General Question

ragingloli's avatar

Where will Bill O'Reilly go now?

Asked by ragingloli (40504points) 1 week ago

Fox has fired him today after it became clear that he is no longer financially viable.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

28 Answers

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Maybe he has an option with Trump’s team for doing Trumpo NEWS from the Oval Office or filling in for Bannon.

johnpowell's avatar

Wort on the street is Glenn Beck is looking for a top.

janbb's avatar

Next Press Secretary after Spicer goes?

Assistant Pussy Grabber?

stanleybmanly's avatar

Well wherever he goes it won’t be the poorhouse.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

I imagine he will go the way of Beck and get his own show on Sirius or One America News Network, or something. These fuckwads never seem to die. Like Beck, Levin, Hannity, et al, he’s an attention whore.

God, I wish he would go, though. But I doubt it. If I had Trump’s money, I would do the world a favor and buy him his own island out in the middle of the Pacific complete with whores and all. Get him out of the way. Then I’d pull the girls out and poison the bloody well.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Not my concern. Even before all the sex stuff came out, he was a horrible and rude news guy.

He is no loss to the news business.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Don’t worry some other FAKE news outlet will snatch him up.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

Radio. Or politics. Maybe retirement and writing books.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

O’Reilly can write? I seriously doubt it.

kritiper's avatar

Rollin’ along with the tumblin’ tumbleweeds…

gorillapaws's avatar

Hopefully he’ll take a long walk off of a short pier…

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

Edit redacted.

Pachy's avatar

Slime always finds a way to recreate itself.

Rarebear's avatar

Glenn Beck has actually recanted a lot of the crazy shit he used to say and has been on an apology tour recently. There was a bit of a hilarious bit when he was interviewed on Samantha Bee.

O’Reilly has written several books with Martin Dugard. Who knows if Dugard is doing most of the writing, but they’ve done well.

dappled_leaves's avatar

He’ll probably just take his millions and go home until someone offers him sufficient money to make talk radio more attractive than the living room couch.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
filmfann's avatar

He will go to his sit and spin zone, and continue to crap out those awful, inaccurate books.

Yellowdog's avatar

FYI—O’Reilly is a competent historian, best-selling author, excellent writer (I first read his articles in National Geographic—not exactly an alt-right publication) and one of the most talented journalists of all time. His books can be found just about anywhere.

I read your rancor but it is not really possible to smear or deny his success and wide audiences. I have no way of knowing whether the allegations are true. On one hand no one is denying it and on the other he shouldn’t have to.

At age 67 and a lifetime of success I don’t think he’s out groveling for a job.

jca's avatar

I googled it last night and they said it’s not clear whether or not he’ll be paid out for his contract. If he’s going to be paid out, and he’s the age he is, how nice to get that pay and not have to work. He’s not in the poor house and won’t be any time soon. He can spend his days on the golf course and enjoying himself without worrying about money. How nice is that?

dappled_leaves's avatar

@Yellowdog Bill O’Reilly certainly is not a competent historian; his books are filled with bias and inaccuracies, as @filmfann said. You may think that he is an “excellent writer”, but of course the prose belongs to Martin Dugard and other ghostwriters, not O’Reilly.

And no doubt, O’Reilly will continue to cash in on this nonsense going forward.

Strauss's avatar

It doesn’t matter

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Best answer yet^^^ and for the most part who freaking cares about the future of some extreme right wing journalist ??

Brian1946's avatar

@dappled_leaves

I can’t read the article you linked without subscribing.

Would you please post the text here or send it to me via PM?

Strauss's avatar

@Brian1946 Would you please post the text here… Article by George F. Will, Washington Post, November 10, 2015.

Bill O’Reilly Makes a Mess of History

Were the lungs the seat of wisdom, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly would be wise, but they are not and he is not. So it is not astonishing that he is doubling down on his wager that the truth cannot catch up with him. It has, however, already done so.

The prolific O’Reilly has, with his collaborator Martin Dugard, produced five “history” books in five years: “Killing Lincoln,” “Killing Kennedy, “Killing Jesus,” “Killing Patton” and now the best-selling “Killing Reagan.” Because no one actually killed Reagan, O’Reilly keeps his lucrative series going by postulating that the bullet that struck Reagan in March 1981 kind of, sort of killed him, although he lived 23 more years.

O’Reilly “reports” that the trauma of the assassination attempt was somehow causally related to the “fact” that Reagan was frequently so mentally incompetent that senior aides contemplated using the Constitution’s 25th Amendment to remove him from office. But neither O’Reilly nor Dugard spoke with any of those aides — not with Ed Meese, Jim Baker, George Shultz or any of the scores of others who could, and would, have demolished O’Reilly’s theory. O’Reilly now airily dismisses them because they “have skin in the game.” His is an interesting approach to writing history: Never talk to anyone with firsthand knowledge of your subject.

Instead, O’Reilly made the book’s “centerpiece” a memo he has never seen and never tried to see until 27 days after the book was published. Then Dugard asked the Reagan Presidential Library to find it.

Recently on Fox News, O’Reilly put this on the screen from Sue Janzen of Yorba Linda, Calif.: “We went to the Reagan Library, and were told they do not sell Killing Reagan because it’s not factual.” Then O’Reilly said: “You were deceived, Sue. The Reagan Library is angry at Martin Dugard and me because we’re seeking” the Cannon memo. He added: “The memo’s disappeared. But Dugard and I are on the case and the library is not happy about it.”

“Disappeared”? His crude intimation was that the allegedly deceptive library is hiding the memo. The library, however, has never had it because when James Cannon wrote it, he was not a member of the White House staff, hence the memo was not a “presidential record.”

O’Reilly recently canceled an interview with Meese, who says O’Reilly told him he was “vetting” the memo. (How does one vet a memo one does not possess?) O’Reilly says he canceled the interview because Meese set “conditions.” Meese, who was eager to be interviewed, waived any conditions.

The “centerpiece” memo was written by Cannon at the request of former senator Howard Baker (R-Tenn.) when Baker was about to replace the fired Don Regan as Reagan’s chief of staff. The memo assessing White House conditions apparently included disparagements of Reagan from some unhappy Regan staffers. The memo was presented to Baker at a meeting at Baker’s home attended by A.B. Culvahouse, who the next day would become counsel to the president. Culvahouse remembers the normally mild-mannered Baker brusquely dismissing the memo: “That’s not the Reagan I met with two days ago.”

Neither Baker nor Culvahouse considered the memo important enough to save. Meeting with Reagan the next day, Baker and others found no reason to question his competence.

O’Reilly impales himself on a contradiction: He says his book is “laudatory” about Reagan — and that it is being attacked by Reagan “guardians” and “loyalists.” How odd. Liberals, who have long recognized that to discredit conservatism they must devalue Reagan’s presidency, surely are delighted with O’Reilly’s assistance. The diaspora of Reagan administration alumni, and the conservative movement, now recognize O’Reilly as an opportunistic interloper.

He began his profitable paltering with America’s past with “Killing Lincoln.” Historians advising the National Park Service, which administers Ford’s Theatre, found a multitude of errors in the first, uncorrected version, in which, for example, O’Reilly repeatedly places Lincoln in the Oval Office, which was built in 1909. The Theatre bookstore still does not sell “Killing Lincoln.” The Theatre gift shop, a commercial rather than educational entity, does. Four “histories” later, O’Reilly remains slipshod.

In “The Great Gatsby,” F. Scott Fitzgerald writes of Tom and Daisy Buchanan, who “smashed up things” and then “retreated back into . . . their vast carelessness . . . and let other people clean up the mess they had made.” Tidying up after O’Reilly could be a full-time job but usually is not worth the trouble. When, however, O’Reilly’s vast carelessness pollutes history and debases the historian’s craft, the mess is, unlike O’Reilly, to be taken seriously.

jonsblond's avatar

Continue writing best seller books. He doesn’t need Fox.

Strauss's avatar

@jonsblond Continue writing best seller books.

Don’t you mean “Continue to have Martin Dugard (and others) ghostwrite his bestseller books!”

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther