[Cid_Yama]

O’Reilly lied about witnessing the execution of nuns while reporting from El Salvador.

He brought up the deaths on at least two occasions: “The Radio Factor” on September 27, 2005, and “The O’Reilly Factor” on December 14, 2012.

In the first, O’Reilly said, “I’ve seen guys gun down nuns in El Salvador.” In the second, he said, “I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head,” according to Media Matters.

The politically progressive media watchdog pointed out on Wednesday that Salvadorans had raped and murdered three American nuns and a lay worker in December 1980. But O’Reilly did not arrive in the country until the following year, according to his own timeline of events.

In “The No Spin Zone,” O’Reilly writes that he arrived in El Salvador to cover the conflict several weeks after he was promoted to CBS News correspondent in 1981.

On Tuesday, the liberal group issued another report, based on a JFKFacts.org blog post from 2013, questioning whether O’Reilly repeatedly lied about hearing the gunshot blast that killed a figure in the investigation into President John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

O’Reilly says on March 29, 1977, as a young journalist for a Dallas TV station, he tracked down George de Mohrenschildt, a Russian man who knew Lee Harvey Oswald and had been contacted by congressional investigators, at his daughter’s home in Palm Beach, Fla.

As O’Reilly arrived at the door, he says, de Mohrenschildt committed suicide by shooting himself.

This version of events appears in O’Reilly’s book “Killing Kennedy” and has been repeated on his television program.

But Jefferson Morley, a visiting professor at the University of California, who runs JFKFacts.org, says on that day O’Reilly was in Dallas, more than 1,200 miles away. To demonstrate his point, Morley embedded audio clips he says are from a phone conversation between O’Reilly and Gaeton Fonzi, a congressional investigator.

The heightened interest in O’Reilly’s credibility arose from allegations that he lied about his experiences in Argentina to bolster his credibility as a war correspondent, as Brian Williams of “NBC Nightly News” had done regarding Iraq.

On “The O’Reilly Factor” Monday night, he aired archival footage from the protests outside the presidential palace in Buenos Aires, which he had previously characterized as a “war zone.”

link

Seems O'Reilly has far bigger lies in his closet than Brian Williams ever did. But is Western Media raking him over the coals like they did to Brian Williams? No. In many cases they are even defending him.

It's Western Media that has no credibility. Not their targets.

[Plantagenet]

If you're going after entertainers now, then why not also go after CatWoman? All these years she's pretended to only be interested in Batman (except for smiling at Robin on occasion) and now it turns out she's actually bisexual.

dcs-catwoman-comes-as-bisexual

Why doesn't Media Matters investigate Catwoman? She's lied and led Batman on and misrepresented her actual situation hundreds----no THOUSANDS of times.


Cid---why don't you denounce Catwoman? She's lied more times then news anchor Brian Williams and entertainer Bill O'Reilly combined!

[PrestonSturges]

O'Reilly has built his whole reputation on telling the truth, or rather telling you that he's telling you the truth. Colbert built his act around O'Reilly and his "truthiness."

Senior citizens just know O'Reilly is honest because he never stops bragging about his honesty. But someone that does that is full of deception both conscious and unconscious. That's the sort of person that wilts under scrutiny because they start lying about their lies.

[Plantagenet]

If we're going to call out all the people in the MSM media who lie, then Catwoman is even worse than Brian Willaims and Bill O'Reilly.

Batman and Superman and Catwoman have built THEIR reputations on telling the truth. They call themselves the good guys. They are Superheros, for crissakes. Now it turns out that Catwoman has been lying to Batman for years.

Who would ever have imagine that comic book characters would lie? And little kids read these comics! Its shocking, I tell you.


Watch out Batman---Catwoman is Lying!!! purrrrrrr!

[PrestonSturges]

Plant, could you at least stay on topic and dial back the stupid assholery just a little?

[vtsnowedin]

So it seems that over the last couple of weeks both the liberal and conservative sides of the media have been caught lying about how close they were to actual news events as they happened. If one will lie to make themselves seem more important they can also be suspected of lying at any other time that becomes convenient or profitable to them. I can't say that it is exactly news that you can't trust the news as it is fed to us. Giving up on both sides of the regular or "mainstream " media where should we turn to get factual and reliable news and information?

[PrestonSturges]

Williams has actually been in combat zones, and I think the story was that he was in a flight of several choppers, one of which got hit with small arms fire.

[PrestonSturges]

Williams has actually been in combat zones, and I think the story IRL was that he was in a flight of several choppers, one of which got hit with small arms fire.

[vtsnowedin]

Being in a combat zone is one thing being in THE chopper hit by an RPG is quite another.
Again throw all these liars right and left off the air and get some people that can tell the truth.

[Pops]

The obvious difference here is Williams was suspended and apologized, whereas O'r was backed by the CEO of fox and went on to threaten reporters and probably gave fox a nice bump in its revenue. O'reilly is a "Opinionator", Fox is an "Opinion" network. If that isn't obvious to the viewer, I'm pretty sure they are deluding themselves as to their own bias.

What should be equally obvious is a "news" person tells you something "new." If a so-called "news person" is stroking your "I Knew It!" bone too often, or always, then you aren't listening to the news, you have your ear to a self-selected echo chamber.

Which isn't to say all media aside from fox is pristine, as my sig line points out, there is no objective reality, everything we perceive is filtered through and projected on our previous perceptions. Most of the big networks as rated by the readers of AllSides.com (and other research) are somewhat to the left of center. Which make sense because most Americans are somewhere to the right of center. My bias is pretty far left, I read the editorial of the typical lefty sites to get my fix of "I Knew It!" but I also don't take their version of reality as gospel without a little cross referencing.

Check out the http://www.AllSides.com news page, as they say, if you got a pulse, you got a bias. LOL

.

[dinopello]

Check out the http://www.AllSides.com news page, as they say, if you got a pulse, you got a bias. LOL
.

Thanks, that's a pretty cool idea they have. It is simplistic to rate everything on just a left right scale, because as we know from this site there is the up and down (corny/doom) scale and probably many other dimensions that aren't always predicted by a left-right. But, it's better than nothing!

[Keith_McClary]

Check out the http://www.AllSides.com news page, as they say, if you got a pulse, you got a bias. LOL
.

Thanks, that's a pretty cool idea they have. It is simplistic to rate everything on just a left right scale, because as we know from this site there is the up and down (corny/doom) scale and probably many other dimensions that aren't always predicted by a left-right. But, it's better than nothing!

When I clicked on "Sign in to comment" it took me to "Sign in to The Washington Post".
Edit:
Why does WAPO need a separate "balanced" site - do they think their main site isn't balanced?

[Pops]

AllSides is not Washington Post.
When you click on a story, AllSides loads that entire website into a "Frame" - you don't leave the AllSides site. That way you can still see the AllSides stuff at the top of the window, links to "other perspectives" et.

And, you get all the original content from the original site as well...

IOW, AllSides is not a WaPo site. Click a fox news story or a NPR story and it loads just the same.

[Outcast_Searcher]

It's Western Media that has no credibility. Not their targets.

Generally, neither has much credibility.

Celebrities of all stripes (including politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle) lie a lot. The amazing thing is they are so stupid they think they can get away with it.

Isn't it just a WEE bit ironic that the "pro family values" GOP Capitol Hill members get caught (literally) with their pants down with some other woman a lot? How about the clearly anti-gay GOP establishment members getting caught in some kind of gay sex episode?

Now, before you liberals smirk too much -- how about all the liberal politicians (you know, the ones fighting for "the little guy" and "low income workers") who on one hand seek to raise taxes at every opportunity AND cheat on their OWN taxes at every opportunity (since apparently only their rich constituents should pay taxes).

Credibility? Not so much. Hypocrisy? Plenty.

So, why again should I be "impressed" with the likes of Brian Williams or Hillary Clinton for flagrantly lying or "exaggerating" about coming under fire? Oh, I see. That's OK as long as a clown like Bill O'Reilly lies too. (Nice try, but I don't think so. NONE of that ilk are worthy of respect).

[Outcast_Searcher]

O'Reilly has built his whole reputation on telling the truth, or rather telling you that he's telling you the truth. Colbert built his act around O'Reilly and his "truthiness."

The style may be different, but not the substance. Major news organizations either state or imply that they are credible and trustworthy. So when a Brian Williams or a Dan Rather or any other major commentator is caught out in repeated lies or trying to excuse or cover up their lies, it is completely unacceptable. And "apologizing" later, under duress, because they have no choice buys NOTHING for the credibility of them or their news organization.

Look, I hate O'Reilly and the clownfest on Fox, just like I hate the corresponding mess on MSNBC (I'm a moderate independent (leaning libertarian) and tend to loathe the extremists of either party). But acting like somehow it's OK if a liberal lies but if a conservative lies it's terrible, and using some trivia about their style as an excuse is really pretty pathetic.

[Cid_Yama]

Your comments speak otherwise. You are the right wing extremist you denounce without recognizing it.

[KaiserJeep]

Cid, from the perspective of somebody on the far left fringe, everybody else is right wing, and your comment puts you there.