Like him or not, Bill O’Reilly is an influential person. He has been a major contributor to the Fox News Network for decades. He is known personally and professionally by all the movers and shakers in the world of Journalism and Television.
This man is being roasted over an open fire for his claims of time in combat and for having witnessed events it is said he did not. Former associates and people who touted they were always anti-O’Reilly are talking about this…NOW.
Bill O’Reilly made these claims years even decades ago, but no one disputed the claims…THEN. They stayed silent and let him carry on. Other journalists are reporting they knew several of the stories were fabricated, but there are some problems with this. The former associates or others may have an ax to grind with O’Reilly. Many of these revelations are first reported by News Agencies which are known for “paying for a story”, taking a benign story and giving it negative connotations or sometimes soliciting “paid to lie” exposés. Either the O’Reilly accusers are lying now or they lied then, by omission.
In most cases the lies like Brian Williams of NBC were self-serving to enhance his “street cred”. However, it looks as if some of Bill O’Reilly’s tales may have done serious harm to one or more person’s ability to earn a living, move about comfortably in their normal environment and perhaps endangered their lives. He is not the first Journalist who may have caused this kind of situation with his story telling and he is not alone by any means.
If you were to research deeply enough you may find an article or two from other Media sources who at the time supported even concurred with Mr. O’Reilly’s claims.
If these allegations are true then it shows a double standard which prevails in our News & Information arena. Ignore or close ranks around one of their own, even when they do wrong and throw everyone else under the bus.
Our worldwide Media is inhabited by imperfect people, some who lie. They lie to the public for personal gain of all kinds. They present themselves to the public as the voice of reason, honesty and moral good.
I am not expecting perfection; however they do lie, sometimes with disastrous results. Misrepresentations, justifications for promoting false impressions that influence our perceptions which cause faulty judgments and possible untoward acts on persons are theirs.
This editorial is not a condemnation of Bill O’Reilly, but of our Media. It is a roast for every person who calls themselves Journalist or information Provider and reported falsely without checking facts or failed to report corrections; reported false stories with the intent to do harm or has taken part in activities which were criminal.
Even now our Media skillfully dodges any reports about which US Journalists and News agencies may have been involved in the hacking and official bribing scandal.
The purpose of the First Amendment Right was to allow our Media to report wrong doing without fear of reprisal. It was not created to use this “Right” to do wrong without reprisal or punishment.
In order for a field which employs or provides a living to hundreds of thousands who purport themselves as servants of reliable and credible information our Media will have to do a lot better to regain our trust and respect.
By: S. Kendrick – a.k.a. Dial Dancer 2/27/2015
(This editorial is the views of its writer. It does not reflect the views of all of the Members & Supporters of AdLLaw)
We are comparing Robson’s complaint, containing fictitious allegations against Michael Jackson, with his own and his mother’s and sister’s testimonies at the 2005 trial. Up till now the process helped us to discover that everything Robson said about his so-called abuse – and I really mean everything – is a fake.
Indeed, the story of a start and continuation of “abuse” allegedly during his first visit to the US and MJ’s Neverland has turned out to be a silly and outrageous lie from its very beginning to end. Pure lies like that seldom occur but Robson’s papers are a rare exception to the rule – the story told by him is a 100% lie.
Due to the abundance of lies the restoration of the truth is a long process and has already taken two posts (see here and here please), and up till now we have only reached point…
More and more the public is calling for the reigning in of intrusive police practices and tabloid news that constantly abuses the right to a free press and infringes on people’s privacy rights. During his lifetime, Michael Jackson endured extraordinary invasions of his privacy as a public figure, as well as slander and defamation of his character, to which he protested vigorously. Nor was it not long after his death on June 25, 2009, that the media started in on his family, especially his underage children. And while there is at least the possibility of legal remedy for the living, heretofore there has been none to protect the rights of the surviving family of the deceased. That is why CADELAW is a bill whose time has come.
In her 2010 book, Outrageous Invasions: Celebrities’ Private Lives, Media, and the Law, UConn law professor Robin D. Barnes devotes Chapter 10, “John Lennon and Michael Jackson: The Influence of the Superstar,” to discussing how because of the popularity bestowed by the media and fans on John Lennon and Michael Jackson, the two men became targets of deliberate attempts by governments to neutralize their cultural and political impact. Lennon’s youngest son, Sean, told the New Yorker magazine in 1998 that his father was considered a threat because of his influence: “If he had ever said bomb the White House tomorrow, there would’ve been 10,000 people who would have done it. Pacifists revolutionaries are historically killed by the government.” Barnes reports that “government impotency in relation to the potentially unbounded influence of the superstar,” means clandestine methods and tactics are to shape the “tone and tenor of public discourse.”
The case of Lennon, according to Barnes, leads to understanding how an “equally powerful superstar,” Michael Jackson was also considered a monumental threat to disrupting the status quo. Michael’s 1998, “Man in the Mirror” (written by Siedah Garrett with Glen Ballard), along with the revolutionary social and political message in the lyrics and in the images used in the short film that went along with it “put the world on notice,” according to Barnes.
But in the summer of 1994, when a confidential report of accusations of child molestation was leaked to Hard Copy tabloid reporter Diane Dimond from the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services, the ensuing media persecution began its relentless quest for ratings by using rumor and scandal. Already marginalized for his eccentricities, Michael was objectified, dehumanized, and finally demonized as the press cashed in. For example, Barnes cites Los Angeles criminal defense attorney, Tom Mesereau’s comments that tabloid huckster Nancy Grace’s coverage of the trial held in 2005 “was sub-moronic . . . [and that] she tried to spin a verdict through a lot of emotional innuendo that was just buffoonery.”
Barnes asserts that while trying to prove there was an “actual conspiracy to imprison Jackson” was elusive, the case could be made for Jackson being a convenient scapegoat to deflect heat off the Catholic Church because of the concurrent sexual abuse allegations against clergy of the Archdiocese of Boston. The massive investigation of the Catholic Church went on for several years before Jackson was again falsely accused and his Neverland ranch raided by 70 County Sheriff’s and members of Tom Sneddon’s District Attorney’s Office. All this to control Michael’s rising political influence.
From 1994 until he died, Michael endured relentless persecution from the media. Barnes asserts that while the U.S. Constitution grants free speech and freedom of the press, the Supreme Court fails to enforce the laws that require prerequisites to the proper exercise of those freedoms and the protection of constitutional rights. She notes that the media defends slander and defamation by asserting that the statements they make are true for the most part. False statements also get a pass as simply being reported or quoted, most often from anonymous, so-called inside sources.
Still, Michael is gone now and supposedly what the media writes or broadcasts can no longer hurt him. Obviously not, but it can and does hurt his young children, as well as other family members who share his name. For that reason, our representatives should be introduced to CADELAW and asked to vote to pass it to protect the rights of the family of the deceased.
Article written and submitted by: Sherry Walker Bryant
Sherry Walker Bryant is a doctoral student at Ball State University in Muncie Indiana. She isdesigning an educational series called “Teaching Michael Jackson” to share her research and writing a book on Jackson’s worldwide charismatic influence.
SEE "Donate to Cadeflaw Projects" tab on WordPress site at top of page.
Anti-Defamation Legacy Law Advocates (AdLLaw/Cadeflaw Initiatives) 