Bill O'Reilly vs. Jon Stewart: Howard Kurtz's Reliable Sources On Description Of Protesters (VIDEO)

The recent spat between Bill O'Reilly and Jon Stewart over FOX News' handling of health care reform protesters got some air time Sunday morning on CNN's Reliable Sources.

Host and Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz played a clip of O'Reilly responding to Stewart, accusing The Daily Show satirist of airing FOX News clips out of context (O'Reilly calls anti-Bush protesters "loons).

Kurtz then asks his panel if there's a valid point about how protesters are described, depending on their cause.

WATCH

Comments

[greenrotgut]

Stewart is a satirist, O’Reilly is a commentator. Both give their opinions on any giving issue. Stewart fires from the left, O’Reilly fires from the right. But let’s not mistake what Stewart and Colbert do as anything other than comedy – they are on the COMEDY channel.

The only difference between Olberman and Stewart is that Stewart actually has an audience and he is funny, while Keith is just a source puss angry liberal.

Anyone wanting real news need to shell out the money and read the Wall Street Journal.

[Evil Hamster]

Or the Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune, The New York times, or even the LA Times.

Because only a loon would close themselves to multiple sources of information based simply on ideology.

[Ameriki]

Why do you believe that the WSJ or any of the others will give you "real news" instead of GOP agitprop?

[balmora]

Can't get real news in those liberal rags you mention, definitely not in the NY Times or the Washington post. It's a lot like reading the Huffinton Post here, you know that what you're reading has such a radical left spin to it you just had to take it into account as you read.

[balancedsolution]

Sad to see a comedian whomp a "supposed" newsman.

When most Americans believe Jon Stewart to provide news, this is a problem for the mainstream media.

If i was the head of a news organization, I would take this as a wake-up call and dig in my heels and get back to old time journalism, reporting, and purge my network of salacious stories.

But hey, that's just me.

The PEOPLE ARE CLAMORING for the TRUTH!

YOu have 24 hours a day newschannels to work on stories...Quit recycling stories. It's just sad and shows a lack of respect for your consumers.

[fausto412]

David frum touched on something that has bothered me for years....will all that tv time they never go in depth on any subject.

[Ballot]

Do people still watch CNN? Many ceased doing so years ago.

[Archivist1000]

The sad part of this is that O'Reilly's fans will say:

""""See he didn't call them loons. Well, he did call them loons, because they are loons and he has the survey to prove it."""""

Who ya gonna believe? O'reilly or your lying eyes?

[zenmonkman]

New game: CREATE A BATTLE ROYALE between newscasters ... it's a win-win ... rating skyrocket ... viewers sit spell-bound at the edge of their seat ... and ... zzzzzzzzzzzzzz! .... opps excuse me ... I must have dozed off with all the excitement these battle-fests cause ... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! ... this is why they invented American Football in the fall.

[Javida]

These "panels" are so boring. That's why I no longer watch CNN and other cable "news" channels. They present some issue, like this one - O'Reilly vs Jon Stewart," and then they lapse into wasting time on people's opinions. We get plenty of opinions on blogs.

Does anyone care enough about this silly manufactured story to waste time listening to folks discuss it??!! I immediately stopped the video as soon as the panel's talking heads got started. There's much more to life -- much, much more -- than watching this gibberish. Also, it's a waste of money. Cable companies should give refunds for having this nonsense in their channel lineup.

[therealpixie]

Your post made me smile. I saw both Jon Stewart & the O'Reilly clip, so I didn't bother to watch this video. I just scrolled to the bottom to see people's opinions.

[Littlewords]

I was going to comment on the slow news day, but that is not the case.

What we have is CNN continuing to run pedantic, banal chats consuming valuable air time otherwise available for say in-depth reporting of an critical story, journalistic commentary to help people understand a complex issue, or investigation of a brewing matter that could have great impact on the people.

Thanks CNN for showing your continued inroads of transformation away from news and into an infotainment network.

[Revee]

I have been thinking the same thing for quite some time about all cable network shows, not just CNN.
Imagine if this air time was used to delve into the thousands of pages of bills that have been put out there to actually extract a summary out of it so that people may grasp what is actually in them.
Or, they could have specials on health care in other countries. So often, I hear of people making broad claims on other health care systems based purely on anecdotal evidence. Wouldn't that be a real nice piece of journalism?
Of course, on the flip side, I am not sure how may people would actually watch in-depth shows of that kind.
I can only dream of "real" journalism. These shows are entertainment - pure and simple.

[Piatt]

Thought Kurtz made serveral interesting points in his recent Post column. For the first time in a long time, the MSM has actually started calling a lie a lie. Given the percentages of Americans who still think that death panels and government takeovers are in the offing, it doesn't seem to have had much of an impact.

I don't think a lot of people watch news or read papers to find out what they need to know to make decisions. They watch the news and read the papers that most effectively reinforce their existing points of view which does nothing but increase the babble and render facts insignificant.

Doesn't help that the past two administrations haven't exactly been slaves to truth telling. Americans are right to be skeptical of government but the past sixteen years have led many of them to believe that every time a politician opens his mouth, he or she is lying.

[smittie]

but...but...but...O'reilly Did call them loons.

[seatea1967]

How did O'Reilly's rebuttal negate Stewart's point? He called anti-war protestors loons.

[jungpatawan]

There is a huge miss going on here, and it is symptomatic of the whole problem with public discourse filtered via the media today. Essentially, they are not making a distinction between legitimate protest and crazy ranting.

It was legitimate to protest Bush's policies which led to thousands of American deaths and tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths, the destabilization of the whole Fertile Crescent, and the devaluation of the American "brand" throughout the diplomatic world. This level of cause and effect was demonstrable, and the only debate possible was whether the results were worth the cost.

Today's "patriots" as they are being described by Fox, are protesting a death-panel which doesn't exist, an embryonic Naziism which was a fitter description of the previous administration, and socialism, which some can't even spell, judging by their signs, much less define.

Bush protestors were consciously trying to stop a war. Obama protestors are unwittingly (sometimes wittingly) trying to protect corporate profits. Bush protestors were self-motivated and self-organized. Obama protestors are astro-turfed.

This is exactly what is wrong with the MSM today - "fairness" to them has devolved into giving a sound-bite soapbox for every wandering kook and a bully pulpit for useful idiots (Hello, Joe the Plumber and his new radio show!)

jp

[azind]

Fanned and faved Thank You Great Post

[sstrickland]

well said

[Khirad]

Fanned.

[Revee]

Well said. Great post!

[xLethal-Interjection x]

Great job braking it down, sad that probably so called patriots would read this and get nothing...

[BabblingBrooks]

O'Reilly has the advantage, as he played enough of the clips so that people can see what happened, what was said, and make up their own minds.

Stewart is a COMIC, for gosh sake. It is sad and frightening that so many consider him a news reporter!

[Chad Krossber]

What is sad is that you are upgrading the status of Bill O'Reilly. HE IS NOT A REPORTER. He is a commentator used by Fox News to entertain the audience. I fail to see the difference between O'Reilly and Stewart. They are both commentators. One reports false news with a twist to evoke an emotion. The other reports REAL news with a funny twist/satire to envoke an emotion. Where is the difference? They are both entertainers in their own right.

The difference is that ignorant people give one commentator way more credit than he deserves. If you do not know who, then you are probably that ignorant person.

[Queenofthedamned]

Did you NOT watch the clip? The point Page made was that his video store guy says , "I get all my news from Bill O'Reilly." Clearly, not everyone is as smart/discerning as you and "that ignorant person" label happens to apply to the millions of loyal fox news watchers who DO consider it to be a "real" news outlet (it calls itself as such and einforces constantly it's deceptive "fair&balanced" position) regardless of whomever is conveying current events. What is sad is that you are dismissing "that gnorant person" as though he/she is of no consequence in political discourse and progress. Yet these are the very citizens who have been stoked up to so vehemently oppose reform that will be in their own best interests.

[EmotionDetector]

O'Reilly is every bit the entertainer that Stewart is....so just stop trying to make O'Reilly the next Walter Conkrite.

[trubluelefty]

Have you ever turned off the noise and watched Jon Stewart? There is nothing FUNNY about what he is showing. Just sad true facts.

[ANuttyReader]

CNN has no credibility...

[NJmikeV]

Do you know who Roger Ailes is ?

Roger Ailes, is the president and founder of Fox News. He was a veteran Republican operative long before he was a news executive, having worked as a media consultant in the presidential campaigns of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and the first President Bush.

Fox (not really) News has no credibility.

[Leper]

Both of you are correct. CNN AND FOX have no credibility.

[Siva Nathan]

CNN, why do we even have Kurtz. It is repetition over our already saturated brain from the past week. This is just like your other getting to be boring programs ...