STUDY: Bill O’Reilly Uses Derogatory Names ‘More Than Once Every Seven Seconds’

[IChing]

A new study by Indiana University media researchers finds that Fox News host Bill O’Reilly calls “a person or a group a derogatory name once every 6.8 seconds, on average, or nearly nine times every minute during the editorials that open his program each night.”

The study documented six months worth, or 115 episodes, of O’Reilly’s “Talking Points Memo” editorials “using propaganda analysis techniques made popular after World War I.” Researchers found that O’Reilly “was prone to inject fear into his commentaries and quick to resort to name-calling. He also frequently assigned roles or attributes — such as ‘villians’ or downright ‘evil’ — to people and groups.

Some findings from the study:

– Fear was used in more than half (52.4 percent) of the commentaries, and O’Reilly almost never offered a resolution to the threat. For example, in a commentary on “left-wing” media unfairly criticizing Attorney Gen. Alberto Gonzales for his role in the Abu Ghraib scandal, O’Reilly considered this an example of America “slowly losing freedom and core values,” and added, “So what can be done? Unfortunately, not much.”

– The researchers identified 22 groups of people that O’Reilly referenced in his commentaries, and while all 22 were described by O’Reilly as bad at some point, the people and groups most frequently labeled bad were the political left — Americans as a group and the media (except those media considered by O’Reilly to be on the right).

>>>>>snip..............link: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/02/oreilly-derogatory/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
So what else is new?

[Beelzebud]

1. So what? We do have freedom of speech. I'm sure Malloy uses more than that.

[Deep13]

3. Really, how can I listen to Malloy?

I live in NE Ohio. He doesn't seem to be on the radio here.

[Beelzebud]

5. www.novamradio.com :) Enjoy!

[Deep13]

10. Oops, I don't think I can use the computer in the car.

And the office computer doesn't have a sound card.

My point was that O'Reilly and the rest of those screw heads are everywhere where one really has to hunt for liberal radio. Liberal TV only exists in parody form. Freedom of speech doesn't mean much when only one side effectively has it.

[Beelzebud]

11. So because Malloy doesn't have a national radio deal, we should deny the 1st amendment?

Thats my point.

Shill O'Lielly might be repugnant, but he does have 1st amendment rights.

[Deep13]

12. What does the 1st Amendment have to do with it?

O'Reilly can say whatever he wants. That does not mean he has a right to do it on the public airways. We own the airways and licensees have agreed to use them for our benefit.

[Beelzebud]

13. So who gets to be the censor on what is acceptable? Is this the road "progressives" want to go down

Just because you don't like what he's saying doesn't mean "the public" agrees.

What happens when the shoe is on the other foot, and they're trying to yank a liberal off the air for offending them?

[Deep13]

22. Right now the 5 or 6 companies that own our media are the censors.

The reason there is no liberal radio in Ohio is because Clear Channel shut them down. On the other hand, the Fed. Communications Act mandates diversity in programming. We don't have that. When was the last time a news program editorialized about the benefits of universal socialism? Ever Air america doesn't present that view.

[LanternWaste]

18. Who on this thread called for his censorship

Who on this thread (or in the OP)has called for his censorship (censorship being legal consequences a speaking)? I've seen criticism of many of the things he's said, but I haven't read any post that implies he should be denied his right to free speech...

[Beelzebud]

19. Make no mistake, the underlying theme here is that he should be censored from saying this stuff.

You know it and I know it.

If people are truly offended by the idiot, they can simply not tune into his show and stop listening to his every word as if they were some fanboy. People that sit around listening to guys like O'lielly, just to be offended by him, give him more viewers...

[LanternWaste]

20. It appears to me that the underlying theme is simply...

It appears to me that the underlying theme is simply criticism. That's what I inferred.

And no, I don't watch his show. I don't watch or listen to any of the talking heads on the left or the right, but I do understand why a organization or school would listen to, monitor, take notes and write a position on them.

It allows us a better insight into the tactics and strategies the MSM in general, and the talking heads in particular use to make their case and allows us more tools to either validate or invalidate that case.

[wryter2000]

21. Of course, he has the right to say those things

The point is that he denies name-calling. This study illustrates his hypocrisy.

[goddess40]

15. But Malloy doesn't swear up and down that he doesn't do it

O'Reilly does - then he points his finger at liberals that put a fitting label on any right winger. Name calling is when the name doesn't fit or it's just belittling a person for something they can't change (female, black, gay...)

[wryter2000]

23. I should have read your post first

:thumbsup:

[krkaufman]

26. Malloy hardly has the platform of the O'Reillys of the media world.

[Ms. Clio]

2. but he doesn't use cuss words

so that's civility, motherfuckers!

[BadAssTeddyBear]

6. Civil??

O'Reilly is anything but Civil. And I prefer MOTHERFUCKERS! (it adds a little something)

[Ms. Clio]

9. it was a joke

obviously not a good one.

[GCP]

4. Dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x805213

[IChing]

7. Didn't see it you....... Godlesscommiepervert....

Yeah try to scare me...... call me names every 7 seconds
:) :rofl:

I didn't see it.

[GCP]

8. That's PREVERT to you!!

[Journeyman]

14. I saw a You Tube clip yesterday of an O'Reilly "talking point". . .

and it occurred to me, for someone who claims to be "fair and impartial" on a news channel whose tag line insists the viewer will decide, I'd expect to hear mention of "conservative news source" and "far right spokesman" and "wacky rightwing" as often as I hear the same descriptives for those O'Reilly deems as such on the left. But surprisingly, only the liberal side got called out, only the progressives were "tagged and bagged" as it were. So though I didn't have the numbers Indiana U produced, I came to the same conclusion -- and it only took three minutes of my life. Well, maybe the IU study will save some other citizen a passel of minutes of their life and spare them the ordeal of actually watching that gaseous blowhard.

[cherokeeprogressive]

16. I've never heard him make a derogatory remark, nor have I heard him lie.

Because I don't fucking listen to him. PERIOD. In fact, a quick search of the channel guide on my satellite box, and you'll find that FUX isn't even there. Because I choose for it to be so. Ride in my car and you'll find that the radio doesn't have a preset button for the station that carries his show. Because I choose for it to be so.

The obsession with that asshole is what keeps him in the limelight. Everything I know about him I learned from people who supposedly hate him, but watch his tv show, listen to him on the radio, or read his printed material.

Fuck him. He's not worth a single moment of my time. Even if I'm in a business establishment that shows FUX on it's lobby tv, I don't listen. I tune it out. Then I make a mental note NOT to patronize that business again. Fuck Him.

It's quite simple really... don't like him? Stop looking for info on him. Stop listening. Stop watching. Stop reading. Sometimes I wonder how much of his success can be attributed to people who cannot drop their obsession with him.

Fuck him AND the rock he crawled out from under.

[UTUSN]

17. K&R #1 for, & this doesn't have MORE recs---BECAUSE??!!1 n/t

[Deep13]

24. In fairness to O'Reilly...

...without him, Stephanie Miller's radio show would only be half as long as it is.

[Mabus]

25. That's almost as many as I use on those few occasions when I hear him talk

But he's older than I am so I guess he's slowed down more than me. :evilgrin:

Actually a pretty interesting read. And accurate.