Media Matters, Bill O'Reilly, Assorted Lunatics
MEDIA MATTERS DERAILS
Brock's Site Taken In By Moonbat Antagonism Campaign
While we would never accuse Media Matters of placing a particular emphasis on
accuracy, it's stunning to see David Brock's leftist media site embrace an overt anti-Bill O'Reilly harassment campaign.
It's one thing to critique O'Reilly's show, quite another to encourage creepy stalkers to step up their efforts.
By highlighting and clearly misrepresenting a call O'Reilly was forced to cut off, Media Matters could potentially face real liability issues if crazed lunatics now feel emboldened to bring harm to O'Reilly, anyone at Westwood One or the FOX News Channel.
This issue transcends political ideology, Mr. Brock and you reap what you sow.
Don't take our word for it, read what the blogger apparently behind this months-long harassment campaign (he also points to an incident with O'Reilly from last October) has to say:
In the huge number of comments that follow, it takes some time before anyone states the obvious:
Exactly: even radio novices have heard about the delay, Brock no doubt among them. When the "dump" button is pressed, listeners simply aren't going to hear what was said in the previous seven to ten seconds.
Therefore, we're not hearing what really led to the caller being dumped, the most important portion of the conversation. That there was more to it than a mere mention of Keith Olbermann's name is quite obvious.
If O'Reilly were to let the offending language reach the airwaves, imagine the outcry from the left, not to mention the FCC.
And yet Brock's site still published this dubious "transcript":
By giving this guy validation, as Media Matters has done, others are also now encouraged to follow suit. That's downright dangerous. Does Brock really hate O'Reilly and FOX News that much?
If somebody hurts him, David, what will you have left to write about?
Since 1993, either for political or personal reasons, I've worked with many hosts across the country who couldn't stand each other. Sometimes we would argue in the hallways, or the studio between shows.
If you ever wanted to bring everyone together in a state of solidarity, however, simply get us talking about the personal threats faced by crazed stalkers.
Since it's usually the same few lunatics going after everybody, names and experiences can be shared. In Seattle, one person was for years a major headache. To the side of the studio, we kept a photo of him (while under arrest) for identification purposes.
At two stations I've been associated with, shots were fired right at the facilities from the street. One had bulletproof glass, so it didn't penetrate the second pane, while the other had shards all over the front lobby.
Luckily, nobody was hurt.
As much as media egomaniacs might hate each other, they would never encourage potentially psychopathic stalkers to go after enemies. With this crusade, David Brock reveals the degree to which he's blinded by hatred, taking us all into unchartered waters.
UPDATE: Even the left-leaning TVNewser fell for this, pointing to "several stories" of FOX News security agents calling people at home. Sure enough, one of the two personal accounts featured at the site he references, again comes from our friend "Mike". While we're not disputing whether calls were made, we don't know the reasons. In addition, Mike is overtly organizing an anti-O'Reilly harassment campaign.
This is getting really out of hand.
Thanks for your continued and vital Radio Equalizer support, via Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately order! Because this investigative work is taking an increasing amount of our time, it's needed more than ever.
O'Reilly photo: Canadian Press
Brock's Site Taken In By Moonbat Antagonism Campaign
While we would never accuse Media Matters of placing a particular emphasis on
accuracy, it's stunning to see David Brock's leftist media site embrace an overt anti-Bill O'Reilly harassment campaign.It's one thing to critique O'Reilly's show, quite another to encourage creepy stalkers to step up their efforts.
By highlighting and clearly misrepresenting a call O'Reilly was forced to cut off, Media Matters could potentially face real liability issues if crazed lunatics now feel emboldened to bring harm to O'Reilly, anyone at Westwood One or the FOX News Channel.
This issue transcends political ideology, Mr. Brock and you reap what you sow.
Don't take our word for it, read what the blogger apparently behind this months-long harassment campaign (he also points to an incident with O'Reilly from last October) has to say:
Bill O’Reilly: First Blood
Published by Mike ----- (surname removed) March 2nd, 2006 in Bill O'Reilly
We got him today. One mention of Keith Olberman and Bill wet his pants. After a week of pinpricks (about 3-5 mentions of Olberman), this one finally got to Bill…
In this call, you’ll hear Olberman’s name mentioned. It didn’t get broadcast - Bill dumped it. This sound comes from the Bill O’Reilly premium membership I just paid for. (I vomited in my mouth as I hit the “Finalize Order” button).
Tomorrow I want to have a big push. Today we reduced O’Reilly to making false and empty threats. Tomorrow, crush him.
Email me if you’re game. ----- (removed) dot m at gmail dot com.
In the huge number of comments that follow, it takes some time before anyone states the obvious:Typical radio delay is 7 seconds. Starting with the point where the audio got cut off on the air, the next 7 seconds heard on the tape will be all that the guy could say before being cut off.
Exactly: even radio novices have heard about the delay, Brock no doubt among them. When the "dump" button is pressed, listeners simply aren't going to hear what was said in the previous seven to ten seconds.
Therefore, we're not hearing what really led to the caller being dumped, the most important portion of the conversation. That there was more to it than a mere mention of Keith Olbermann's name is quite obvious.
If O'Reilly were to let the offending language reach the airwaves, imagine the outcry from the left, not to mention the FCC.
And yet Brock's site still published this dubious "transcript":
O'REILLY: Orlando, Florida, Mike, go.
CALLER: Hey Bill, I appreciate you taking my call.
O'REILLY: Sure.
CALLER: I like to listen to you during the day, I think Keith Olbermann's show --
O'REILLY: There ya go, Mike is -- he's a gone guy. You know, we have his -- we have your phone numbers, by the way. So, if you're listening, Mike, we have your phone number, and we're going to turn it over to Fox security, and you'll be getting a little visit.
HILL: Maybe Mike is from the mothership.
O'REILLY: No, Maybe Mike is going to get into big trouble, because we're not going to play around. When you call us, ladies and gentleman, just so you know, we do have your phone number, and if you say anything untoward, obscene, or anything like that, Fox security then will contact your local authorities, and you will be held accountable. Fair?
HILL: That's fair.
O'REILLY: So, just -- all you guys who do this kind of a thing, you know, I know some shock jocks. Whatever. You will be held accountable. Believe it.
We'll be right back.
By giving this guy validation, as Media Matters has done, others are also now encouraged to follow suit. That's downright dangerous. Does Brock really hate O'Reilly and FOX News that much?
If somebody hurts him, David, what will you have left to write about?Since 1993, either for political or personal reasons, I've worked with many hosts across the country who couldn't stand each other. Sometimes we would argue in the hallways, or the studio between shows.
If you ever wanted to bring everyone together in a state of solidarity, however, simply get us talking about the personal threats faced by crazed stalkers.
Since it's usually the same few lunatics going after everybody, names and experiences can be shared. In Seattle, one person was for years a major headache. To the side of the studio, we kept a photo of him (while under arrest) for identification purposes.
At two stations I've been associated with, shots were fired right at the facilities from the street. One had bulletproof glass, so it didn't penetrate the second pane, while the other had shards all over the front lobby.
Luckily, nobody was hurt.
As much as media egomaniacs might hate each other, they would never encourage potentially psychopathic stalkers to go after enemies. With this crusade, David Brock reveals the degree to which he's blinded by hatred, taking us all into unchartered waters.
UPDATE: Even the left-leaning TVNewser fell for this, pointing to "several stories" of FOX News security agents calling people at home. Sure enough, one of the two personal accounts featured at the site he references, again comes from our friend "Mike". While we're not disputing whether calls were made, we don't know the reasons. In addition, Mike is overtly organizing an anti-O'Reilly harassment campaign.
This is getting really out of hand.
Thanks for your continued and vital Radio Equalizer support, via Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately order! Because this investigative work is taking an increasing amount of our time, it's needed more than ever.
O'Reilly photo: Canadian Press
published by Brian Maloney at
06:00
9 Comments:
O'reilly is such a pussy. and you, maloney, for taking his side, when you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this caller "threatened" him, are just as big of a pussy. "we're going to call the cops on you!" what a douche. for someone who likes to portray himself as tough, he sure does go crying about it when someone isn't nice to him. i only say this because i know that you would be saying exactly what i just said if it had been Franken getting a call like that. you know, i hope that o'reilly really sees what a pussy this makes him out to be. why don't we now call it the "no-balls zone"?
By
hardcore conservative genious, at 05 March, 2006 11:39
I was reading up on this and apparently you can fine out what that caller said. Wouldn't getting it Straight from the caller himself be better than speculating?
By
Unknown, at 05 March, 2006 16:54
Brian’s Lies Watch – Day 10 Post 12
The anatomy of a lie:
1) Rush Limbaugh, on his Feb 14 radio show, in talking about the Ohio Hackett/Brown Democratic Primary, said:
a. “And don’t forget, Sherrord Brown is black” – this was not a lie, but a mistake
b. He then said, “There’s a racial component here, too”
2) Rush was then informed by listeners via e-mails that Brown was not black, and was, in fact, white. Paul Hackett was white, as well
3) Therefore, there was no “racial element” to the story at all
4) Rush “corrected” his mistake that Brown was black, but DID NOT retract or apologize for the “racial element” remark
He made up the “racial element” angle, obviously. This was Rush’s lie. His next lie:
1) He said “I’m not gonna apologize, ‘cause I don’t think it’s an insult to be black”
2) Of course, this is a lie, too, because he should be apologizing for making up the “racial component” of the story
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2006/02/rush-limbaugh-cincinnati-sherrod-brown.html (the link on Brian’s page is about to disappear forever)
Brian Maloney then reported on the story on Feb 20. He related the story as if the only element was the “error” Rush Limbaugh Made about Brown’s race.
Of course, the real story was the “racial component” that Rush made up and then refused to retract.
Hence, Brian lied as well.
The elements of the story as I’ve stated above are incontrovertible fact.
But don’t believe me, and don’t believe anyone else - Research for yourselves.
By
TJ, at 05 March, 2006 17:57
frankenlies said that TJ "you've been debunked several times over already."
This is incorrect. Not only did Rush invent the "racial component" in the Brown/Hackett decision, he also indicated the New York Times was some how at fault for not reporting it. So the Democrat's decision was racially motivated, and the New York Times was duplicitious by not reporting it.
Here is the Rush quote: "And don't forget, Sherrod Brown is black. There's a racial component here, too. And now, the newspaper that I'm reading all this from is The New York Times, and they, of course, don't mention that.
By
Ezsuds, at 06 March, 2006 02:30
Mike's performing a public service. The only one guilty of harassment is Bill O'Reilly, who is the new face of fascism. If Bill wants to take on Keith Olbermann, he should stop hiding behind his viewers and show up once in a while. He's just a pompous sack o'shit.
By
Anonymous, at 06 March, 2006 07:52
Boy, you O'Reilly haters never do learn. Why would he be angry about some kook mentioning Olbermann? Olbermann is not even a remote threat to O'Reilly's ratings and never will be. The fact that the guy enjoy's Olbermann's show proves he's not too bright and it's most likely that before the made his threat or started cursing or whatever idiotic thing he did, there was nothing too bright spewing out of his mouth anyway. Nor will there ever be.
If anything, this says plenty about the insecurity of the left. I'd never even think of calling a leftist talk show host. First of all, they don't encourage debate, so I'd never get on or they would just dump the call when they realize they're about to exposed as fools.
Second, why bother countering a point a liberal host has made or getting into an argument with them at all? No one's listening. They can rant and rave all they want to their little enclave of listeners, but Conservative talk doesn't care because the libs aren't even considered competition.
It's this second part that really sticks in their craw because this fact has even been able to penetrate their extra thick skulls...even if they refuse to admit it and keep trying to cook the numbers in their favor.
By
Dr. T, at 06 March, 2006 12:36
one important point that everyone is missing:
Brian isn't championing this effort because he believes Mike Stark is dangerous, nor because he believes Mike Stark should be feared.
Brian is reporting this (and will very soon be beating it to death) because Bill O'Reilly PUT BRIAN ON THE AIR ONCE (at least) and mentions this blog.
Brian, having failed in radio as a partisan, is desperately trying to reinvent himself in "investigative reporting" as a partisan.
He, like many, many others, is trying to do it the easy way - start a blog, and hope for enough noteriety to get some backing.
Only time will tell if he gets to make a living spewing this crap day-in and day-out.
However, while he does, expect much more in the way of kiss-ups to O'Reilly and any other more prominent person who gives him mention, as well as hyperbolic attacks against the perceived enemies of same.
He's hoping, after-all, to make this his bread-and-butter.
By
TJ, at 06 March, 2006 20:25
I used to leave the occasional comment at MMFA, and they even added me to an announcements list for immigration posts (without asking me first). However, I just gave up after I got tired of them continually deleting my on-topic, non-abusive, informative comments that showed how they were wrong.
MMFA is frequently wrong, and I encourage you to leave comments there. Some of them might stick.
I also suggest editing Wikipedia's entry on MMFA for accuracy. I added some of their mistakes there, but they were deleted.
(And, don't forget to buy a pixel to save AAR Phoenix.)
By
LonewackoDotCom, at 07 March, 2006 03:14
I heard about you on the O'Reilly Factor last night and had to pop over here to see your blog. :) O'Reilly totally rocks.
By
Unknown, at 08 March, 2006 18:50
Post a Comment
<< Home