Tag Archives: NBC News

O'Reilly questions keep mounting

History might be repeating itself. First there’s an allegation of fibbing. Then it’s followed by more allegations. More witnesses come forward. More questions get asked.

That’s the way it often goes when controversy starts boiling over.

Bill O’Reilly’s troubles aren’t going away, any more than Brian Williams’ troubles aren’t going away.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/02/25/another-fabrication-oreilly-never-witnessed-the/202667

The Fox News talk show host now is being questioned about whether he witnessed the murder of nuns in El Salvador, which he says he saw. This comes after questions arose about whether he heard the shotgun blast when someone connected to President Kennedy’s assassination killed himself. It comes after questions surfaced in a lengthy Mother Jones article about whether O’Reilly ever was in serious danger while “covering” the Falklands War from Buenos Aires.

This stuff happens. It’s not unique to O’Reilly. Brian Williams went through it. Others have endured similar revelations. Remember the John Edwards story and how the one-time Democratic vice-presidential nominee denied the affair with Rielle Hunter? How about when President Nixon denied any wrongdoing in the Watergate scandal? Then came those tape recordings and the testimony from those who said, “Yep, he told the FBI to stop investigating the break-in at the Democratic Party office.”

Is any of this going to spell the end of O’Reilly at Fox News? Time will tell.

Meantime, the bombastic talk show host had better get ready for more nasty revelations.

 

O'Reilly getting a taste of his own brew

The Bill O’Reilly story isn’t going away any time soon.

It might not ever disappear. Why is that? Well, look at it as payback from other media organizations that have been on the receiving end of O’Reilly’s sanctimony over many years.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/02/24/oreilly-lied-about-suicide-of-jfk-assassination/202655

The left-leaning media watchdog groups around the country are taking a serious look at the allegations of embellishment and falsification that have piled up around O’Reilly. The Falklands War story still is resonating in some circles. O’Reilly has implied that he was in serious danger while covering the 1982 Falklands War between Great Britain and Argentina. He didn’t show up on the battlefield, but was in Buenos Aires covering riots and other disturbances during the Falklands conflict.

Was he in the danger he says he was? His former CBS colleagues dispute it.

Now comes another allegation of falsehood, that he was present during the suicide of a principal in the John F. Kennedy assassination. That, too, has come under challenge.

This story will have legs for some time for one simple reason: Bill O’Reilly has made considerable hay over the years criticizing other media outlets and reporters for their own transgressions. He’s held himself and his employer, Fox News, as the twin paragons of virtue and truth-telling. The “No Spin Zone,” which he calls his Fox TV show, has every bit as much “spin” as any other TV news talk show. O’Reilly just chooses to “spin” his stories his way.

Another reality, though, is that O’Reilly isn’t getting any more of a media vetting than Brian Williams got when it was revealed that he really wasn’t shot down in Iraq in 2003 as he has suggested. Nor is he being hammered any harder than former CBS News anchor Dan Rather was when he reported erroneously about President George W. Bush’s Air National Guard duty in the 1970s.

However, O’Reilly’s penchant for sticking it to other media means this story will continue for a good while longer.

This kind of scrutiny goes with the territory. O’Reilly knows it better than most.

 

VA chief 'inaccurately' states military service

When will this all stop? The fibbing, the “incorrect” statements about one’s personal history, the embarrassments.

Welcome to the Pantheon of Prevaricators, Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert McDonald.

The new VA boss — hired to fix the problems that have plagued the Department of Veterans Affairs’ health care network — has been caught saying he served in the U.S. Army Special Forces when, in fact, he didn’t.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-veterans-secretary-apologizes-for-misstating-military-service-abc-news/ar-BBhUHJ7

McDonald was caught on camera telling a homeless veteran that he served in the elite fighting force. The vet told the secretary he had served in Special Forces. “Me, too,” McDonald answered, telling the fellow he also was a Special Forces soldier.

To be fair, McDonald is a West Point graduate and did become an Army Ranger, which happens to be an elite fighting force as well. Why embellish those credentials?

NBC News anchor Brian Williams has recently admitted to “misremembering” an incident in which he said  a helicopter he was riding in was shot down by enemy fire in Iraq; it didn’t happen and he’s been suspended without pay for six months. Then came questions about Fox News talk show host Bill O’Reilly’s experience covering the Falklands War in 1982; he has said he came under fire covering that conflict but others have challenged his assertions, saying he didn’t set foot on the battlefield, as his reporting at the time and the years since have implied. O’Reilly and Fox are battling the accusations.

McDonald has apologized for the incident, which was recorded by a CBS News crew. “I asked the man where he had served in the military,” McDonald said, according to ABC News. “He responded that he had served in special forces. I incorrectly stated that I had been in special forces. That was inaccurate and I apologize to anyone that was offended by my misstatement.”

Inaccurate? Yeah, it was at least that. I’d call it a “lie,” which is the kind of thing that got the VA into trouble in the first place, with hospital staffers falsifying wait times that veterans were having to endure while seeking medical care.

Get back to work, Mr. Secretary — and limit your public remarks to the job you’ve been assigned to do.

 

'Bloviator' O'Reilly's war coverage challenged

Bill O’Reilly’s brand on TV news is one of confrontation and — some would suggest — self-serving excess.

OK, I’ll suggest it, too. O’Reilly is full of himself at times.

He’s been all over the Brian Williams story and the now-admitted “misremembering” about the NBC News anchor being shot down in Iraq in 2003.

Well, the self-proclaimed bloviator is now facing a challenge of his own, from Mother Jones magazine, over whether O’Reilly actually witnessed combat during the brief war in the remote Falkland Islands in 1982, when Great Britain sent a flotilla to its territorial possession to rid the place of Argentine troops who had taken the island illegally.

“I was there,” O’Reilly has contended all along. Mother Jones disputes O’Reilly’s assertion.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/bill-o%E2%80%99reilly%E2%80%99s-falklands-war-coverage-challenged-in-explosive-new-report/ar-BBhLZxs?ocid=ansWrap11

This story is still developing, but as MSN reported, O’Reilly has been quick — imagine that — to respond to the allegations that Mother Jones has made that the correspondent did not face hostile fire, as he has reported for more than three decades.

MSN reports: “The (Mother Jones) website’s David Corn highlights several instances where the Fox News primetime host claimed to have covered the 1982 fighting in the Falklands War between Argentina and England up close–the issue is few reporters were able to cover the conflict up close due to the remote location of the war zone.”

I’m not going to make an assessment here of whether O’Reilly fibbed about his war coverage. I will, however, suggest that the Fox News TV talk show star’s aggressive reporting of others’ troubles — such as Brian Williams — exposes him to careful scrutiny by other watchdogs to ensure that he’s as righteous as he claims to be.

Here’s the Mother Jones article that O’Reilly asserts is “bulls***.” It’s lengthy. It’s also quite interesting and carefully detailed.

Bill O’Reilly Has His Own Brian Williams Problem

See for yourself. Is David Corn merely a “left-wing assassin,” as O’Reilly asserts, or is he an aggressive reporter?

As for O’Reilly, it appears he has to explain himself — without resorting to name-calling.

 

Williams gone for 6 months, maybe forever

That didn’t take long.

I was hoping to cool my jets for a time while NBC News decided how to handle Brian Williams’ “misremembering” tale of woe. But today, the network news division decided to suspend Williams for six months without pay for violating the No. 1 cardinal rule of journalism — which is to tell the truth.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/nbc-news-suspends-brian-williams-for-false-iraq-helicopter-story/ar-AA9eu7i

It does not appear that this will end well for Williams’ once-stellar journalism career. He got caught fabricating a story about getting shot down in Iraq in 2003; he has been saying for years that his helicopter was hit by enemy rockets when, in fact, it wasn’t.

Then came questions about his reporting on Hurricane Katrina in 2005 — and then some head-scratching regarding his reports about flying over rocket fire in Israel in 2007.

When does it end?

NBC made the right call here. Williams’ credibility is, shall we say, blown to smithereens. His presence now at the NBC Nightly News anchor desk calls attention not to the news he would delivering, but to the man who would deliver it — and not in a positive manner.

What happens now is anyone’s guess. Williams will be off the air for at least six months. I suspect it won’t take him that long to decide that perhaps his time in the anchor’s chair is over.

For the short term, the network and the anchorman will have time to work out a separation agreement and a way to announce his departure that seeks to save a little bit of face — for both parties.

There will be plenty of discussion over how this controversy was allowed to explode and how Williams got away for as long as he did telling a story so many people knew was wrong.

A part of me is sad to witness the implosion of a man’s career.

Another part of me, though, is glad someone is being held accountable for breaching a serious trust between the media and those who expect truth in the information they deliver.

 

NBC anchor getting pulled under

It’s hard to watch this, but I’m getting the feeling — just a few days into a strange saga of “misremembrance” — that a highly visible TV news anchor may be on his way out.

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams is still facing questions about a story he made up — or “misremembered,” as he described it — about an incident in Iraq in 2003. He had been saying for a dozen years that a helicopter in which he was a passenger had been shot down by rocket fire. It turns out the shoot-down with Williams aboard didn’t happen.

Williams reported the other day about how an Army command sergeant major had helped rescue him and his fellow passengers after their ship was shot down. The report got a lot of play and Williams stood and accepted the cheers at Madison Square Garden alongside retired Sgt. Maj. Tim Terpak, the young man who engineered the rescue. Other veterans, though, spoke up and said the incident Williams described didn’t happen the way he described it; they said Williams wasn’t aboard the stricken Chinook helicopter.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/rieder/2015/02/05/brian-williams-unmitigated-disaster/22915325/

Now comes word that Williams might have fabricated what he saw in New Orleans while covering the Hurricane Katrina disaster in 2005. Williams reported serious flooding in the French Quarter. To borrow a phrase: oops! The French Quarter largely escaped the floodwaters that devastated much of the Big Easy.

NBC News has announced it is launching an internal investigation into what Williams said and did in Iraq and in New Orleans.

Williams has traded on the trust he has built with news watchers over many years in the anchor’s chair.

It’s difficult to imagine how a viewer of the NBC newscast each night can trust Williams now with telling us the truth about what he is reporting from the anchor’s chair.

What’s more, his apology has seemed somewhat muted, as he’s sought to wrap himself in the flag. Consider this from USA Today: “On air Wednesday night, Williams said he had ‘made a mistake in recalling the events of 12 years ago,’ that the whole incident was simply ‘a bungled attempt by me to thank one special veteran and by extension our brave military men and women, veterans everywhere, those who have served everywhere while I did not.'”

From where I am sitting, that looks and sound a bit like spin.

NBC’s main anchorman is facing a steep climb back to respectability.

 

So much for 'trust'

My trick knee is throbbing once again.

This time it’s telling me NBC News anchor Brian Williams has some more explaining to do about a made-up story that got him some seriously happy — and falsely premised — publicity over the weekend.

You see, it turns that Williams erred in recounting a story that he had been aboard a Chinook helicopter that had been hit by enemy rocket fire in Iraq in 2003. He had befriended an Army command sergeant major, Tim Terpak, who — according to Williams — had provided cover for the anchorman and other passengers aboard the downed helicopter.

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/nbc-s-brian-williams-recants-iraq-story-after-soldiers-protest-1.327792

Williams and Terpak went to a New York Rangers hockey game the other evening and both of them stood and accepted the crowd’s applause as the public address announcer revealed the story about Terpak’s heroism in protecting the passengers and crew, which allegedly included Williams.

It now turns out Williams wasn’t there.

This is a serious smirch on Williams’s reputation as a veteran TV journalist who trades on the “trust” he has built with the viewers of his nightly newscast.

Williams has recanted the story, apologized and said he “misremembered” the events of that day. He actually had arrived about 60 minutes after the chopper was shot down.

Misremembered? For a dozen years?

The anchorman came clean only after other soldiers who were there protested, telling others they had no memory of Williams being present when Terpak — who’s since retired from the Army — engineered the getaway of those aboard the Chinook.

“I would not have chosen to make this mistake,” Williams said. “I don’t know what screwed up in my mind that caused me to conflate one aircraft with another.”

Neither does anyone else.

 

NBC journalist faces conflicting interests

Chuck Todd wears an important hat for NBC News as moderator of “Meet the Press.”

He must remain impartial and he must be clear of any association with a partisan political campaign. And by “any association,” that means the woman in his life, his wife.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/12/chuck-todds-wife-aiding-jim-webb-199431.html?hp=l5_4

It turns out that Kristian Denny Todd is assisting former U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., as he considers whether to run for president in 2016. Kristian Todd is one of those Democratic “strategists” who assists people in public life.

Meanwhile, her husband is going to be covering the still-growing 2016 campaign and all its players. That must include former Sen. Webb, for whom his wife is working in an unpaid basis.

Todd’s role as a major news network’s main political reporters must be free of any association with a partisan campaign.

Let’s be clear about a thing or two. First, Todd isn’t the first network personality to make that crossover. Others include: George Stephanopoulos of ABC, who once worked in the Clinton White House; Pete Williams of NBC, who was spokesman for the Pentagon in the George H.W. Bush administration; Diane Sawyer of ABC, who once wrote speeches for Richard Nixon; the late Tim Russert of NBC, who worked for New York Gov. Mario Cuomo and the late Sen. Pat Moynihan of New York.

This kind of political affiliation involves both parties.

If Mr. and Mrs. Todd are going to allow this kind of association with a potential presidential candidate to continue, it falls on Chuck Todd to ensure that he doesn’t pull his punches with his wife’s boss if and when he gets the chance.

Be very careful, Chuck.

 

What's wrong with Meet the Press?

Michelle Malkin is a noted conservative firebrand/columnist whose views on the “mainstream media” are well-known.

I read her recent column on “Meet the Press”‘s ratings troubles and she lays the problem squarely at the feet of the host, David Gregory, who she calls a lot of names.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/23/nbcs_cognitive_dissonant_hack_syndrome_122382.html

She said he’s boorish, a “jerk,” he throws tantrums, he hates conservatives. In other words, he’s a “typical Washington elite.”

OK, I’ll accept her bias going in. My own view of Gregory’s troubles can be summed up simply. He isn’t Tim Russert, the man who preceded Gregory in the moderator’s chair on TV’s longest-running program.

Russert died of a massive heart attack in 2008 at the age of 58. NBC-TV went to great lengths to eulogize Russert, an everyman from Buffalo, N.Y., who went to law school, worked for Democratic U.S. Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan and Democratic New York Gov. Mario Cuomo before settling into the “Meet the Press” chair he occupied with such distinction.

Malkin’s recollections of Gregory’s hectoring of NRA guru Wayne LaPierre and Cardinal Timothy Dolan are vivid. They’re also accurate portrayals of the way Gregory often crosses an invisible line that is supposed to separate him from the issues he is covering.

I didn’t know about the tantrums or the boorish behavior until I read Malkin’s column (see attached link).

To my eyes and ears, Gregory just hasn’t met the standard Russert set with his equal-opportunity grilling of guests. He was tough on lefties and righties, Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives.

The one thing Russert did so artfully was to research his interview subjects’ own statements. He would then use their words to make a point and ask them to clarify what they said. If they could, so much the better — for them. If they couldn’t, well, score one for Russert.

Malkin also noted that Russert conducted himself like the gentleman he was and it showed in the way he handled his tasks as “Meet the Press” moderator.

I also should add that a little self-deprecation goes a long way in the ego-filled world of TV journalism. Russert could poke fun at himself, such as when he told the story of when NBC asked him to fill in on “Meet the Press.” “What?” Russert would say. “Look at this face.” It didn’t matter. He knew his stuff and was good at what he did.

It is that legacy that is dragging David Gregory down. Pure and simple.