Bill the Bloviate

Headlines are the journalists' tool for directing eyeballs to read a specific story. Generating buzz about a writer gets the writer noticed, and once a writer develops a readership, column inches increase, as well as story significance. The same may be said for TV talk shows; hence, current controversy and caustic commentary create loyal viewers who tune in and boost ratings, which keep a show on-air.

I listen to Bill O'Reilly maybe twice a week, not more, because he is the definition of the cautions he provides to reader response: do not bloviate; do not be supercilious; do not be loquacious; do not blather. The thesaurus synonym list is a lot longer than my recall of it, but the point is for readers to be on-point, while O'Reilly rants and raves endlessly. Do as I say, not as I do seems to be O'Reilly's mantra.

In the world of fair and balanced, it depends on how much and how often the interviewee agrees with Mr. O'Reilly's opining, posturing, and pontificating. Those who touch a toe over the O'Reilly line find it stepped on, a firm warning to get back in line -- literally. Those who continue to cross the O line are the target of arrogant disdain the following day, when O'Reilly explains to his audience of apparent idiots what he said, why he said it, and why he was not just correct in his bloviation, but prevailed over his hapless vic ... uh, guest. O'Reilly treats with disrespect those with whom he disagrees, using his microphone to beat up on them linguistically, a tactic that is bullying at its best.

For a man who is large physically, verbally he suffers from little man syndrome. Fairness allows an individual to accept what others believe without agreeing with them. After a balanced debate of both points of view, the ideological combatants can depart the field of battle to joust another day. O'Reilly prohibits that eventuality by crushing his opponents, based on his own established political views that allow no dissent in his fair and balanced TV world.

However, be that as it may, O'Reilly is himself the target of his tactics. Yahoo.com posted an excerpt from an interview O'Reilly participated in recently, where his most memorable people/events formed the basis for commentary. The headline screams Fox News' Bill O'Reilly boycotting Sean Penn films, a part of the interview that encompasses maybe a paragraph and is based on the actor's political choices, with which O'Reilly disagrees. Thus, O'Reilly doesn't watch any of Penn's films, a fair and balanced position for the TV host to assert.

The article, paying homage to O'Reilly's century mark as #1 in the ratings, also explores the depth of his character in printing that comments made by a 20-something male evoked O'Reilly's angriest TV moment. The male, whose father was killed in the Towers on 9/11, stated that it was a US plot, a position with which O'Reilly (and most well-educated, well-informed citizens) vehemently disagrees. A grieving son, casting for any port in a stormy sea of calamity, will blame anyone for his personal tragedy. O'Reilly should have been able to see beyond the words to the emotionally convoluted reasoning behind them, but that's asking too much of the #1 rated news' show host. O'Reilly's entire focus is on what someone says, not what they have experienced and may have difficulty articulating to a TV audience.

O'Reilly crushed his guest that day, too, but to what purpose? The thesaurus offers a wide range of synonyms for compassion; perhaps Mr. O'Reilly could spend some time perusing those pages?