So Barry Nolan, the former host of Hard Copy, has popped up to bluster that it's "morally unacceptable" for Bill O'Reilly, the former host of Inside Edition, to get a local Emmy honor because he's a "mental case" and a bad example to budding TV journalists."I'm appalled, just appalled," Nolan tells tells The Boston Herald. "He inflates and constantly mangles the truth... and his frequent target is the ‘left-leaning’ media-- the ones who do report the news fairly. And those are the same people who will be sitting in the room honoring him.”
Barry, who's now settled in Boston where he performs on a word quiz show carried on National Public Radio, was always an amiable if a bit pompous chap who'd brag that he was a Mensa member and was elevated to the Hard Copy gig because his solid looks and acting experience allowed him to inhabit the "anchor role." But he never really "got it" when it came to tabloid, and his O'Reilly campaign shows that he still doesn't "get it."
Barry's lack of a clue is revealed not only in his claim that the "left-leaning media... do report the news fairly." In what's probably meant as a witty Bostonian coup de grâce, he really blows it when he says he'll not only attend the local Emmy bash next month, but is inviting O'Reilly's TV nemesis Keith Olbermann as his date.As everyone in the industry knows, Olbermann, who was a Brylcreemed local sportscaster while Nolan and O'Reilly sold the tabloid revolution, is a bonafide mental case.
We could write a book about the post-tabloid career of the producers, reporters and hosts of the past television era (and, in fact, we sort of did), because most of the ones who soldiered the revolution slipped quietly into a new landscape that was irrevocably changed by their unheralded work. O'Reilly is one of the few prominent tabloid television veterans to go on to even greater prominence. So whether you like the guy's TV persona, or agree with his politics (and we have our issues with O'Reilly), you've got to hand it to him.
"Appalled? Just appalled? Morally unacceptable?" Sheesh. Barry. What are you, some former writer for the LA Times or something?
5 comments:
Dear Burt;
While you always had quite a flair for the dramatic, you never had much regard for the truth. The issue for me with NATAS is simply what it says to students and journalists everywhere - when you give an award to someone like O'Reilly who mangles the truth on a daily basis. You and your pals would tell them; lie, bully people, conflate the facts, call people names like "wetbacks" on TV, sexually harrass your staff, and maybe one day you too will be honored. I do not suggest that they give an award of any kind to Olberman.
Apparently you can't be bothered to read anything carefully.Maybe that is why you, like O'Reilly make half your crap up.
Glad to hear you finally got sober.
Barry Nolan
But Barry, what does bringing Olby to the event prove? Sure,he'll be pissed, but you're a grown man, and by all accounts so is Olby.
And please explain how and why you believe the left wing media reports the truth, where as the right wing media does not.
Do you really think the schlock that comes from that former sportscaster who lies on a regular basis, smears those that dare disagree with him, never deviates from his regular guest list cause he can't stand to have people on his show who don't preach to his choir, and throws softballs to Dems and doesn't have the balls to go toe to toe with anyone is legitimate journalism???
You're a legitimate journalist right? And you believe Olby to be the same?
Hey, at least you'll never be WPITW, along with Bin Laden.
Tom - I will type it again slowly so maybe you can read it: I do not suggest that Olberman is worthy of an award - or is an example of someone NATAS should give a award to. Nor is O'Reilly. It is an award that is meant to recognize high standards - and both personal and professional integrity. I grew up in the 60's. If you thought something morally wrong was being perpetrated - you protested (bringing Olberman) you didn't just bend over and grab your ankles and say "yes sir may I have another".
What O'Reilly calls the "left wing" media - what other people call the news - gets things factually correct - whereas Falafel Boy is challenged that way. Read for instance:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php?nid=&id=&pnt=102&lb=brusc
summed up in Wikipedia thusly:
A poll conducted between June and September of 2003 asked people whether they thought WMD had been discovered in Iraq since the war ended. They were also asked which media sources they relied upon. Those who obtained their news primarily from Fox News were three times as likely to believe that evidence confirming WMD had been discovered in Iraq than those who relied on PBS and NPR for their news, and one third more likely than those who primarily watched CBS.
Spend 10 minutes on Google - there are abundant examples of O'Reilly getting it wrong while insisting he is right, bullying, bloviating, threatening. The wrong guy to give an award to unless perhaps you are David Dukes.
"what other people call the news"
You honestly believe that? So when you see polls taken of how people see the media as more left leaning than anything else, and how little they trust them, and how they're out of touch with the US, that doesn't mean anything to you.
But polls saying how Fox is right winged and its viewers were on the WMD bandwagon because of its reporting is all you need?
So David Gregory, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Dan Abrams really represent, dare I ask, fair and balanced opinion to you? They get things factually correct?
And good of you to prove how the sportscaster doesn't lie on a regular basis, smear those that dare disagree with him, have only guests who preach to his left choir.
Hey, maybe you can be added to the list of his regulars and you guys can pitch softballs back and fourth. Nothing like watching Dems interviewing Dems.
Good points, Barry.
Post a Comment