Media-created 'controversy' annoys those who foster it
There is an annoying art form that has developed among conservative pundits in terms of how they deal with LGBT-themed subjects. Basically, they act as if the gay matter at hand is the most ridiculous, pointless, annoying topic known to man, and that mere discussion of it makes them bored, nauseous, or worse. But then, despite their chagrin, they proceed to talk about that matter, and talk about it, and talk about it, and talk about, and talk about it, until even the staff at GLAAD is like, "Whoa, dudes and dudettes -- lay off the gay chatter!"
One man who is responsible for some of this artform's greatest masterpieces? Bill O'Reilly. Time and time again, we've seen the Fox News and radio personality voluntarily take on a certain LGBT-themed subject on one of his shows, yet act as if every word he speaks on the subject cuts tongue like a verbal razor blade. He is always one to take on even the most minor gay issue, but he acts as if someone is forcing him to do so. This was all highlighted back in August of this year when O'Reilly stated that "I think everybody's got to relax on all this gay stuff," while neglecting the fact that he routinely chooses to promote the sorts of lies, fallacies, and half-truths that disallow us from "relaxing"!
Latest case in point? J.K. Rowling's "Dumbledore is gay" revelation, which O'Reilly has tackled on both his radio show and two consecutive nights of his television talk show. And, true to form, each time he took on the topic, he echoed both right wing talking points and the whole "it pains me to talk about this" schtick. Some examples, courtesy of Media Matters:
Charming. And of course the "non-partisan" Bill is totally framing this from the perspective of those parents who don't want homosexual parity, and not those who are sick and tired of intolerance. And there is never a consideration from him (or even Dennis Miller) that Rowling made this disclosure out of a desire to convey facts. "Controversy" and "provocation" and "indoctrination" are the only possibilities they see.
Bill: you are right to be annoyed that we're even having to talk about "issues" like this. NOW STOP F***ING TALKING ABOUT IT!
*A segment from Rowling's initial Carnegie Hall revelation has popped up on YouTube. It looks like it begins immediately after she made the initial statement. And as you can hear, the audience wasn't "stunned into silence by the revelation" like Mr. O'Reilly claims:
**Oh, and once again, kids: It's pronounced "ROLLING!" If you're going to make claims about her intentions, at least learn her name.
Indoctrinate??? Somebody has got to do something about Fox News. Seriously.
Posted by: Jujupiter | Oct 27, 2007 5:45:33 AM
I think you should quit using Media Matters as a source. They lied about O'Reilly's comments in an attempt to make him look like a racist, and within a few days lied about Rush Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comments.
Using them as a source when criticising someone will only weaken your case. Media Matters is simply not honest.
Posted by: David | Oct 29, 2007 10:49:56 PM
David: Regardless of your personal opinions regarding the "racist O'Reilly" and "phony soldiers" situations, or of Media Matters in general, in this case they are simply providing a service. I'm not quoting their opinions on this matter, but rather providing the unedited video clips that they've compiled. It speaks for itself.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Oct 30, 2007 7:20:39 AM
I'm not sure you took my point.
I wasn't expressing opinions about Media Matters' actions; I was stating actual facts. Media Matters told a lie of omission about O'Reilly's visit to Harlem, and within a week's time they told another lie of omission about Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comment.
Anyone knowing this could dismiss your criticism of O'Reilly as based on more Media Matters lies without even bothering to look at the videos. So getting video of O'Reilly from another source would be better.
Posted by: David | Nov 2, 2007 1:02:07 AMcomments powered by Disqus