Doctrine?
No candidate is perfect but the press is doing all they can to ruin Palin. I don’t agree with McCain/Palin 100% and I am wondering what might happen with immigration under McCain. In comparison to what O might do though…ugh. So, for the safety of our country and my wallet I hope they win. I think the voter this year wins too because the mainstream media has been exposed for their bias towards Democrats.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28508
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305420655186700
By illustr8r on 09-13-08
And- it’s not just bias in interviews, or commentary or in the way that Gibson “looks down” his reader glasses at Gov. Palin. It’s also in imagery and how each (R) side (D) is represented to the public. Obama gets his halo…and McCain, well, read and see:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/13/lib-photographer-admits-making-mccain-look-sinister-mag-cover
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.