O'Reilly Adds New Yorker Magazine to Blacklist

Billy just added the New Yorker Magazine to his defamation list because one guy wrote an article about his fake war on Christmas.

A Message from Bill:

Media Operations that Traffic in Defamation

The following media operations have regularly helped distribute defamation and false information supplied by far left websites:

- New York Daily News
- The St. Petersburg Times
- MSNBC
- The New Yorker Magazine

These are the worst offenders. In the months to come, we expect to add more names to this list. We recommend that you do not patronize these operations and that advertisers do the same. They are dishonest and not worth your time and money.

http://www.billoreilly.com/pg/jsp/general/mediadef.jsp

-------

Hertzberg wrote an article called "Bah Humbug" the so-called war on christmas. It's all about FOX, Gibson, and O'Reilly pumping this fake war on Christmas. In the article he hammers O'Reilly for not going to Vietnam and he uses some quotes from mediamatters.org.

So O'Reilly is telling people to boycott the entire new yorker magazine because one guy wrote about the war on Christmas and used some quotes from mediamatters.org on O'Reilly.

Bah Humbug

The so-called War on Christmas.

by Hendrik Hertzberg

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/051226ta_talk_hertzberg

than Joe friggin McCarthy

He talks about them like they are public enemy number one then leaves them off his hit list...

Walldude wrote:

I still can't figure out why Media Matters isn't on his "list"

Because he dont want to give them any publicity, O'Reilly never mentions oreilly-sucks.com, newshounds.us, mediamatters.org, Keith Olbermann, etc. He knows that if he says their name it will give them free publicity, it's why he says the far left smear sites, instead of using their names.

Everyone else on the list is a big organization that probably wouldn't benefit much from his "black-list".

And the heads of his viewers. So, what difference does it make? They're probably laughing their butts off over there right now at the news of being included on his "hit list."

I like it even better now that I know it's on his blacklist. :bounce:

to show my support.

Thanks for the plug O'Lielly!

:evilgrin:

O'Reilly is almost comedy. I almost think he's doing satire.

that any of his core audience actually reading or watching anything on that list before it was published were 0 anyways.

...to propose burning any material that included a scrap of criticism of himself or Little Lord Bunnypants. He's a complete asshat, from his toes right to his pointy little head.

Everyone with a website should link to those sites, if they dont already.

And he still isn't on the enemies list?

O'Reilly is a coward.

a sputtering, choleric idiot without the grace and poise of Morton Downey Jr

What ever happened to that old loudmouth?

ON EDIT: Wikipedia says he died in 2001. Ironically, of lung cancer.

I've been waiting for someone else to see the similarities. Maybe - if we wish really really hard - O'Reilly will be found in an airport toilet with a backward swastika smeared on his forehead - just like little Morty did to himself trying to get some free publicity when his pathetic career started to go down the tubes.

devolution in action: Joe Pine to Downey to O'Reilly
I guess the next step will be broadcasts of a brain-damaged chimpanzee flinging feces

O'Reilly.

Oh, wait. Already doing that.

Let's fact it O'Reilly is just stupid, his blacklist will do nothing but help the people on the list.

1) The right wing idiots who watch his show never visit, watch, or read the news outlets on the list to begin with. And they never will in the future, so it does no good to list them on his website.

2) Every news outlet on the list will get increased traffic from people on the left just because O'Reilly put them on his list.

O'Reilly must have cheated his way through school to get those degrees because he is an idiot.

and nobody cared?:boring:

...I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet my life that Bill can't actually quote one single instance in which any of these papers was distributing "defamation and false information". So, in an irony that I'm sure would be completely lost on O'Lyingsacko'shit, his pathetic little list is actually defaming these publications.

So sue him already. It would be worth it just to see him have his bullshit laughed out of court, just like before.

...I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet my life that Bill can't actually quote one single instance in which any of these papers was distributing "defamation and false information". So, in an irony that I'm sure would be completely lost on O'Lyingsacko'shit, his pathetic little list is actually defaming these publications.

So sue him already. It would be worth it just to see him and Fox News have their bullshit laughed out of court, just like before.

And Hendrik Hertzberg is far and away my favorite writer there.

best magazines for the money. (Vanity Fair another) The articles are always well written, in-depth and uses big people words (so naturally that eliminates anyone who would take O'Lielly's word about anything).

I read it for Hertzberg's and Seymour Hersh's works. Every week's issue is a fricking HOLIDAY present to myself!

because O'Reilly is in violation of at least a few dozen of the good book's tenets. He stands in judgment of others. He proclaims his faith loudly -- and publicly, instead of privately. He lusts after other women. (and settles quickly out of court). He bears false witness. (has he made his apology yet to the school administrators in Texas who he claimed, falsely, wouldn't allow students or faculty to wear red and green? (totally fake news).
And that's just to mention a few. Open up The Bible to any page. Chances are, O'Reilly is in violation.
Maybe his audience of concerned Christians could turn off the TV or radio and pick up a copy of The Bible. They might be surprised at what they find there.
Oh, and then there's his claim to have won a Peabody.....sigh. He should be grateful his audience is so dim. To everyone else, he's just a big joke.

without Louis Menand's book reviews?

*snark*


And Sy Hersh's reporting?

*snark snark*

But seriously folks, if you want to have some fun, read some in depth analysis (from a sort of "Popular Politics" point of view, and get more than just sound bites; read The New Yorker.
They had a great article on the ID trial which was very prescient in that it just about predicted the verdict that came out yesterday.
My slightly left leaning financial guy gives me a subscription and I'm very glad he does. The New Yorker manages to make me laugh at least once a week, unlike The Nation, which only succeeds in raising my blood pressure.