Bill Moyers owned by Bill O'Reilly

Very interesting, typical far left BS by Moyers.

 

Bill Moyers at least uses fact instead of ineuendo and complete garbage that o'reilly spouts. Moyers actually researches a subject and doesn't shoot from the hip the way the small minded short sighted o'reilly.

 

True investigative journalism is definately on the decline and has been since 1988.... O'Reilly is a perfect example of this.

 

So what is the logic here? Because Bill Moyers could not remember impromptu that he said that in general pundits spew venom, his claims about the administration and the media are not true?

Talk about colluding independent events.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tom 6850 @ Apr 26 2007, 06:35 AM) [snapback]430361[/snapback]</div>

i believe bill moyers was a biggie in the LBJ administration and used the FBI to investigate people in the Goldwater campaign staff? He has i believe a long and cherised leftie liberal history and now is viewed as some kind of media guru??? funny

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Apr 26 2007, 08:29 AM) [snapback]430454[/snapback]</div>

A good analysis of the distortions in the O'reilly piece here:
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/04/25/bill_o...o_surrealtv.php

 

What I find funny is that Murdoch's TV lapdogs are busy going "ooh look over there - big scary rich foreigner trying to influence the US media". :lol: You Americans, you crack me up.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tom 6850 @ Apr 26 2007, 05:35 AM) [snapback]430361[/snapback]</div>

Umm yeah, O'Reilly is an imbecile, Moyers is an educated scholar. I guess you watch who you can relate to...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveLeePrius @ Apr 26 2007, 09:48 AM) [snapback]430473[/snapback]</div>

If I agree with your view you are an educated scholar. If I don't, you are an imbecile.

 

I think the juxtaposition of what was asked and said need to be posted here:

WATTERS: Well, didn't you give an interview where you said he was part of a slime machine and trying to discredit other journalists?

MOYERS: The FOX News, the talk radio, The Weekly Standard have not only mongered for war along with the administration, not only embraced the administration's policies because they were "conservative", including going to war, but also mounted a slime machine to discredit any journalist who dared to stand against the official view of reality.

WATTERS: You said that Bill spews venom.

MOYERS: If a journalist tried to tell the truth about the intelligence the Hannitys and the O'Reillys and the Limbaughs and the Mike Savages would come down on them and you know slander them, discredit them. So that good reporting lost its power to break through because of this, this avalanche of opposition and venom directed at them.

O'REILLY: I believe I heard the word "venom."

I didn't hear the word "spew". I think the OP just enjoys the emotions people like O'Reilly stir within without looking at the evidence. In other words they live in "truthiness".

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Apr 26 2007, 06:53 AM) [snapback]430482[/snapback]</div>

I didn't hear "spew" either, but "venom" was included.

I like Bill Moyers; he's one of my favorite liberals. He used to be fair and very much open to presenting other viewpoints. But like so many others, he has surrounded himself with people who think like he does, and opposing views are no longer "another point of view" but instead dangerous, or slanderous, or "venom" from the other side.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 26 2007, 11:35 PM) [snapback]431018[/snapback]</div>

No. They misquoted what he said and asked if he said it, to which he truthfully answered no.

See, a real journalist, like Moyers, understands that when you quote someone, you don't get to rewrite it. That's called journalism. You report what actually happened. What Fox does is called fiction. Moyers probably knew, after a brief moment of puzzlement, that he hadn't said those phrases because the syntax wasn't his; it just wasn't the way he would have phrased it, so he said no.

(Just as a side note: if you're ever spent any time transcribing dialogue, you would understand that people have very distinct patterns of speech and phrasing individual to themselves. Moyers, having spent much of his life interviewing people and writing down those interviews, would have a very good sense of the way he himself phrases things.)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MegansPrius @ Apr 27 2007, 08:52 AM) [snapback]431089[/snapback]</div>

Note to O'Reilly - must try different lure. Moyersfish clearly too crafty to be fooled with current bait.

 

Moyers seems like a nice guy, but obviously is getting tripped up in a few lies, whether inadvertently or not.

I wouldn't use this one episode to discredit the guy, but he has a long history of bias that comes through in a very insidious manner in his show "NOW".

There is nothing wrong with bias per se - certainly O'Reilly does little to hide his bias. However, in Moyer's case, his program was taxpayer funded and presented as balanced journalism.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TimBikes @ Apr 27 2007, 03:53 PM) [snapback]431354[/snapback]</div>

Yeah. Truth and reality tends to have this nasty liberal bias.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Apr 26 2007, 09:58 AM) [snapback]430434[/snapback]</div>

Isn't that exactly what Scooter Libby is in (or going to) jail for right now? He forgot after much questioning exactly who told him that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA. A fact that almost everyone (mostly reporters) knew already.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(roryjr @ Apr 28 2007, 05:01 AM) [snapback]431602[/snapback]</div>

The circumstances, venue, and context of Mr. Libby's questioning was quite a bit different than Mr. Moyers'. The two aren't comparable.

OTOH, I have no doubt that some right-winger will indignantly bring up that Bill Clinton did the same thing as Libby but didn't go to jail for it (although he was impeached).