Scarborough vs. O’Reilly…
Last night on Scarborough Country, Joe Scarborough responded to Bill O’Reilly’s criticism of NBC News’ decision to label the Iraq situation a “civil war”. Segment transcript follows…
SCARBOROUGH: And you know, Matthew Felling, though, when we‘re talking about bias, I got to—let‘s bring in Fox News anchor Bill O‘Reilly because he actually went after NBC News for the decision to use the term “civil war” to describe the situation in Iraq. Take a look at Bill O‘Reilly‘s attack on NBC.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL O‘REILLY, “THE O‘REILLY FACTOR”: NBC News has declared that there is indeed a civil war in Iraq. Now, that‘s not shocking because NBC is the most aggressive anti-Bush network these days, as they have made a calculated effort to woo left-wing viewers. The question is, Is NBC wrong about Iraq? The answer is, Yes. Of course, the American media is not helping anyone by oversimplifying the situation and rooting for the USA to lose in Iraq, and that is what some media people are doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: I think that‘s insane, that he‘s suggesting there that NBC is rooting for America to lose in Iraq. Bill O‘Reilly has had questions about this war from the very beginning. Bill O‘Reilly knows we‘re engaged in a civil war over there. I‘m stunned. What is going on at Fox News? Why is Bill O‘Reilly claiming that my network, NBC News, is rooting for terrorists? That‘s truly insulting to me.
MATTHEW FELLING: Yes, well, apparently, we now know of two programs that don‘t have a breathalyzer and require you to be sober when you go on the air. It‘s “The View” and “The O‘Reilly Factor.” This “No spin zone, the alcohol must be…(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: And let me tell you this, Matthew. Hold on. I have defended Bill O‘Reilly time and time again because I know liberals hate Bill because he speaks his mind, and he wins. But I think in this case, it‘s over the top and it‘s very disturbing to me.
FELLING: Well, it‘s not—it‘s not just over the top. And Bill O‘Reilly has quoted some of the data from my group, the Center for Media and Public Affairs, as recently as three weeks ago, when we talked about how the media was covering the congressional 2006 election. And what we found out in the data was, actually, NBC was being the nicest to the GOP and to the Bush administration of the three different networks.
And I Just have to wonder—I mean, Bill O‘Reilly—if you want to call anybody who considers it a civil war rooting for America to lose, you now have to count Colin Powell on that list. And Newt Gingrich has called this involvement in Iraq a failure. So these aren‘t really the “cut and run” Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi people we‘re talking about.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, and you‘ve got that—you‘ve got the neocons that are saying the same thing. And again, this isn‘t about me defending NBC News. I go after my own network, as well as other networks. I‘m just—
I‘m very surprised at it. And again, I don‘t understand what‘s behind that.
FELLING: No. And I—I don‘t understand this culture warrior mentality. He makes a lot of good points, but he has to go over—steps over the bounds, where—I mean, he said, Are they looking to lose the war? And I‘m just—I‘m just asking him, Is he—where is he getting his information? Everything is just in the mind, in between the ears of Bill O‘Reilly, and he just spits it out.
And I mean, I don‘t know who made a bigger—a bigger mistake, what Danny DeVito did or Bill O‘Reilly, because it‘s just misinformation that‘s patently wrong. It‘s provable based on our data.
SCARBOROUGH: Yes, I really think it is. I know there aren‘t a hell of a lot of networks out there other than Fox News that have conservatives like me on. Finally, Tom O‘Neil, we got to go, but let‘s bounce back to Rosie, when you want to talk about somebody who really is biased. Do you think Rosie‘s going to survive “The View” much longer?
Well this explains why SC got that bump in ratings last night. Perhaps Scarborough is trying to emulate KO’s ratings “success” by bashing FNC? Could we see Scarborough’s own “Special Comments” corner coming soon? Hell, why doesn’t all of MSNBC emulate ‘Special Comments’…even Imus can get in on the action.
Comment by Anonymous — November 30, 2006 @ 9:59 pm
Joe did another segment on the same topic tonight.
Comment by IceMan — November 30, 2006 @ 10:29 pm
And he’s doing it again tonight. Is this Abrams new strategy?
Comment by Alison — November 30, 2006 @ 10:30 pm
Sad to say, O’ Reilly’s 100% correct! Note that he said “some” media, not all.
Comment by Paul — December 1, 2006 @ 12:17 am
Anonymous, you’re right. I was flipping around last night (I always do when it’s Colmes’ turn to talk) and saw O’Reilly. So being a Factor fan, I of course watched, to see Joe doing a job on O’Reilly. I can’t believe how so many of MSNBC’s “personalities” make it their mission to go after Fox News and its people. What dolts!
Comment by Missy — December 1, 2006 @ 1:22 am
Missy is so right. Is the mission of MSNBC to talk about the only channel in cable news that understood what to do, and was successful at leavig all the others in their dust? And this Felling guy is a dope.
Comment by Trudy — December 1, 2006 @ 9:50 am
While I agree with #5 and #6……I also think BO is FOS, there indeed is a civil war or worse going on in Iraq. So, either BO has fell off his “rocker” or he’s just staying with the overall FNC talking points. Which says a lot about the no spin zone. Perhaps its time for him to hang it up.
Comment by Terance — December 1, 2006 @ 10:37 am
A few years ago when FNC was taking turns with MSNBC for last place behind CNN, FNC made a habit of attacking CNN’s shows, hosts and perceived liberal bias, just like MSNBC is going after Fox now. This is consistent with the behavior of talk radio stations and even music radio stations over many decades as they’ve competed for dominance.
It’s the ratings LEADER that is best admonished not to mention the competition. There’s no reason to draw any attention to them at all if you’re beating them. But if you’re the ratings loser, there is EVERY reason for mentioning the leader and trying to discredit them in any way, relevant to the target audience.
In the years since FNC took over in the ratings, they’ve seemed to understand this rule, even though O’Reilly has skirted it from time to time. But their reaction to NBC’s decision regarding the civil war in Iraq seems to blow the rule away entirely, and whether Scarborough is right or not I can’t see how it’s good for FNC to keep talking about NBC and MSNBC, especially when 60-something percent of Americans seem to agree with the NBCers, if recent polls are to be believed.
Comment by berberry — December 1, 2006 @ 10:57 am
At some point, MSNBC is just going to have to call themselves “The FOX Review” because if it’s not on FOX they don’t know what to say about it. I also find it interesting that ol’ Joe didn’t talk about any of the other people who are saying that NBC’s “decision” was a political/ratings move, rather than an intellectual one.
But on the plus side, this is further evidence why I’m glad Joe is out of congress. He’s a follower, and just listens to what everyone around him tells him to do… no real opinion of his own, no back-bone to speak of. The definition of all that’s wrong with politicians.
Comment by ImNotBlue — December 1, 2006 @ 12:21 pm
Missy:
“I was flipping around last night (as I always do when it is Colmes’ turn to talk).”
And I thought higher of you than that! You clearly are not interested in hearing two sides of an issue, even thouygh Colmes” is not the best person to represent a “liberal” idea.
Hannity is the biggest blowhard that has ever hit cable TV….and you clearly swallow what he says as if it actually were “truth”. O’Reilly in not much better and his “no spin zone” in reality is nothing but spin.
So please don’t ever go after Olbermann (or MSNBC) again, as I’ve heard you do in the past. The only problem for you is that the words coming out of his mouth are not the words you want to hear.
Comment by Mike — December 1, 2006 @ 12:36 pm
If they want to be their own network, they need to develop their own identity, and sorry, but “This is why Fox sucks” isn’t an identity, it’s a cop-out. If that’s all they have to talk about, something is desperately wrong somewhere. They’re pandering to what they hope will be their new audience: the extreme left. But even Olbermann can’t keep a consistent audience around for his show, which is why he has to keep hauling out new “Special comments” to fire up his liberal base. It’s beyond pathetic. I don’t like being played and that’s exactly what MSNBC’s strategy seems to be these days. I used to avoid Fox, now I avoid MSNBC. It’s CNN only for me these days.
Comment by Alison — December 1, 2006 @ 12:50 pm
I wish all of them would just quit with the attacks.All three( FNC,MSNBC and CNN)have been guilty at one time or another. It all seems so immature and unprofessional.
Comment by Anon — December 1, 2006 @ 2:13 pm
#8: The latest polling shows it’s down to 14% of Americans who still believe it’s NOT a civil war in Iraq. I think there are a lot more adults who believe Santa Claus is coming soon.
#9: Joe is hardly a “follower”. He was part of the so-called “insurgency” to overthrow Newt “let’s suspend the 1st Amendment” Gingrich after the ‘98 elections (and impeachment debacle). So now that he’s saying that although he almost always sticks up for O’Reilly (and he does), anyone who still believes Iraq is not in a civil war is “delusional”, HE’S the one with no “backbone”?
Comment by museglet — December 1, 2006 @ 3:23 pm
I think, berberry and others, that it’s been a slow news week - which is an especially bad thing when you are expecting a big one (with the Pope and the Jordan summit) - and that is the reason for both O’Reilly’s and Scarborough’s pseudo-attacks. And Mike, I think that can explain Missy’s channel-surfing. She’s already heard and rejected AC’s (Alan Colmes’) argument.
I should note also that O’Reilly went after NBC as a whole, as Scarborough went after O’Reilly. Usually O’Reilly is careful to go after the corporation, not an individual, so it can’t be taken as a “personal” attack.
And museglet - NBC does us all a disservice by oversimplifying the Iraq conflict into “just” a civil war. The truth is that the Iraqi civil war is only part of the conflict. With Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s leader, now involved, allied with Muqtada al-Sadr, there is a wider battle just starting between al Qaeda and Hezbollah, with our troops stuck in the middle of all of it. Add to that the ethnic cleansing/genocide taking place, and you have a widening conflict that could eventually engulf the entire Middle East. But NBC has decided to skip covering it, and go with their “just a civil war” angle.
Comment by erljr — December 1, 2006 @ 4:40 pm
erljr, even though we usually disagree, I always respect your articulate opinions, and you never engage in 4th-grade name-calling as many of the posters here seem to do. To me the significane of the NBC decision is that virtually all news organizations have bent themselves into pretzels for at least 2 years, finding ways to submit to the pressure of the Administration and NOT say “civil war”. Only a few brave journalists who have actually BEEN IN IRAQ for years, such as Michael Ware of CNN, have stated the obvious. Or retired U.S. military such as Gen. McCaffrey, who had long supported Bush’s war, but has been saying the words “civil war” for over a year now.
And those words do not imply that is the ONLY conflict in Iraq right now, just that the sectarian viloence has risen to that level for a long, long time. Moody and FOX’s (and therefore mouthpiece O’Reilly) rationalization is far, far more intellectually dishonest, because it is based on NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE as presented by journalists and military experts, including those in the Administration. As usual.
Comment by museglet — December 1, 2006 @ 6:52 pm
Guess I needed to proofread today!
Comment by museglet — December 1, 2006 @ 6:54 pm
Mike,
erljr’s defense of me is fairly accurate (thanks, erljr!). I have watched H & C and have defended Colmes NUMEROUS times over the years. He used to make valid points and was very polite in doing so. But lately, he is just unwatchable, IMO, and I cannot follow his logic. His manners seem to have taken a hike, as he just pounces on people as of late!
And I did watch Countdown for a period of time. I thought KO was very humorous in his presentation, and liked the way he’d often provide background on various news stories on which he reported. HOWEVER, his presenting only one side of a topic and his failure to have on people who represent views opposite his own was apparent to me after a while. Entertaining as he may be, none of us can afford to hear only one view of an issue presented.
Comment by Missy — December 1, 2006 @ 9:23 pm
One thing to add museglet: I was shocked at what Moody said the other day; where to draw the line as to when we can say “civil war” has been discussed on FNC repeatedly over the past few months. Then O’Reilly shocked me again when he took his stand against NBC. Both O’Reilly and Moody are not watching their own network! And they are reinforcing the belief that FNC is NOT fair-and-balanced. Any regular viewer of FNC knows that more and more people were reaching their own line in the sand. The day before NBC’s announcement, one host said he thought it would be civil war when the deaths reached 1000 a week. I have three points:
(1)FNC was NOT ignoring the issue or taking a stand before the Moody screw-up.
(2)I believe close to half of FNC’s “Fox News contributors” were saying “civil war” before the NBC announcement and Moody’s screw up.
(3)Moody screwed up!
Comment by erljr — December 2, 2006 @ 12:27 am
Mike,
“Please don’t ever go after Olbermann again.”
Hmmm, that is a lot of arrogant finger-wagging.
You may be on a slippery slope, sir.
As soon as Alan’s face hits the screen, I hit the remote.
I have listened to this ill mannered bitter loser for as long as I intend to.
Comment by cella — December 2, 2006 @ 11:12 am