The reason why I find it so funny is that Bill has the worst inconsistencies of any major media personality that I watch and is constantly being called out on them by the web community.
For example, he says that Media Matters is the worst, yet they point out his inconsistencies more than anyone. Most importantly, they always show transcripts, court cases, and other documented facts. He says that the Smoking Gun is just as awful. They are the ones who would not let him sweep his sexual harassment case under the carpet. Think Progress even showed that Bill lied in this latest segment.
But let me tell you the one thing Oâ€™Reilly did that made me really feel disdain for him. A few nights ago, Oâ€™Reilly was interviewing General Clark about the Abu Ghraib pictures that were ordered to be released. First, Bill made the argument that torture has always been a condoned part of American warfare, why should now be different? I believe that Americans hold themselves to a higher standard and we cannot say we are liberating Iraq from a violent, torturing dictator if our soldiers do the same.
But then, he started listing off American torture in previous wars and said this:
General! You need to look at the Malmedy massacre in World War Two, and the 82nd Airborne who did it!
The Malmedy massacre was a slaughter of at least 72 American prisoners of war by the Nazis.
Do you want to know whatâ€™s worse?
- 1) Bill has not acknowledged his error.
- 2) He has not apologized to the soldiers and families of the 82nd Airborne.
- 3) And, are you ready for this, Fox News edited the statement out of their transcript on the web!!!
Yet, this is why I love what the internet has done to free speech in this country. For decades, media outlets have barely been accountable for what they print and say. Now the citizens have a medium for checking the data and ideas disseminated through the airwaves and newsprint. In a government of checks and balances, I see this as liberating step towards true democracy.
So when you go to a website, ask yourself: Are they linking to source evidence? Are they looking at all the evidence or just specific pieces that support a given point? And feel free to voice your own opinion. Itâ€™s just as valid as everyone elseâ€™s.