»» Columnists

Fair And Balanced? O’Reilly’s Obama Interview Struck Different Tone Than Bush Interview In ’06

Video

by Alex Alvarez | 12:29 pm, February 8th, 2011

» 60 comments

Those of you who were able to carve out some time to watch Fox News’ Super Bowl Sunday interview between Bill O’Reilly and President Barack Obama in between overdosing on chicken wings and sharing one’s deep offense at Groupon’s Super Bowl ad with all of one’s Twitter followers saw that, as expected, the conservative pundit – not being one to lob too many softballs in the first place – was relatively tough (But fair?) on the Commander in Chief.

Our own Matt Schneider described portions of the interview as being “slightly contentious” (particularly – no surprise here – on the topics of Egypt and health care reform). Frances Martel, writing about the second half of the interview, felt O’Reilly appeared to have “targeted his questions in a way that perfectly rewards both his regular viewers and the folks watching football that happened upon his interview,” pointing towards O’Reilly having given Obama a platform for sharing what he felt FNC could “do better.”

One of the main talking points borne out of the interview was, predictably, O’Reilly’s pointed question on whether Obama was “disturbed that some people hate (him).” Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi took issue with the use of the word “hate,” and Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski found herself wondering whether O’Reilly would have asked such a question of George W. Bush.

Fortunately, we have the ability to take a look back on the 2006 interview O’Reilly conducted with Bush and contrast the two. During the interview, O’Reilly wonders whether President Bush is a more hated president than predecessor Bill Clinton, and muses about the extent to which Bush is a victim of “vitriol” at the hands of a left-leaning press.

While the questions posed are similar – at around the 2:00 mark, for instance, O’Reilly asks President Bush how he feels about his 40 percent approval rating – the tone is markedly different. For one, O’Reilly never uses the word “hate” when framing his question to Bush, choosing instead to take a less confrontational route.

It’s also worth noting that the rhythm and tone of the two interviews are different as well, with O’Reilly allowing Bush more opportunity to finish his thoughts and sentences.

To his credit, O’Reilly is able to create a rapport with both men to the extent that it feels as if he’s speaking to personal acquaintances and real individuals rather than a pair of distant, untouchable political figures. It should also be noted that O’Reilly is a savvy media figure who knows his audience (and, perhaps more importantly, he knows what gets his critics sputtering), so it would make sense to alter his questions and package his interviews with a Republican president quite differently than with a Democrat.

But don’t just take my word for it. Watch Part 3 of O’Reilly’s interview with Bush (chosen because it focuses on “Bush haters,” and, thus, serves as an interesting book end to O’Reilly controversial “hate” question to Obama) below, as well as O’Reilly’s look back on his interview with Obama, both from Fox News Channel. In the latter, O’Reilly shares a clip from another interview with Bush, where he indeed does discuss “hate” and “haters”:

barack obama, Bill O'Reilly, Fox News Channel, George W. Bush, Hatred

http://www.zazzle.com/talkingpoints NORBIT Jr.

It’s reversing polar poles.

When Bush was in the entirety of the Mainstream Media was pummelling him daily; with Obama, it’s been a veritable Love Affair.

I wanted Bill O. to ask:

If Democrats are so supportive of Egyptians protesting an overbearing central government, then why do they so bitterly despise Tea Partiers in the US, who are doing the same?
Is it different when its YOUR central government?

That would have been an interesting question!
tatboy

SHOCKING!!! And in other news Olbermann, Maddow, Ed, Niles Crane… hell ALL of MSNBC, Air America (when operational), the MSM, NPR, etc. treat the current persident with more defrence and respect than the last one. NEWS FLASH!!! I’ve also noticed that Tommy is slightly more simpathetic to liberal subjects than he his conservative. He’s always fair…. but you know where his sypatheies lie.
The Real Royal King

You may recall Baal-o predicted the largest audience for an interview in the history of television. He only fell 52,700,000 short of Barbara Walters!

NORBIT Jr. said:
It’s reversing polar poles.

When Bush was in the entirety of the Mainstream Media was pummelling him daily; with Obama, it’s been a veritable Love Affair.

I wanted Bill O. to ask:

If Democrats are so supportive of Egyptians protesting an overbearing central government, then why do they so bitterly despise Tea Partiers in the US, who are doing the same?
Is it different when its YOUR central government?

That would have been an interesting question!

So the US gouvernment is like unto the Egyptian? My, are you delusional!
ImNotBlue

It’s also worth noting that the rhythm and tone of the two interviews are different as well, with O’Reilly allowing Bush more opportunity to finish his thoughts and sentences.

Um… was the interview with Bush done prior to the Super Bowl? How long did O’Reilly talk to Bush for? What were the time constraints? Was it live, or taped?

It really seems that some in the media are going out of their way to find something to be outraged out in this interview. O’Reilly asked what the President feels about being “hated,” and that’s the worst thing EV-AH! Of course, when Olbermann told President Bush (not in an interview, of course), to “Shut the hell up!” that was reasoned and provocative dialog, which in no way insulted the office of President… certainly not as much as someone asking the President what it’s like to have people not fawn over him. *Sigh*

I wonder… is it really that O’Reilly asked this question… or is it the fact that some people actually hate Obama that’s the problem? I’m starting to believe that those on the left (and those in the media) are so upset over the idea that someone or some people don’t LOVE Obama, that any question or conversation about such things (which don’t wind up calling those people “racists”) is forbidden. O’Reilly apparently broke the code, and dared to say out loud that some people dislike and *GASP!* even hate Obama.

Really, if this is the biggest controversy that can be dug out of the interview, you’re going to have a hard time convincing me that O’Reilly didn’t do a pretty good and respectful job.
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

There is also a difference when you are doing a live interview with a limited time. The Bush interview could give Bush because they could edit it. The Bush interview was taped. Bush also did not filibuster like Obama.
cjd ohio 1

The Real Royal King said:
You may recall Baal-o predicted the largest audience for an interview in the history of television. He only fell 52,700,000 short of Barbara Walters! So the US gouvernment is like unto the Egyptian? My, are you delusional!

yeah who wants to listen to obama, when the white house blowjob girl has important shit to say
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

could give Bush MORE time because they could edit.
ImNotBlue

The Real Royal King said:
You may recall Baal-o predicted the largest audience for an interview in the history of television. He only fell 52,700,000 short of Barbara Walters!

Well, I’d sure like to see the numbers you’re using for that.

Of course, it doesn’t really matter since O’Reilly also made it clear that he was speaking about the interview in the long run, not necessarily that night. But, I guess you missed the part where O’Reilly said, “because of the internet,” right after talking about how many people will see it.

As I said after O’Reilly made his original statement, in terms of the live audience, the re-airs the next day, the clips used on all other news channels and programs, and the clips seen across the internet… he certainly is on solid footing. His interview was/is the talk of the town, and will be for the rest of the week. When you factor in all audiences, in all mediums, the viewership of that interview is HUGE.
ModerateMan

The Bush interview was not limited by time. The Obama interview had a 15 minute time limit.
skyfet

Phony, phony, phony.Big phony! sucks up to the GOP and conservatives who hates his guts. Attempt at being an Independent also damaged, because of the lack of fair and balance, so he is left on an island by himself. No one wants him, and there’s no place to hide. He sucks up to them (the GO), yet they still don’t trust his guts.
Alex Alvarez

ModerateMan said:
The Bush interview was not limited by time. The Obama interview had a 15 minute time limit.

O’Reilly aired more of the interview the following evening.
skyfet

The Real Royal King said:
You may recall Baal-o predicted the largest audience for an interview in the history of television. He only fell 52,700,000 short of Barbara Walters!

So the US gouvernment is like unto the Egyptian? My, are you delusional!

Delusional is being kind, I’d say its madness!
The Real Royal King

ImNotBlue said:
was the interview with Bush done prior to the Super Bowl? How long did O’Reilly talk to Bush for? What were the time constraints? Was it live, or taped?

That’s absurd.

Barbara Walters conducts pre-event interviews without the same difficulty. I guess Barbara Walters is just a better interviewer.

Be honest. Was this a Koldys talking point?
cjd ohio 1

The Real Royal King said:
That’s absurd. Barbara Walters conducts pre-event interviews without the same difficulty. I guess Barbara Walters is just a better interviewer. Be honest. Was this a Koldys talking point?

come on guys, listen to the president, or a girl that gives blowjobs in the white house, america knows what is important to them
BarneyFranken

I guess in comparison to Brian Williams fellating Obama as an interview format, anything else would seem contentious.

Perhaps there wouldn’t be a need to interrupt Obama so often if he kept his answers under 20 minutes per question.

For God sakes man, get to the point! It is so hard to make an unequivocal statement every now and then?

Obama was much more sure of his opinion of the Cambridge Police than he is about the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Real Royal King

ImNotBlue said:
Well, I’d sure like to see the numbers you’re using for that.

Of course, it doesn’t really matter since O’Reilly also made it clear that he was speaking about the interview in the long run, not necessarily that night. But, I guess you missed the part where O’Reilly said, “because of the internet,” right after talking about how many people will see it.

As I said after O’Reilly made his original statement, in terms of the live audience, the re-airs the next day, the clips used on all other news channels and programs, and the clips seen across the internet… he certainly is on solid footing. His interview was/is the talk of the town, and will be for the rest of the week. When you factor in all audiences, in all mediums, the viewership of that interview is HUGE.

17.3M for Baal-o, 70M for Walters (Lewinsky).

Boy, you’ll look for any feeble justification to prop up the FOX “News” personalities. The fact is 17.3M is not shoddy, just not as big as Baal-o’s ego. Internet. Re-airings. Please. Baal-o is a moderately talented interviewer. You’re embarrassing yourself by all of the knee jerk, unnecessary, vacuous, shrill defenses.

Did Koldys put you up to this?
joeshmoe

NORBIT Jr. said:
If Democrats are so supportive of Egyptians protesting an overbearing central government, then why do they so bitterly despise Tea Partiers in the US, who are doing the same?
Is it different when its YOUR central government?

The struggles are so similar, are you nuts?!? In Egypt the government abducted, beat, and tortured political opponents, journalists, and humanitarian workers. Kept his people in poverty, while he stole billions from the economy for his personal estate. And you want to compare the struggles of the Egyptian with that of the tea parties who got their panties in a bunch, because the government wants to give more people insurance??? Or are whining about taxes when they actually have gone down.
You are the epitome of delusion!!!!! You actually have the nerve to ask why doesn’t anyone take your protests seriously. Guess what, you lost in 2008 Obama is president, get over it!
The Real Royal King

BarneyFranken said:
Perhaps there wouldn’t be a need to interrupt Obama so often if he kept his answers under 20 minutes per question.

A short attention span, I gather?
ImNotBlue

Alex Alvarez said:
O’Reilly aired more of the interview the following evening.

True… but he had 15 minutes of live time that he needed to use as quickly and efficiently as possible. The fact that Obama gave him more time afterwards was great, and he could slow things down a bit for it… but that doesn’t mean he could conduct a leisurely interview to being with.

The Real Royal King said:
That’s absurd. Barbara Walters conducts pre-event interviews without the same difficulty. I guess Barbara Walters is just a better interviewer. Be honest. Was this a Koldys talking point?

Really? Like what interview that got those numbers (which you still haven’t linked up)? AND you’re mixing two different sets of comments. Soooo… what exactly are you talking about?

As for this being a talking point… maybe you should tell me. You seem to be post more frequently over there than I…

The Real Royal King said:
17.3M for Baal-o, 70M for Walters (Lewinsky). Boy, you’ll look for any feeble justification to prop up the FOX “News” personalities. The fact is 17.3M is not shoddy, just not as big as Baal-o’s ego. Internet. Re-airings. Please. Baal-o is a moderately talented interviewer. You’re embarrassing yourself by all of the knee jerk, unnecessary, vacuous, shrill defenses. Did Koldys put you up to this?

Yes, I’ll try to find any way to defend FNC… including actually listening to what someone says when they make a comment.

It’s a bad habit I know… but I just can’t get past that “being honest” think, which you seem to have no trouble contorting around.

I’d love to be a hypocritical liar like yourself… but I dunno, I just don’t think it’s my style. Perhaps you should offer classes… or you could write a book! “Denying Reality 101,” “Creating New Screen Names For The Internet & Maintaining Fake Personalities,” or “Overcoming Hypocrisy: The Truth About Lies.” I see a big future for you, Royal… the only real problem would be picking a pen name and sticking with it.
The Lantern of Truth

The Real Royal King said:
Be honest.

RRKING replying to myself . I may try that someday .
ModerateMan

Alex Alvarez said:
O’Reilly aired more of the interview the following evening.

I think O’Reilly was very aware that the live portion of the interview was only 15 minutes and that the only way to fit the important questions in was to make sure the questions were answered quickly. There seems to be more of an incentive to cut Obama off than the Bush interview. 90% of the viewers were only going to see the 15 live minutes and O’Reilly knew this.
The Lantern of Truth

The Real Royal King said:
Be honest

RRKING answering myself . Hey , I ‘m always honest as Garth or Sarah P. !
Color Me Badd

Whoever thought it was a good idea to have Bush walking around with O’Reilly is a dunce. He looks like Emmanuel Lewis.
writer

I am outraged that someone has an avatar depicting a spider as being black.
Alric_IV

NORBIT Jr. said:
It’s reversing polar poles.

When Bush was in the entirety of the Mainstream Media was pummelling him daily; with Obama, it’s been a veritable Love Affair.

I wanted Bill O. to ask:

If Democrats are so supportive of Egyptians protesting an overbearing central government, then why do they so bitterly despise Tea Partiers in the US, who are doing the same?
Is it different when its YOUR central government?

That would have been an interesting question!

Actually, it’s a stupid question, because the two aren’t the same. The Tea Partiers weave gigantic paranoid fantasies about the government simply because the president’s a Democrat and they don’t like his policies. Their lack of complaining about the current Republican House is a fine example. So far, they’ve done nothing but a big political theater and have still not passed any policies that would bring jobs. They’ve discussed any real cuts to the government spending, except to take from programs for the needing and disenfranchised; all their big-buddy military spending is guarded. Yet, the Tea Party has been so quiet lately, mostly because they’re busy masturbating at the prospect of getting Obama out in 2012. They saw that last election and the takeover of the House as a harbinger of a complete Republican victory to come in 2012. So already they’re less angry.

So, the Egyptians are rallying against a totalitarian government. Tea Partiers are rallying against the democratic process when it doesn’t go there way. If you can’t see the difference, you’re a moron.
George C

writer said:
I am outraged that someone has an avatar depicting a spider as being black.

Up on your high horse , eh , little man . ; )
ImNotBlue

Color Me Badd said:
Whoever thought it was a good idea to have Bush walking around with O’Reilly is a dunce. He looks like Emmanuel Lewis.

O’Reilly IS a giant.
The Real Royal King

ImNotBlue said:
Like what interview that got those numbers (which you still haven’t linked up)?

Philistine.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/bill-oreilly-bragged-obama-super-97302
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/the-most-watched-interview-in-history-not-quite_b51989
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/a-pre-game-interview-prediction-falls-short/

Now, stop whining. You’re giving me a sick headache.
writer

As little as I am, being way up on this high horse is terrifying.
The Real Royal King

Now that I have responded to your whining, INB, answer my question: Are you repeating a Koldys’ talking point? If you say, “yes,” I’ll believe you.
writer

I prefer to whine about things that seriously affect the country….such as the size of ‘Brisket’ Palin’s thighs.
The Lantern of Truth

The Real Royal King said:
Now, stop whining. You’re giving me a sick headache.

RRKING whining . Maybe I shouldn ‘ t have taken my Carter ‘ s Little Liver Pill whilst quaffing my Geritol .
writer

King, those Depends may be good, but nothing can stand up against a tsunami.
The Lantern of Truth

writer said:
King, those Depends may be good, but nothing can stand up against a tsunami.

RRKING advising . I recommend placing one’s rocking chair in a small plastic swimming pool , situated discreetly in one ‘s living room .
writer

And it goes without saying, no electrical appliances nearby.
The Lantern of Truth

Certainment pas !
The Real Royal King

The Real Royal King said:
Now that I have responded to your whining, INB, answer my question: Are you repeating a Koldys’ talking point? If you say, “yes,” I’ll believe you.

So, no answer? I suppose that is an answer.
writer

For those frequenting the King’s hair salon, ‘Hell Toupee’, be advised that when he asks if you want a ‘happy ending’, he’s not talking about giving you a discount.
The Lantern of Truth

writer said:
For those frequenting the King’s hair salon, ‘Hell Toupee’, be advised that when he asks if you want a ‘happy ending’, he’s not talking about giving you a discount.

RRKING disgusted , Yukkk ! … Discount ????????? On my sacred honor as a hair sylist , I ‘ve never given a discount !
writer

He asked me to give him the money shot. I said, “I’ve already tipped you five dollars!”
skyfet

ImNotBlue said:
O’Reilly IS a giant.

Yes, literally.
M Colins

What a non story this is. What did they expect, that O Reilly would bend over for Obama like every other interviewer has? The comparison made here is laughable. Instead of comparing O Reilly to himself, it would have been far more instructive to compare this interview to the offhand, dismissive, and sometimes even disrespectful way liberal news media routinely treat conservative and Republican politicians including GOP presidents.

By the way, FOX News motto is fair and balanced. Political commentators come with a viewpoint which is typically well understood ahead of time. This story is lamely attempting to take O Reilly to task for a standard he’s not required to adhere to nor one which is expected of any commentator on the other side of the ideological divide.
Pablo

The Real Royal King said:
So, no answer? I suppose that is an answer.

You think, Kook? It’s telling when people can’t answer a simple question.
The Real Royal King

Pablo said:
You think, Kook? It’s telling when people can’t answer a simple question.

The answer was duly given. Sorry you didn’t read it.
BFD

It was hilarious watching O’Reilly spend his show yesterday reviewing himself. The whole show was about him.
He actually thinks his questions were more important than the answers.

Incredible ego.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ben-Pratt/713857896 Ben Pratt

Pablo said:
You think, Kook? It’s telling when people can’t answer a simple question.

yeah go back and read the thread. You’ll see just how dense you are.
Pablo

Ben Pratt said:
yeah go back and read the thread. You’ll see just how dense you are.

Why don’t you explain it, Ben? And name the weapons in question. Come on, bright boy. School me.
The Real Royal King

BFD said:
Incredible ego.

I’m hoping he donates his ego to science for medical research.
Pablo

The Real Rabid Kook said:
The answer was duly given. Sorry you didn’t read it.

Where, Kook? Link please?
tatboy

The Real Royal King said:
I’m hoping he donates his ego to science for medical research.

His is nothing compaired to “The One”.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ben-Pratt/713857896 Ben Pratt

Pablo said:
Why don’t you explain it, Ben? And name the weapons in question. Come on, bright boy. School me.

I did actually. “Records available from the supplier for the period from 1985 until the present show that during this time, pathogenic (meaning “disease producing”), toxigenic (meaning “poisonous”), and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Records prior to 1985 were not available, according to the supplier.” That’s from this report from the U.S. senate commitee on banking.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ben-Pratt/713857896 Ben Pratt

forgot to include the report sorry: http://www.gulfwarvets.com/arison/banking.htm
ImNotBlue

The Real Royal King said:
Philistine.Now, stop whining. You’re giving me a sick headache.

I know… I’m terrible, right? I asked you to provide some proof. Terrible terrible me.

But nice job! You finally came through! Again, it’s a start!

Oh, and I find Advil works wonders on headaches. I mention that only because I have no intention of not pointing out your lies and hypocrisy.

The Real Royal King said:
Now that I have responded to your whining, INB, answer my question: Are you repeating a Koldys’ talking point? If you say, “yes,” I’ll believe you.

As I said before, you’ve been spending a lot more time there (as Waistcoat, or something) than I. So you’d know if it’s talking point.

But to be specific, no… no talking point. Again, it’s just listening to the actual words that were said by O’Reilly. I know that’s a stretch, and something you’d never allow yourself to do, but I considered what he actually said before rendering a verdict.

The Real Royal King said:

The Real Royal King said:
Now that I have responded to your whining, INB, answer my question: Are you repeating a Koldys’ talking point? If you say, “yes,” I’ll believe you.

Sorry buddy… had to do the dishes, clean around the kitchen a bit, eat some lunch… you know, the stuff mommy does for you.

Bears and large dogs… those are things that make me run. You Royal… not even a brisk walk.

skyfet said:
Yes, literally.

Indeed. He’s well over 6 feet. Very tall.

The Real Royal King said:
I’m hoping he donates his ego to science for medical research.

Jealous? Must be nice to wanted, huh?
Gasket

Bill, the question to Bush was framed differently as the “press” (which is codeword for the left) hated him. There was no such framing in his question to Obama that the rightwing hates him. That was not a good reference video. So yes, the questions WERE different.
Yoda002

NORBIT Jr. said:
It’s reversing polar poles.

When Bush was in the entirety of the Mainstream Media was pummelling him daily; with Obama, it’s been a veritable Love Affair.

I wanted Bill O. to ask:

If Democrats are so supportive of Egyptians protesting an overbearing central government, then why do they so bitterly despise Tea Partiers in the US, who are doing the same?
Is it different when its YOUR central government?

That would have been an interesting question!

The Koch brothers fund the tea party.
TfT

Interesting article….too bad we never saw this kind of comparison between how the liberal fawning Obama loving media asked questions of, cow-towed to, and gave hehimself verbal bjs, versus how the liberal media wore glasses on their noses, spoke down to, asked stupid questions of Palin.

Kind of like the Couric interview of Palin versus the Couric interview of Biden – and how Biden got a complete pass from the liberal media whereas Palin got no such thiing.

None-the-less, Bush has a habit of giving concise answers, Obama has a habit of stonewalling and fillibustering.
Gasket

TfT said:
Interesting article….too bad we never saw this kind of comparison between how the liberal fawning Obama loving media asked questions of, cow-towed to, and gave hehimself verbal bjs, versus how the liberal media wore glasses on their noses, spoke down to, asked stupid questions of Palin.

Kind of like the Couric interview of Palin versus the Couric interview of Biden – and how Biden got a complete pass from the liberal media whereas Palin got no such thiing.

None-the-less, Bush has a habit of giving concise answers, Obama has a habit of stonewalling and fillibustering.

The difference is, cue Olbermann, “THAT WOMAN IS AN IDIOT!”
ImNotBlue

Gasket said:
The difference is, cue Olbermann, “THAT WOMAN IS AN IDIOT!”

Exactly, Gasket! It’s okay that the reporters are more aggressive toward Palin, and fawn over Obama and Biden. It’s okay that her mistakes make the headlines, while Obama and Biden get a passing mention (if that). It’s okay!

And we, right of center folks, need just to accept the fact that our guys are evil and stupid… therefore, the same journalistic and ethical standards that are afforded to Democrats, need not apply!

I think when it comes down to it, we just need to accept the double standard… you know, because it works for the left… and really, shouldn’t that be a priority?
da-wdc

ImNotBlue said:
It’s okay that her mistakes make the headlines, while Obama and Biden get a passing mention (if that). It’s okay!
And we, right of center folks, need just to accept the fact that our guys are evil and stupid… therefore, the same journalistic and ethical standards that are afforded to Democrats, need not apply!

Poor, poor conservatives. Poor Sarah Palin. Everyone is so unfair. It’s so hard. OK?

Listening to people complaining about how the most everyone is against them is the worst. What’s really happening is that you’re not noticing the criticism of Obama and Biden and other Democrats, of which there is plenty – and Pelosi is a particular target. But you don’t hear her whining.
ImNotBlue

da-wdc said:
Poor, poor conservatives. Poor Sarah Palin. Everyone is so unfair. It’s so hard. OK? Listening to people complaining about how the most everyone is against them is the worst. What’s really happening is that you’re not noticing the criticism of Obama and Biden and other Democrats, of which there is plenty – and Pelosi is a particular target. But you don’t hear her whining.

Great point!

I have never heard anyone defend a criticism of… say, President Obama, with a “You’re a racist!” Nope, that never happens.

Hey, I’ve got an idea… why don’t you search Mediaite, and find me a few articles where they’re critical of some Democrats. I’ll wait.