- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

O’Reilly Ousted By Murdochs

Well, well, well: [1]

Bill O’Reilly has been forced out of his position as a prime-time host on Fox News, the company said on Wednesday, after the disclosure of multiple settlements involving sexual harassment allegations against him. His ouster brings an abrupt and embarrassing end to his two-decade reign as one of the most popular and influential commentators in television.

“After a thorough and careful review of the allegations, the company and Bill O’Reilly have agreed that Bill O’Reilly will not be returning to the Fox News Channel,” 21st Century Fox, Fox News’s parent company, said in a statement.

Mr. O’Reilly’s departure comes two and a half weeks after an investigation by The New York Times [2] revealed how Fox News and 21st Century Fox had repeatedly stood by Mr. O’Reilly even as sexual harassment allegations piled up against him. The Times found that the company and Mr. O’Reilly reached settlements with five women who had complained about sexual harassment or other inappropriate behavior by him. The agreements totaled about $13 million.

I think O’Reilly deserved this, though I’m sorry to see it. Deserved it, because sexual harassment is a big deal. The record O’Reilly has established on that front demonstrated abuse of power. It is always good to see the powerful held to account for their behavior. O’Reilly treated some women like dirt.  [3] And lest you think that it was just an older guy being a little too aggressive in an office culture run by feminazis, read this.  [4]

I am sorry to see it, because it’s sad to see O’Reilly end his extraordinary career on such a shameful note. Love him or hate him, what Bill O’Reilly accomplished at Fox over the last two decades is one of the more remarkable feats in broadcasting. Lots of cable hosts have come and gone, but O’Reilly has stayed on top. And at his best, he was brilliant at puncturing p.c. pomposity.

But he and he alone is the cause of his own ignominious defeat. No man is above the moral law.

I see that Tucker Carlson’s show will be moving to O’Reilly’s slot. Good.

41 Comments (Open | Close)

41 Comments To "O’Reilly Ousted By Murdochs"

#1 Comment By Adamant On April 19, 2017 @ 4:47 pm

Good business decision by the Murdoch family:

[5]

#2 Comment By collin On April 19, 2017 @ 5:15 pm

The leader of Old White Man Lives Matter has cast aside. He was no better than Al Sharpton.

Good Riddance.

#3 Comment By Viriato On April 19, 2017 @ 5:19 pm

O’Reilly’s show was a mixed bag. His and his guests’ commentary was often thought-provoking and insightful.

On the other hand, Dennis Miller’s and Jesse Watters’s segments were an utter waste of airtime. Also annoying was O’Reilly’s incessant boasting about his ratings and peddling of his books. Most egregious of all, though, was O’Reilly’s intolerance of dissenting views. He would often shout over a guest making a point he disagreed with, and sometimes even kick them out of the studio (hmm… I wonder if that inspired our current President). This behavior would only serve to give me more respect for the guest’s viewpoint and to make me suspect that O’Reilly had no valid argument.

Needless to say, I agree that O’Reilly was clearly a bad man.

All in all, this was a very good and long overdue move on Fox’s part; I can’t say I’ll miss O’Reilly.

Hey, maybe he could team up with Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby and co-host a new talk show with them. 🙂 Perhaps the three of them could even do commercials for Jello pudding pops.

#4 Comment By Floridan On April 19, 2017 @ 5:37 pm

Trust no one who displayes not a modicum of humility.

#5 Comment By Jonah R. On April 19, 2017 @ 6:03 pm

O’Reilly has gotten increasingly buffoonish over the years as he became O’Reilly, Inc., cranking out tedious and apparently ghostwritten books and running a website where people could buy coffee mugs and framed constitutions or pay for (why? I don’t even know) premium content, so I don’t feel sad that his overweening pride led to this fall.

But what I find odd is the early reaction on social media from the left, who seem to think they’ve just claimed a major right-wing scalp. The median age for an O’Reilly viewer was 72. He typically covered the latest cause for right-wing outrage days or even weeks after it had already been hashed out on social media or picked apart by conservative pundits with original thoughts. He wasn’t an influencer; he was a news aggregator for elderly people who weren’t in the new-media loop. (For his minority of viewers who were in the new-media loop, he provided a prime-time hour for additional tribal venting.) I don’t expect his absence to make a huge difference in the political media landscape.

[NFR: Now that you mention it, the only people in my conservative circles who watch O’Reilly these days are my parents. And my dad is dead, so that leaves my mom. But she LOVES Tucker Carlson, so she’ll be happy he’ll be on earlier. True story: I know Tucker somewhat, and asked him to phone my mom out of the blue one day, because she’s such a huge fan. He did! Made my mother’s year. He was incredibly sweet to her, and can’t possibly imagine how much he brightened the day of a 73-year-old widow. At her request, he also sent her a photo autographed to her, which she framed and hung on the wall. She liked O’Reilly a lot, but she’d be happiest if Fox would clear the entire evening schedule and make it the Tucker Show. — RD]

#6 Comment By Seth On April 19, 2017 @ 6:09 pm

“No man is above the moral law”. Former President William Jefferson Clinton must be a special case then.

#7 Comment By M_Young On April 19, 2017 @ 6:23 pm

I don’t get it…don’t these idiots know that the golddiggers out there will go after them if they give them any opportunity, any hint of impropriety? If you really need ‘some’, get a call girl for heaven’s sake.

#8 Comment By Sancho On April 19, 2017 @ 6:42 pm

O’Reilly is very dishonest and should not be missed. For years he wouldn’t acknowledge what was obvious to everyone – that Fox is a conservative, pro-Republican network, but instead he arrogantly peddled the propaganda that it was independent, “fair & balanced”. He once comically claimed that Fox was balanced because it had 19 paid liberal contributors, failing to mention that there were another 156 contributors that by implication weren’t liberal. But much worse is the fact that O’Reilly clearly lied on numerous occasions, particularly about his reporting in “combat zones.” For example, more than once he waxed about his experience witnessing the supposed “massacre” outside the Casa Rosada in Buenos Aires, when not even his own reporting at the time backed up his wildly hyperbolic claims. If you doubt this, check out clips from these interviews (start at about min 13 for the first one and min 26 for the 2nd):
[6]

[7]

Now try to find any reporting that backs up his claims of multiple people being killed in the streets, or the military firing “real bullets” instead of the rubber variety. Even O’Reilly’s own defense in the face of criticism can only vaguely refer to the possibility of their being fatalities, with no evidence other than his convenient hunch ( [8]). And this is just one example of his many fabrications.
O’Reilly was incredibly successful, but so what? Since when does it profit a man to gain fame, wealth, and power if he is willing to lie repeatedly to attain it? I would find some comfort in the fact that he’ll no longer be peddling his bogus schtick (at least for a time) except for the fact that Carlson is possibly even worse.

#9 Comment By Charles Cosimano On April 19, 2017 @ 7:23 pm

“No man is above the moral law.”

Every man is who has the power to be above it. O’Reilly simply did not have the power.

#10 Comment By mrscracker On April 19, 2017 @ 7:39 pm

Well, I think a lot of men are above the moral law until the powers that be decide otherwise. Until it becomes a litigation liability or affects profits, the entertainment industry has generally looked the other way.
Bill O’Reilly’s behavior wasn’t unique.

#11 Comment By Kevin On April 19, 2017 @ 7:49 pm

“And at his best, he was brilliant at puncturing p.c. pomposity.

But he and he alone is the cause of his own ignominious defeat.”

And of course, there can be no connection whatsoever between O’reilly’s admiration of traditional values (defined as America c. 1950) with his earnest belief that his female subordinates were his to grab. Anyone suggesting otherwise is an SJW monster.

#12 Comment By ROB On April 19, 2017 @ 8:07 pm

The moral law had nothing to do with it. A boycott organized by his political enemies succeeded in silencing him. The same enemies who lionize, you know, the Big Dawg.

#13 Comment By Sands On April 19, 2017 @ 8:31 pm

There are lot of pissed off old people right about now.

#14 Comment By Brendan Riordan On April 19, 2017 @ 8:45 pm

Rod I hope you remember this post a few years from now when David Brock and his underlings initiate an advertiser boycott of TAC because of something you wrote with respect to gay marriage or abortion or immigration that offended the SJW hivemind.

[NFR: O’Reilly wasn’t being boycotted by advertisers because of any of his stated views. He was being boycotted because he was apparently a serial sexual harasser that cost his employer multiple millions in lawsuit settlements. — RD]

#15 Comment By Thomas Kaempfen On April 19, 2017 @ 9:03 pm

The striking thing about O’Reilly was how really stupid he was. His speech, his prose, his arguments, they were so simpleminded. Sometimes, I even wondered if he was drunk! I guess you don’t have to be a genius to be successful, as long as you tell people just what they want to hear. Of course, Hannity makes O’Reilly look like Einstein.

And for the record, there are intelligent movement conservative commentators: Hugh Hewitt, Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson, etc.

#16 Comment By Brendan Riordan On April 19, 2017 @ 9:58 pm

[NFR: O’Reilly wasn’t being boycotted by advertisers because of any of his stated views. He was being boycotted because he was apparently a serial sexual harasser that cost his employer multiple millions in lawsuit settlements. RD]

Well you can tell yourself that if it makes you feel more comfortable but the question, as always with the left, is “who” and “whom.” Blacklists by advertisers of right wing dissenting voices should at the very least concern you, even if you don’t recognize that Brock and Carusone would have gone after O’Reilly if he were as pure as the driven snow. If I recall, they did the same thing to Glenn Beck a few years ago when he was still of Fox. Hell, the left is doing it now to Breitbart, but Conservatism Inc. doesn’t care about that because Breitbart is #LiterallyHitler. The “sexual harassment” allegations are merely a pretext.

#17 Comment By John Wilson On April 19, 2017 @ 10:15 pm

He said, she said.
No trial, no presentation of facts by both sides.
Rejoicing by the Fox haters.
Disappointing to see that here.
After two years of daily reading of this blog, I have sadly decided to move on from this site.

#18 Comment By russ On April 19, 2017 @ 10:27 pm

@Sancho:

He once comically claimed that Fox was balanced because it had 19 paid liberal contributors, failing to mention that there were another 156 contributors that by implication weren’t liberal.

I’d be interested to see how those numbers stack up to my preferred source for news, NPR.

#19 Comment By russ On April 19, 2017 @ 10:28 pm

Oops, screwed up the blockquote tag above ^.

This sentence was mine:

I’d be interested to see how those numbers stack up to my preferred source for news, NPR.

#20 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On April 19, 2017 @ 11:01 pm

I seldom saw much to admire in O’Reilly’s commentary, and I agree that he deserved to be terminated. Strange as it may seem to Brendan Riordan, allegations used opportunistically by a person’s political enemies may still be true, and reprehensible. But, at a time like this, if there is anything good to say about a fallen man, it should be offered.

Bill O’Reilly had the integrity to publicly apologize for his hasty conclusions about Shirely Sherrod, and admit that he had not done his homework as to the allegations that she acted prejudicially against a white farmer while holding a position in a publicly funded advocacy office. (Of course, when the white farmer came forward and said Sherrod was the best friend his family had, she had saved their farm… what else could he say?) I might add that some highly placed people in the Obama White House acted like craven cowards rushing to secure Sherrod’s resignation for fear that “Glenn Beck is going to say something about this” before even checking the facts — which is just like a lot of liberal democrats.

(An advertiser boycott of TAC? I doubt if TAC gets five percent of its revenue from advertising. Its not the Super Bowl.)

#21 Comment By Brendan Riordan On April 19, 2017 @ 11:57 pm

How the Corporate Matrix orchestrated O’Reilly’s canning:

[9]?.tsrc=fauxdal

Notably is the admission that the founders of this group consist of “people in the marketing industry” and that the decided to jump in because O’Reilly “had been bigoted in the past.” Also notable is that they “didn’t want their names attached to Sleeping Giants because of professional conflicts of interest” and the fact that association of individual names “could get in the way of our lives” (i.e.. doxxing by the hacker known as 4chan).

Rod you have often pointed out on this site that the corporate world is no friend to social conservatives, devout Christians or those at all predisposed to traditional modes of living. It’s not clear how high up in the food chain these Sleeping Giants people actually are; however, it appears to be more organized than just a bunch of random schmucks on twitter. Regardless of your opinions of O’Reilly, taking out the a cable news figure with the largest primetime audience today because of his status as a long-time conservative hate-figure to the left represents a huge blow to the anyone on the right and it just demonstrates how much power the Cathedral has over discourse in American media today. In the aftermath of the Trumpeting, they are desperately trying to push the Overton Window back to the Left by purging media figures they deem “toxic” or “bigoted” for whatever reason and you are only kidding yourself if they will stop after O’Reilly. You and those like you are next.

#22 Comment By Fran Macadam On April 19, 2017 @ 11:57 pm

Rupert Murdoch infamously owns the European satellite TV porno network. When are the Murdochs of the world brought to account? Recall his British tabloid surveillance scandal. Men like him are granted immediate citizenship by act of Congress, that they can circumvent media foreign ownership rules.

O’Reilly, after all, was just the hired help.

#23 Comment By Jesse On April 20, 2017 @ 1:24 am

“Regardless of your opinions of O’Reilly, taking out the a cable news figure with the largest primetime audience today because of his status as a long-time conservative hate-figure to the left represents a huge blow to the anyone on the right and it just demonstrates how much power the Cathedral has over discourse in American media today.”

Perhaps Bill O’Reilly shouldn’t have sexually harassed multiple women in such provable ways even Rupert Murdoch’s attorneys told Fox to pay out?

I mean, it’s really not that difficult.

#24 Comment By JonF On April 20, 2017 @ 6:49 am

RE: Former President William Jefferson Clinton must be a special case then.

Do you expect he will not face Judgment as all of us will?

#25 Comment By Ben H On April 20, 2017 @ 9:35 am

This is small beans compared to what goes on in Hollywood on a daily basis.

#26 Comment By Michelle On April 20, 2017 @ 10:02 am

Hard to feel too sorry for O’Reilly. He got an $85 million golden parachute and will presumably go on making millions more with his series of “Killing Whomever” books and what’s bound to be a best-selling memoir about his years at Fox stoking the anger of old white folks. I’m sure my parents, who are in their 80s, will be buying whatever Bill-O and his ghost writers cough up.

O’Reilly was occassionally a voice of sanity among the Fox talking heads; and, while a jackass, he was nowhere near as vile as his Trump-lovin’ compatriot Hannity. O’Reilly managed to survive a sexual harassment settlement in 2004, but with his protector Ailes deposed for similar sins, even his ratings weren’t going to save him this time around. Perhaps his fellow misogynist and master of serial sexual abuse, our PGIC, can hire him to take over for the hapless Sean Spicer. Birds of a feather.

#27 Comment By Stefan On April 20, 2017 @ 11:02 am

“I am sorry to see it, because it’s sad to see O’Reilly end his extraordinary career on such a shameful note. Love him or hate him, what Bill O’Reilly accomplished at Fox over the last two decades is one of the more remarkable feats in broadcasting.”

Refreshingly amoral take I must say…
“Love or hate Stalin and Mao, what they did to their countries is one of the more remarkable feats in political history.”

[NFR: Oh, please. O’Reilly was not Stalin or Mao. I didn’t care for Dan Rather, but I was sorry to see his career ended so disgracefully, even if it was his own fault (as it certainly is in O’Reilly’s case). Have a little humanity, would you? I think it’s generally a bad look to rejoice in the downfall of one’s enemies. — RD]

#28 Comment By Stefan On April 20, 2017 @ 11:23 am

What struck me about O’Reilly the one time I watched a segment of his show was not just the man’s sheer stupidity but the fact that he was obviously either too stupid to realize how limited his intellect was, and therefore unable to comprehend that those who disagreed with him were not ipsi facto mental defectives, or that he wastoo much of a schoolyard bully to let it influence his brand as someone who delights spiteful old people by beating up pinkos.

[NFR: He is (was) a cable television host. You expect them to be the Academie Française? — RD]

#29 Comment By Uncle Billy On April 20, 2017 @ 11:26 am

So O’Reilly has settled five (5) sexual harassment suits (for $13 mil) and has at least two (3) more pending? You would think he would have learned something after 2 or 3 of them? He appears to have a problem.

#30 Comment By collin On April 20, 2017 @ 12:51 pm

I didn’t care for Dan Rather, but I was sorry to see his career ended so disgracefully, even if it was his own fault

No, I think Dan Rather was an important lesson of doing the right thing versus his actions. He was a fine reporter but let his actions hurt his reporting and CBS news for the next generation. (Conservatives still whine about his actions as evidence of liberal MSM.) And long term he helped Jr. reelection.

#31 Comment By thomas tucker On April 20, 2017 @ 1:01 pm

I like Carlson Tucker too. But I wish he’d resume wearing bow ties.

#32 Comment By Ben H On April 20, 2017 @ 5:30 pm

This is shot #1 in the greater goal of making Fox news a mainstream media outlet that is controlled by exactly the same factions as all the other ones. Whatever the problems of Fox (many) at least it was a different voice but over time that will change. They will hire and promote from the same limited pool as the other channels and outlets, they will be included in the same coordinated media hits against dissenting figures. Watch this happen.

Murdochs kids are running the show now and they are not right leaning/cynical about making bank like the old man; they are spoiled rich kids who want to be liked. Only the sleazy tabloid side of Fox and other media properties will remain, the viewpoint diversity will be gone for good.

#33 Comment By Fran Macadam On April 20, 2017 @ 7:28 pm

“[NFR: He is (was) a cable television host. You expect them to be the Academie Française? — RD]”

I’m not sure what the attraction of cable TV is, I don’t get it personally, though I’m definitely no French intellectual.

#34 Comment By Thomas Kaempfen On April 20, 2017 @ 11:35 pm

[NFR: He is (was) a cable television host. You expect them to be the Academie Française? — RD]

But there are cable television hosts who aren’t idiots, as I mentioned above, people like Hewitt, Ingraham, Carlson. There’s nothing unfair or unreasonable about pointing out O’Reilly’s doltishness. Indeed, that was one of the most notable things about him.

#35 Comment By VikingLS On April 20, 2017 @ 11:48 pm

Well Bill O’Reilly did one more remarkable thing, I am totally in agreement with Jesse.

It’s not that difficult not to sexually harass women, most men do it every day.

#36 Comment By James C On April 21, 2017 @ 1:27 am

O’Reilly still denies all allegations. But if they aren’t true, he should have fought them from the beginning. The amount of money he has paid out is staggering—people get less money in wrongful death suits! So either the allegations are true or else O’Reilly is an idiot for hanging a big sign outside his window saying ACCUSE ME AND MAKE MILLIONS.

[NFR: As much money as O’Reilly cost Fox, he made them even more. It was a cost-benefit analysis for Fox, under Ailes. The problem is that when all these accusations — and the settlements — went public, advertisers considered them credible, and dropped him. What made the accusations seem even more credible is the corporate culture Roger Ailes created. — RD]

#37 Comment By Stefan On April 21, 2017 @ 2:11 am

“NFR: He is (was) a cable television host. You expect them to be the Academie Française? — RD”

He does have a master’s degree from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. Isn’t that supposed to mean at least something?

#38 Comment By RIchard Parker On April 21, 2017 @ 6:06 am

“NFR: O’Reilly wasn’t being boycotted by advertisers because of any of his stated views.”

I’m no fan of O’Reilly here, but Rod, I think you’re being very naïve here.

#39 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On April 21, 2017 @ 11:39 am

Don’t mix sex and work, guys. It isn’t that complicated. For some reason though a lot of people, Bill O’Reilly as well as many liberals and conservatives, seem to be addicted to importing sex into the work place.

#40 Comment By Stuart On April 21, 2017 @ 12:24 pm

I wish to opine , but I won’t bloviate.
There is a difference between sexual harassment and a pompous arrogant man who forgets how a gentleman is to admire (treat) women. Unfortunately I see fewer and fewer that do.

#41 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On April 22, 2017 @ 10:02 pm

As I was stuck in a motel room with nothing to do for an evening, I recently happened upon Tucker Carlson live on TV. A rather empty headed bloviator, but skilled at finding empty headed social democrats to joust with, like a rather muddled Oakland city council member.