|
New Page 1
Download free
media player
Windows Media Player |
Real Media Player
To
download media files, right click on the icon (MP3 audio,
RealPlayer or Windows Media), select "save target as" or "save
link as," and choose the destination of where you would like to
save the file on your computer.
|
  
 |
|
Olbermann Trashes
O’Reilly on The Tonight Show |
|
Jay Leno:
"Now, I mention this because I saw something in the paper
where you had a Bill O'Reilly mask."
Keith Olbermann: "Yes, I did."
Leno: "Where's that picture? Put that picture up."
Olbermann: "I'll explain what, you want me to explain
that?"
Leno: "Explain what that was all about."
Olbermann: "Again, I had the 9 AM Saturday thing with
these press TV guys."
Leno: "Right."
Olbermann: "And I was told, in fact, by Brian Williams,
do something creative, wake them up, they're tired, they're
sweaty, they're wearing the same suit for the third day in a
row."
Leno: "Right."
Olbermann: "-dress, do something. I said I've got it.
With the whole thing with me and Bill O'Reilly over the years,
AP, the Associated Press, had a problem with Fox. They were
taking pictures of the Fox talent without Fox's permission, so
Fox said no pictures of our guys at the press tour."
Leno: "Right."
Olbermann: "So I thought, well, I'll give them a
picture of the Fox guys. I'll just wear a Bill O'Reilly mask,
and then they can use that picture."
Leno: "Right."
Olbermann: "And everybody sat down, we all had a big
meeting about it beforehand, and everything went great --
until the next picture was taken."
Leno: "Well, let's see, let's see the next one. Where's
the next one? Now, there you're doing a-"
[laughter from audience]
Leno: "You seem to enjoy tweaking Bill."
Olbermann: "Well, this is not just about Bill, Jay.
There's a two-part explanation."
Leno: "All right. Go ahead."
Olbermann: "Would you like to hear it?"
Leno: "Go ahead."
Olbermann: "The first half is, I saw a guy in the back
who I recognized, and I was giving him a yoo-hoo, you know,
yoo-hoo!"
Leno: "Right."
Olbermann: "And they got me in between the yoo and the
hoo. So that's that one."
Leno: "Right."
Olbermann: "The second part is that on the air in the
last year, Bill O'Reilly has defended the Nazis from World War
II on three separate occasions."
Leno: "Oh, really?"
Olbermann: "Yes, I wish I were making this up."
Leno: "Have you met him in person? Have you two come
face to face on any occasion?"
Olbermann: "Well, he can't go out during daylight
hours."
-- Exchange between host Jay Leno and Countdown’s Keith
Olbermann, NBC, The Tonight Show, July 25, 2006 |
|
|
|
Live Thread: MRC's
Brent Bozell on 'The O'Reilly Factor' |
|
BILL O'REILLY: We try
very hard to be fair here on "The Factor," but, of course,
fair play is usually in the eye of the beholder. Joining us
now from Washington is the president of the Media Research
Center, a conservative group, Brent Bozell.
All in all, the last couple of weeks, has the coverage on the
networks and the cable news operations been fair?
BRENT BOZELL: I think all in all, it has been to date.
But you know that's not surprising. At the start of any ground
engagement, the start of any war when you're focused on hard
news coverage, the coverage does tend to be fair and balanced
and objective. It's when you start moving beyond that, when
reporters start getting restless, when they are tired of the
old pictures and start analyzing it, that's when the trouble
begins and I suspect in the next two or three days, you're
going to see it start to emerge.
O'REILLY: Well, that's a good point. We're struggling
now to find new angles to report the story fresh. You can't be
repeating the same things over and over again. But I have
heard -- I have to say I haven't seen it because I am so busy
doing what I do--I have heard that CNN and NBC in particular
have been much more accommodating to the Hezbollah point of
view. Have you seen that?
BOZELL: Well, yeah. There was a report last week on CNN
that was rather disgraceful. Nic Robertson went in at the
invitation and at the behest and at the control of Hezbollah,
reporting a propaganda piece from Hezbollah's perspective. And
really didn't tell his viewers exactly what was going on. And
then several days later, when questioned about that story by
Howie Kurtz on the CNN "Reliable Sources"--give CNN credit for
at least following up--he conceded that he really didn't know
if he was reporting the truth. He wasn't allowed to go inside
the buildings. He wasn't allowed to show anything.
So when he reports from a Hezbollah position that there are no
military weapons to be shown here, that really doesn't mean
anything.
O'REILLY: OK. I just want to be clear because Robertson
is a pretty good correspondent. He's got access --
BOZELL: But Bill--
O'REILLY: But I want to set it up.--
BOZELL: But here's my point, Bill. No reporter ought to
allow himself to be led by the nose by a terrorist
organization.
O'REILLY: No, I understand that. That's how Dan Rather
got in trouble with his prewar interview with Saddam Hussein.
BOZELL: That's how CNN got in trouble. That's how CNN
got in trouble--
O'REILLY: He was in there and he was compromised. What
happens is that you trade objectivity for access. If Hezbollah
is going to let you in there, then you have to almost shade it
toward their point of view because they won't ever let you in
there again.
BOZELL: Precisely. That's what CNN did during the first
Gulf War. CNN acknowledged that they did that afterwards to
curry favor with Saddam Hussein. CNN really did damage to its
reputation. It ought to learn that lesson and be very careful
about the future.
O'REILLY: Now has Fox News been too pro-Israel?
BOZELL: I don't think so. Just his afternoon in
preparation for the show, I was watching Fox and CNN, I might
add. And I thought both networks were going back and forth and
back and forth from both perspectives very, very well.
O'REILLY: All right. So because I do want to be fair
here. Up front I'm an analyst, not a reporter. I say that when
Hezbollah attacks without provocation and has 13,000 missiles,
that I have got to take the side of the people attacked. But I
don't obviously wouldn't want them to do anything untoward as
well. Now--
BOZELL: The pictures that everyone is seeing, the vast
majority of the pictures that everyone is seeing is of the
dead and wounded in Lebanon. And those pictures are airing on
Fox as well.
O'REILLY: OK. Last question for you. The New York Times
is sitting this out, absolutely sitting it out editorial. And
I believe it's because they don't want to alienate their
liberal Jewish base here in New York City. Am I wrong?
BOZELL: Well, except I hope they do sit it up because
when they do write things, you tend to smash your head against
a wall like the piece the other day worrying about the
asymmetry, wondering if Israel was being unfair in the war
against Lebanon.
O'REILLY: But a lot of people are wondering now whether
they should attack Beirut in civilian style. That's a
legitimate question.
BOZELL: When you're in war, you try to win.
O'REILLY: OK.Yeah but there are even rules of engagement
in a war. But I do believe that the New York Times is very
worried about its circulation after the last, you know, expose
about the terrorist funding. And they can't take another hit.
BOZELL: If they were -- if there were American secrets
at play, the New York Times would have it as front page
stories.
O'REILLY: They can't lose their base, though. All
right. Mr. Bozell, thanks very much for being here. We'll wrap
things up in a moment. |
|
|
|
CNN’s Anderson
Cooper 360 Broadcasts Hezbollah Propagandist |
|
Robertson
narrated: “In a reverse of recent policy, Hezbollah took
CNN on an exclusive fast-paced tour of the most sensitive bomb
sites.”
To Nabulsi: “You are really worried about another strike
here right now, yes?”
Nabulsi: “Of course, of course.”
Robertson: “How dangerous is it in this area at the
moment?”
Nabulsi: “It is very, very dangerous. It's — we are now
the most dangerous place in the most dangerous moment.”
Robertson: “In civilian housing.”
Robertson narrated: “Israel says it targets Hezbollah's
leadership and military structure. Hezbollah wanted to show us
civilians are being hit.” At the base of a heavily-damaged
multi-story concrete building, he asked Nabulsi: “What was
here?”
Nabulsi gestured to the cameraman: “Just look. Shoot. It
is civilians, buildings. Look at this building. Is it a
military base? Is it a military base, or just civilians living
in this building?”
Robertson: “Are you going to have — go for this
cease-fire? Are you going to hand back the soldiers that they
ask for?”
Nabulsi threatened: “We always teach Israel a lesson. We
always teach it a lesson. Now we will teach Israel a lesson
again. I tell Ehud Olmert we will not surrender. We will not
surrender. We will not surrender. Dignity.”
Robertson narrated: “Fearing renewed bombing, we move off
again.”
Nabulsi: “Okay. Hurry up. Hurry up....”
Robertson narrated: “As we run past the rubble, we see
much that points to civilian life, no evidence apparent of
military equipment.”
Nabulsi: “This — I will show you something.” He gestured
to the cameraman: “Shoot me. Shoot. This is here where they
said Sheikh Nasrallah, the secretary-general of Hezbollah, is
living. This is wrong.”
-- Exchange between senior international correspondent Nic
Robertson and Hezbollah “press officer” Hussein Nabulsi, CNN,
Anderson Cooper 360, July 19, 2006 |
|
|
|
Clift Raises Ire of
Colleague When She Calls Bush a 'Dictator' |
|
John McLaughlin:
"You wrote a book on Russia, right?"
Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times: "I did."
McLaughlin: "Did you get into very much of Putin's
administration?"
Freeland: "Well, I'm actually pleased to say that-"
McLaughlin: "You writing a book now?"
Freeland: "No, I wrote about Putin at the very end and
I predicted that although some people thought he was going to
turn out to be benign, he would actually turn out to be an
authoritarian leader -- which I think is the case."
McLaughlin: "Alright, I think that-"
Eleanor Clift: "He's the only one of those leaders who
goes in there with a commanding popularity among his own
people, because he is perceived to be an effective dictator.
What we have in this country is a dictator who's ineffective."
Freeland, shouting over others: "But he's not a
dictator! I mean we can't use, no we can't use these terms so
loosely."
Clift: "So don't use that so loosely? Well we have an
authoritarian President who is ineffective."
Freeland: "No he's not authoritarian."
Tony Blankley: "-small d."
Freeland: "You guys, you guys can elect your Presidents
and there can be a free choice. That's not the case in
Russia."
-- McLaughlin Group, July 15, 2006 |
|
|
|
Dan Rather Still
Defends Discredited National Guard Story |
|
Dan Rather:
“… We had a lot, a lot of corroboration, of what we broadcast
about President Bush's military record. It wasn't just the
documents. But it's a very old technique used, that when those
who don't like what you're reporting believe it can be
hurtful, then they look for the weakest spot and attack it,
which is fair enough. It's a diversionary technique.”
Larry King: “You're saying that was a fair report, I mean
that was -- you believe that report to this day?”
Rather: “Do I believe the truth of the story? Absolutely.”
-- Exchange between host Larry King and former CBS anchor Dan
Rather, CNN, Larry King Live, July 12, 2006 |
|
|
|
Dan Rather Blames
Critics and ‘Powerful People’ |
|
Larry King:
"They called Dan Rather at CBS the liberal network, right?"
Dan Rather: "Well, they call you names when you insist on
being independent. Larry, I think it's so important for the
public to understand -- it's not important for Dan Rather, not
important for people who have made a lot of money and got more
credit than they deserve, which I have over the years -- but
it's important for the American people to understand that a
journalist or journalistic enterprise that's willing to be
truly independent, and fiercely independent when called upon,
and dedicated to pulling no punches and playing no favorites
have become in recent years a bit of an endangered species.
And it's not for their sake. It's not for journalists' sake
but for the sake of the country you want journalists knocking
on doors and saying, ‘What's going on in there?’
“Now, journalism is a human endeavor, and nobody can do it
perfectly. Certainly I didn't do it perfectly. A lot of people
think I did it lousily. Maybe I did. And I've got my scars and
got my wounds. And yes, people always want to put a sign
around you and call you something bad if you refuse to report
the news the way they want it reported. I had my difficulties
with Lyndon Johnson, with, certainly with Richard Nixon, with
President Carter. It's in the nature. If you're an
independent-minded journalist, then people who have a highly
politically partisan and/or ideological point-of-view, what
they come at you with in saying, 'listen, if you don't report
the news the way we want you to report it, we're going to make
you pay a price, and we'll damage you badly and if we can
destroy you we'll destroy you.'
“Now, this is important for the public to understand. And
forgive the personal reference if you must, but CBS News has a
history. Edward R. Murrow took on Senator McCarthy and what he
stood for. He took on with Harvest of Shame, in a great
documentary about the poor. Then CBS News led with civil
rights, led in coverage of the Vietnam War, led in coverage of
the only President in history who resigned as an unindicted
co-conspirator in a widespread criminal conspiracy. Now, when
you're a reporter taking, involved in those kinds of stories
on a regular basis, there are people and there are powerful
people who say we've got to get rid of this guy or we have to
have this guy, we're going to damage him up. And that's when
they start hanging the signs around you."
-- Exchange between host Larry King and former CBS anchor Dan
Rather, CNN, Larry King Live, July 12, 2006 |
 |
