Already a member?
Sign in
Attack Head Mentality Ceases as O'Reilly and Colbert Trade Appearances |
Version Compare
| Version | User | Scope of changes |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 16 2007, 11:29 PM EDT (current) | JamesL123 | 1 word added |
| Oct 16 2007, 11:26 PM EDT | JamesL123 | 2 words added, 1 word deleted |
Changes
Key: Additions Deletions
by James Layman
For years, the culture of television attack politics has netted rating goldmines. Polemicists from Chris Matthews (host of MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews) to Sean Hannity (host of Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes) have risen to the top in a market where belligerence is the name of the game.
January 18th, 2007 marked a momentary change for TV attack dogs everywhere when Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor host Bill O’Reilly and Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report .host Stephen Colbert agreed to swap appearances on one another’s programs. Colbert, a comedian and former correspondent on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, has garnered laughs on his program by impersonating an archetypical conservative pundit. Quite conversely, O’Reilly embodies the brand of polemicist Colbert constantly lampoons. For the first time, a television attack head wouldn’t be confronted with a willing opponent, but a comedic matador. Would attack culture still maintain its corrosive momentum? Could the sparks still fly?
“Look, with a bunch of interviews, you don’t know how they’re going to go,” said O’Reilly in a New York Times interview, “but that’s part of the fun. Colbert, in typical sarcastic character, quipped to The National Post. , “It’s an honor to speak face-to face with a broadcasting legend”.
The programs yielded 4.5 million viewers combined, tuning in awaiting fireworks. Instead, the two joked around. Colbert adorned his set with a “Mission Accomplished” banner, and sarcastically lamented that O’Reilly has never gotten credit for how “loud” he is. Uncharacteristically, O’Reilly laughed off the quips, devoid of his trademark aggression.
But while the sparks never, something entirely unique happened between the controversial Fox News Host and the comedian who chronically mimicked him. Suddenly, the culture of attack politics crumbled without a clear target standing in front of it. The possibility of some great explosion was diffused, while the man critics perceived to be an imposing firebrand showed his lighter side. The bull never gored the matador. In fact, he never charged to begin with- just smiled.
Corrosive partisan controversy took a rest that evening, but has typically never failed to rise- especially when O’Reilly’s name is mentioned.
Vanity Fair columnist and O’Reilly critic James Wolcott blasted the conservative polemicist in a 2004 book titled Attack Poodles. “It takes a bully to run a bully pulpit, and the biggest bully at Fox News is Bill O’Reilly”, wrote Wolcott. “O’Reilly is willing to scrap with anyone, which can make for good TV- “good TV” , in this context, meaning momentary flare-ups of real heat amid the staged pillow fights.” (Wolcott, 171-172).
Author and O’Reilly Factor correspondent Bernard Goldberg was quick to fire back in his 2005 bestseller 100 People Who are Screwing up America. He recalled an account in which Wolcott wrote a post on his own website prior to the 2004 election, expressing his possible sentiments towards a Bush victory. According to Goldberg, Wolcott had written “Good, go ahead America, choke on your own vomit, you deserve to die.”
Goldberg went on to describe the polarizing effect of the statement. “America will never come back together- liberals/conservatives, Democrats/Republicans, Blue States/Red States as long as journalists like James Wolcott hold important positions at big mainstream media outlets.” (Goldberg, 128).
Ironically, Goldberg’s quote might retain some truth for O’Reilly as well.
Almost two years later, the dust of Wolcott and Goldberg’s rhetoric was still settling as O’Reilly and Colbert sat across from one another, with a generational canyon between them. “Entertainers like Jon Stewart, David Letterman and Stephen Colbert have become purveyors of information for many young Americans,” said O’Reilly in a January 15th Advertising Age article. Clearly, the conservative host respected Colbert as a newscaster. Still, while 4.5 million anticipated a clash, he refused to take him on. With a comic like Colbert, would corrosive partisan attack have been a waste of time?
Perhaps O’Reilly’s willingness to joke answers the question. Despite a personality some perceive as caustic, the polemicist smiled and let it go. Across a partisan landscape from Hannity, to Matthews, to Wolcott, could this be sage advice?
Works Cited
Wolcott, James, Attack Poodles, Miramax Books, c. 2004
Goldberg, Bernard. 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (and Al Franken is #37), Medium Cool Communications, c. 2005
For years, the culture of television attack politics has netted rating goldmines. Polemicists from Chris Matthews (host of MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews) to Sean Hannity (host of Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes) have risen to the top in a market where belligerence is the name of the game.
January 18th, 2007 marked a momentary change for TV attack dogs everywhere when Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor host Bill O’Reilly and Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report .host Stephen Colbert agreed to swap appearances on one another’s programs. Colbert, a comedian and former correspondent on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, has garnered laughs on his program by impersonating an archetypical conservative pundit. Quite conversely, O’Reilly embodies the brand of polemicist Colbert constantly lampoons. For the first time, a television attack head wouldn’t be confronted with a willing opponent, but a comedic matador. Would attack culture still maintain its corrosive momentum? Could the sparks still fly?
“Look, with a bunch of interviews, you don’t know how they’re going to go,” said O’Reilly in a New York Times interview, “but that’s part of the fun. Colbert, in typical sarcastic character, quipped to The National Post. , “It’s an honor to speak face-to face with a broadcasting legend”.
The programs yielded 4.5 million viewers combined, tuning in awaiting fireworks. Instead, the two joked around. Colbert adorned his set with a “Mission Accomplished” banner, and sarcastically lamented that O’Reilly has never gotten credit for how “loud” he is. Uncharacteristically, O’Reilly laughed off the quips, devoid of his trademark aggression.
But while the sparks never, something entirely unique happened between the controversial Fox News Host and the comedian who chronically mimicked him. Suddenly, the culture of attack politics crumbled without a clear target standing in front of it. The possibility of some great explosion was diffused, while the man critics perceived to be an imposing firebrand showed his lighter side. The bull never gored the matador. In fact, he never charged to begin with- just smiled.
Corrosive partisan controversy took a rest that evening, but has typically never failed to rise- especially when O’Reilly’s name is mentioned.
Vanity Fair columnist and O’Reilly critic James Wolcott blasted the conservative polemicist in a 2004 book titled Attack Poodles. “It takes a bully to run a bully pulpit, and the biggest bully at Fox News is Bill O’Reilly”, wrote Wolcott. “O’Reilly is willing to scrap with anyone, which can make for good TV- “good TV” , in this context, meaning momentary flare-ups of real heat amid the staged pillow fights.” (Wolcott, 171-172).
Author and O’Reilly Factor correspondent Bernard Goldberg was quick to fire back in his 2005 bestseller 100 People Who are Screwing up America. He recalled an account in which Wolcott wrote a post on his own website prior to the 2004 election, expressing his possible sentiments towards a Bush victory. According to Goldberg, Wolcott had written “Good, go ahead America, choke on your own vomit, you deserve to die.”
Goldberg went on to describe the polarizing effect of the statement. “America will never come back together- liberals/conservatives, Democrats/Republicans, Blue States/Red States as long as journalists like James Wolcott hold important positions at big mainstream media outlets.” (Goldberg, 128).
Ironically, Goldberg’s quote might retain some truth for O’Reilly as well.
Almost two years later, the dust of Wolcott and Goldberg’s rhetoric was still settling as O’Reilly and Colbert sat across from one another, with a generational canyon between them. “Entertainers like Jon Stewart, David Letterman and Stephen Colbert have become purveyors of information for many young Americans,” said O’Reilly in a January 15th Advertising Age article. Clearly, the conservative host respected Colbert as a newscaster. Still, while 4.5 million anticipated a clash, he refused to take him on. With a comic like Colbert, would corrosive partisan attack have been a waste of time?
Perhaps O’Reilly’s willingness to joke answers the question. Despite a personality some perceive as caustic, the polemicist smiled and let it go. Across a partisan landscape from Hannity, to Matthews, to Wolcott, could this be sage advice?
Works Cited
Wolcott, James, Attack Poodles, Miramax Books, c. 2004
Goldberg, Bernard. 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (and Al Franken is #37), Medium Cool Communications, c. 2005
