When a master at manipulating race-based tension calls you out, you must be doing something right.
Exhibit A: Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, a guy who I've called on the carpet many times for his use of coded words and phrases to pass along stereotypical, insulting ideas. He's gleefully pointed out going after "black rappers" in a prime time special on explicit entertainment, noted how those who live a "gangsta life" were like those left to drown in post-Katrina New Orleans and insisted he wasn't going to "go on a lynching party" when Michelle Obama said some thing which upset conservatives about America.
Last night, in one of those inexplicable moments when a world-famous opinionator reaches out to swat a barely-known newspaper writer, O'Reilly called me "one of the biggest race baiters in the country," offering no proof of how I'd earned the term, beyond my status as chair of the Media Monitoring Committee for the National Association of Black Journalists.
I'm betting it's because I took note of his lynching remark in a column about Don Imus on Friday. Indeed, I have a long history of tangling with Fox News' most popular pundit, viewable in stories here, here and here.
"Millions of white Americans will no longer even think about discussing race with black people," O'Reilly offered, just before plastering my picture on his screen. "Any slip of the tongue can lead to trouble." Why is it that the main people who don't seem to want to talk about race in America these days, are those who earn their living by keeping us apart?
Of course, O'Reilly's use of coded race language is hardly accidental. A key part of his show involves invoking the specter of out-of-control black males to frighten his audience. Once a critic like me objects, he can claim it was a mistake and accuse others of overreaching or unfairness. But if the Don Imus incident teaches anything, it's that mainstream America is growing far less tolerant of such antics.
I'm not saying I'm perfect in this. We've reached a point with prejudice and stereotypes where the issues are subtle, deep-seated and difficult to discuss. But I think intent counts for a lot -- and it seems obvious to me that O'Reilly doesn't come to these debates with respect for many positions besides his own. And that's why I'm so tough on him; because he's smart enough to know exactly what he's doing.
THe ironies abound: O'Reilly says red-baiter Joe McCarthy would love me, but criticizes me mostly for my involvement with an organization he doesn't like -- a classic McCarthy tactic. He also has looked into the party affiliations of TV and media critics across the country; hmmm....who does that remind you of?
And as the News Hounds web site noted, the only people O'Reilly accuses of being unfair about claims of racism are black folks (he did criticize an institution run by white people, liberal media watchdogs Media Matters for America).
His enemies list of "race hustlers" includes an ex-girlfriend of comic Bill Maher, who filed a palimony suit accusing the HBO host of using "degrading racial comments" against her. (That mention, which really has little to do with accusations of racism in politics and media, just seemed calculated to juxtapose a picture of Maher, who is white, next to his black centerfold model ex-girlfriend).
O'Reilly and I can agree on one thing: the word "racist" is thrown around way too much. It feeds the notion that the only people who leverage such language are serious bigots, which isn't true. The toughest thing about confronting stereotypes sometimes is that they are seductive, entertaining and often employed by people who aren't bigots. Doesn't make them any more right.
In O'Reilly's world, most of the "race hustlers" in this game seem to be black people (except Al Sharpton, with whom O'Reilly seems to have a cordial relationship). But white pundits like O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage often use race tension to score points with their audiences, exploiting their fear and frustration about race issues to build ratings points.
As I've said many times before, I judge journalists by the enemies they make. So I must be doing pretty well these days.
Follow Eric Deggans on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Deggans
My mother, her siblings survived the holocoust, hitler left my grandmother, and grandfather with one boy and one girl from that terrible ordeal, so i have first hand knowledge and experience with racism in this country.
As u state in ur article here, when your enimeies point the finger at you, that person does not want to face his or her own character defect and wrong doing, so the misdirect misguide and twist the aboloute truth. But rather taint the truth with their own immorality, then that person or persons want to force their morality on others thru lawsuits, etc.
In the case of oreilly, him being a catholic really shows thru when he is on the air, this man uses the first person narrative alot in descriptive sentences, he uses language such as I, or My opinion, and the viewers of fox network hang on evey one of his words like he is some demagod, or leader,
Oh yes he is a leader, read his book culture warriors book and the other books he has writtten. These books are so laced with poison
I guess i have ranted on for too long
Shalom
Peace and Blessings unto to you and yours
Rabbi Josish
HITLERISM BROUGHT ON BY FOX NEWS
This article warms my heart, Mr. Deegan, I only watch the fox news, (ie oreilly for the simple fact i study forensic psychology)
and the rantings of the fox network and their employees are so left of center, the network is promoting hitlerism,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/columnists/chi-oped0409pageapr09,0,5320228.column
People criticize him saying he thinks he's God, even the wingnuts are fed up with him. They think he's an idiot. His audience has to be old timers in their late 50s and upwards.
But he wouldn't dare call any HOTAIR posters on the carpet and he wouldn't dare call her site a hateful smear site for calling him on the carpet for his untruths and megelomania; the way he calls out this site as well as Media Matters.
He is so full of it.
Why?
His claim that "millions of white Americans will no longer even think about discussing race with black people" is actually his response to Mr. Obama's clarion call for an honest dialogue on race. The impact of Mr. Obama's inspiring invitation is so vast and deep it resonates even among some hardened bigots. Lobbing soft balls at "barely-known" writers is Billo's attempt to diminish the national significance of such impact.
You're probably one of those people who are opposed to Black History Month and Women's History Month, because there is no White History Month or Men's History Month. (Because, hello, pretty much all history is about the accomplishments of white men - who have oppressed women and minorities.) Your logic is faulty.
The sad fact is that a lot of white people don't get that you can be proud of your race without denegrating other races.
"Racial equality will not truly be here until whites are no longer expected to feel guilty for bad things that happened more than 140 years ago."
It's also sad that alot of people think you have to look back 140 years to find racism.
Shame is another matter. I am ashamed of slavery as an institution, and my region's part in it.
I do not feel any personal shame over my ancestors who owned slaves, or of the ones up north who slaughtered whales. It's just history. I did not pick my ancestors, and they did not pick me. Heck, even my parents did not plan me!
I've read all your articles. Your message makes this world a better place. Keep it up.
It seems to me it's just way to call people racists when they havent done anything to deserve it.
Who invented this code, and where can I get a copy?
Apparantly I am a giant bigot and didn't even know it. On the St. Louis Cardinals opening homestand, a rookie named Brian Barton hit one up the gap. Admiring his speed, I said "look at that boy run." Little did I know I was calling him a nigger.
Thank you for pointing that out.
"Urban" seems to be code for Black.