Previous  |  Next

Sun

Nov 25
2007

Tim O'Reilly

Tim O'Reilly

Thankful I'm Not Bill O'Reilly

I was thinking that I really ought to do some kind of Thanksgiving weekend post, and I finally found my topic. I'm thankful that I'm not Bill O'Reilly, the conservative pundit, and that my readers are smarter than his!

It's amazing how much email we get for Bill O'Reilly. And it's gotten worse since we put up the Satisfaction widget on oreilly.com. It bemuses me that someone can come to a web site that's clearly selling technology books and conferences, and still ask questions about the O'Reilly Factor, Bill's show. We don't get questions about O'Reilly Auto Parts, the Fortune 500 company, or questions for David O'Reilly, the CEO of Chevron, so I can only conclude that, unlike customers of these other notable O'Reillys, Bill O'Reilly's viewers can't read. We've been moving all the Bill O'Reilly questions over to the O'Reilly Factor page on Satisfaction, but I still see them all as they come in (since I see all the posts to our Satisfaction page.)

One complainer writes:

Is this just a website to make more money for O'Reilly????? How can I get in touch with him? This is very important!!! I am more interested in the news than in buying something. Please contact me.

Sorry, wrong O'Reilly.

Meanwhile, over on the real satisfaction site for O'Reilly Media, we see one reader who has the opposite problem:

Just a quick note: For the longest time I wouldn't visit your site because I thought you were The O'reilly Factor LOL

And I remember Rael Dornfest telling me that he once sat next to someone on a plane, who, when he learned Rael worked for O'Reilly, told him "I hate your boss," and started ranting about Bill's sexual harrassment of employees. Rael was glad to tell him we're not that O'Reilly. But I wonder how many people do mix us up.

It's sad. Especially since we like to think that, while we're focused on technology and not on politics, "fair and balanced" is indeed a key part of our brand appeal. For the other O'Reilly, it appears to be only rhetoric. Apparently, when he was on the Colbert Report, he almost admitted as much, saying "This is all an act." He said it in the spirit of Colbert, but I suspect it's true. So many of the TV pundits are engaged in theater, which is why Colbert's send-up is so refreshing. But it's amazing how many people take the O'Reilly Factor as gospel.

I also note that O'Reilly, and his employer Fox News, are quick to censor and redact any bloopers that bloggers catch them on. My various Google and Yahoo! alerts also pick up Bill O'Reilly stories. I recently clicked through to one such story, and saw that the YouTube video was no longer available...

billoreilly.png

Meanwhile, we get some real humdingers showing how out of touch with reality some of the O'Reilly Factor fans are. This one came in to our customer support email alias rather than Satisfaction:

I have read in The Onion newpaper, that Bush has cut off diplomatic relations with Congress. I found this to be unbelievable and I thought it would be illegal! Can you check it out and see if it is true? How can you run a government and not talk to the Congress??

Not only can Bill O'Reilly's fans not distinguish between a technology publisher and a right wing pundit, they can't tell that the Onion is a satire! Or else they are just trying to yank his chain. (But someone smart enough to do that would know that oreilly.com is not theoreillyfactor.com.)

tarsier image Over on the other side, I'm sure we cause some heartburn for Bill O'Reilly. I remember a few years back, when our familiar tarsier was on the cover of Publisher's Weekly, Bill O'Reilly apparently called up to complain, asking "What the hell is my name doing on the cover of your magazine with a picture of a monkey?"



tags: oreilly, oreillyfactor  | comments: 26   | Sphere It
submit:

 

0 TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://orm3.managed.sonic.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2656

karatedog   [11.25.07 12:43 PM]

Well, God's zoo is big, and the fence is low...

Alex Rodriguez   [11.25.07 01:44 PM]

Nice of you to be an ignorant moron and classify all Bill O'Reilly viewers as illiterate. I respect your political beliefs you should learn to do the same.

Ming Yeow Ng   [11.25.07 01:58 PM]

its all for the money and fame folks. classify Bill Oreilly as a prettier version of Britney Spears, treat what they say in the same vine, and the word starts making sense.

JK   [11.25.07 02:48 PM]

If I understand, Bill O. reaches millions, one of which believes the Onion, and therefore all his viewers are nuts? Will your next post follow similar logic and demonstrate all Huff Post fans are Nobel laureates?

Wikipedian   [11.25.07 02:53 PM]

Like Wikipedia?

"This website is about Tim O'Reilly. For O'Reilly Factor, see Bill O'Reilly." or "For other persons named O'Reilly, see..." (google search)

kcore   [11.25.07 03:05 PM]

Slow down guys. Personally, I agree with you that a classification of Bill O'Reilly viewers isn't the right thing to do but this just was "somebodies" personal opinion so... who cares?

Tim O'Reilly   [11.25.07 03:29 PM]

Alex and JK --

Yes, my post was somewhat snippy and perhaps even a touch inappropriate, but I do despise the hate mongering that Bill O'Reilly (and Fox News in general) seems to specialize in, and it bothers me to be mistaken for him.

But I didn't classify all Bill O'Reilly viewers as illiterate. Nor did I extrapolate from a single reader believing in the Onion. As I mentioned, we get a LOT of mail for Bill O'Reilly. I've even received voice mails.

And as I noted, there are lots of other notable O'Reillys. For example, as I mentioned in the post, O'Reilly Auto Parts is a Fortune 500 company, yet we've never to my knowledge received email for them. And I'd be very surprised if the O'Reilly Factor receives mail from people looking to buy the latest book on Perl or Javascript.

So yes, I think we have a reasonable sample that says something about some of the people who write in to the O'Reilly Factor. But I am sure that there are many people who watch his show and read his books who don't fit that profile.

But I'm surprised, to be frank, that you guys seem to think that this is a matter of political beliefs. I would imagine that principled conservatives are as appalled by the dishonesty of most of the conservative talk show hosts as principled liberals are appalled by folks like Michael Moore, who twist the truth in the other direction.

I like to think that my politics aren't well aligned with either party, but instead are based on assessment of the facts that are available to me. I do my best to weigh all sides of an issue, and to recognize the limits of knowledge. I wish that our mainstream media did the same, rather than pandering to extremes in pursuit of ratings.

Michael R. Bernstein   [11.25.07 03:43 PM]

"But I'm surprised, to be frank, that you guys seem to think that this is a matter of political beliefs. I would imagine that principled conservatives are as appalled by the dishonesty of most of the conservative talk show hosts as principled liberals are appalled by folks like Michael Moore, who twist the truth in the other direction."

I'm not surprised. The right has been much more successful at (and derives it's most recent successes from) devolving politics and debate into a form of team sports. Principled conservatives are 'encouraged' to shut the heck up and get with the program.

This happens on the left as well, of course, but the left has (recently) been much less successful at this.

Alex Rodriguez   [11.25.07 08:14 PM]

The fact remains you stated "Bill O'Reilly's viewers can't read" indicates that O'Reilly viewers are illiterate. I assure you I am not illiterate, and furthermore you may not agree with everything said on Fox News but as a regular viewer it is far from "hate mongering" certainly not anywhere near the kind of vial politics seen on other venues. Fox News has succeeded for one reason it gave a venue for conservatives to voice an opinion when no other network would.

And yes I am absolutely appalled at the "the dishonesty of most" politicians on both sides unfortunately they continue to be elected by an illiterate population that will read a blog (not yours) and take it as gospel. Bush did this, Clinton did that, etc. However to say that "most of the conservative talk shows" are dishonest is a clear indication of your political affiliations. Perhaps you should take the time to listen to Fox News (not just O'Reilly) and listen to some of the evil talk shows and formulate your own opinion.

"Perhaps even a touch inappropriate"? Perhaps?


Robert   [11.25.07 11:50 PM]

Now that is what I would call a *real* challenge for the search engine gurus exposing a "reputation management" bullet point in their presentation slides.

DEBEDb   [11.26.07 01:17 AM]

@Alex Rodriguez

> The fact remains you stated "Bill O'Reilly's
> viewers can't read" indicates that O'Reilly
> viewers are illiterate. I assure you I am not
> illiterate, and furthermore you may not agree
> with everything said on Fox News but as a
> regular viewer it is far from "hate mongering"
> certainly not anywhere near the kind of vial
> politics seen on other venues.

How many grammatical errors (including a dangling modifier) and mistakes in word usage can you count here, o literate one?

What is "vial politics", anyway, A-Rod? Is that something that the body politic drinks from?

Josh   [11.26.07 01:26 AM]

Hey Alex, guess what: you might be literate (the fact that you passed the captcha test on the comment box proves as much), but you can't say "I'm a regular viewer" and also expect anything else you write to be taken seriously by people who think for a living.

Chris   [11.26.07 05:06 AM]

Fact is Bill O’Reilly is a racist bigot. Anyone who doesn’t see that is one too. Anyone who confuses Tim O’Reilly for Bill O’Reilly obviously isn’t paying too much attention and therefore, by most standards, must be a moron. The observation is dead-on accurate.

JK   [11.26.07 06:07 AM]

...perhaps your readers are not so smart after all.

bryan   [11.26.07 06:41 AM]

The fact is that for a lot of people the name O'Reilly has derived such extremely negative connotations from its association with Bill in their minds that you are slightly tarred thereby. I know the difference between the two of you, you're the one who puts a monkey on your cover, and Bill's the one who schtupps a monkey beneath his covers (sorry Alex), but the name still gets on my nerves.... LEAVE THAT MONKEY ALONE!!..

Sorry, couldn't resist.

bryan   [11.26.07 06:50 AM]

maybe you can sue bill for driving down the value of the O'Reilly brand.

Simon   [11.26.07 10:31 AM]

There is clearly a myopia that grips a visitor when they have a particular task in mind.

I work for BDP, a firm of architects and related professions, and we're regularly receiving enquiries aimed at our clients.

There are people wanting to know about new Nike trainers, we designed NikeTown in London. We've had enquiries about Banco Santander accounts, and emails for JP Morgan. Visitors would ask about luggage facilities and toilets at Manchester Piccadilly station, until I put in links to the station's website.

I don't think of these people as illiterate, but they may lack web literacy. Are we, perhaps, too brand literate? Just because you or I would expect to see a picture of Bill O'Reilly beaming out of his website - why should anybody else?

Brad Ediger   [11.26.07 01:37 PM]

It's interesting that you should write about Bill O'Reilly. I'm just wrapping up my first book for ORA (Advanced Rails, 1ed). As part of my author's "swag kit" that you sent last year when the process began, I got a bumper sticker saying, simply, "O'Reilly." The Bill vs. Tim issue was probably the number-one reason that that sticker is still sitting in a drawer somewhere. :-)

leftystrat   [11.26.07 08:09 PM]

"I'm thankful that I'm not Bill O'Reilly"

Well, aren't most people?
I mean, aside from the bloated self-importance, the fame, the blatant disregard for facts, and the money, what point would there be in being Bill?

Your readers will call you on a mistake, as opposed to nodding in agreement and drooling. There's a lot to be said for that.


Don't apologize... Bill wouldn't.

kmself   [11.27.07 01:07 PM]

Bill, erm, Tim:

There's clearly only one thing you can do with your nominal confusion factor: parlay it into an appearance on the Colbert Report!

Peace.

David O'Reilly   [11.28.07 06:55 AM]

Tim, Can you tell me where the nearest O'Reilly Auto Parts is? Thanks!

Darren   [11.29.07 02:32 AM]

I just wanted to quickly thank Alex Rodriguez for your counter argument to this blog post.

To Tim O'Reilly, thank you for your insightful blog posts on technology topics. I enjoy reading them.

I have to say that your political blogging isn't as engaging (stated politely) and probably won't make you the most-watched or highest-rated news program like The O’Reilly Factor has been for some time now.

Best Regards,


-(Bill) O’Reilly Factor Viewer

Tim O'Reilly   [11.29.07 07:19 PM]

Darren --

I generally don't do much "political" blogging, unless you count my posts on the surveillance society and the like as political. Or do you consider posts on energy policy (like support for Google's RE<C initiative) to be political? Because, of course, these issues that should be matters of science and enlightened public policy, finding the truth and acting on it, have instead been hardened by commentators like Bill O'Reilly into "political" positions where people take sides.

Even my comments about Bill O'Reilly himself were not particularly political. I addressed his sincerity and his morals, not his politics. And these comments were in the context of the fact that on the internet, there's clearly "trademark" confusion between us even though you'd think that people would be able to distinguish between our respective businesses. I do believe that Bill O'Reilly has damaged the O'Reilly name for a certain kind of thinking person (see Brad Ediger's comment above, or Rael Dornfest's story that I told in the original post.) That doesn't mean, before you react, that I'm saying that none of Bill O'Reilly's viewers and readers think, but it does mean that by associating the name with a certain set of extremes, he has made the name slightly suspect.

FWIW, there are many people who share some (or maybe even all) of Bill O'Reilly's political views whom I respect. I might even share some of his positions myself. But I don't respect his honesty or his fairness.

In this regard, I find myself very much in agreement with Michael Bernstein's comment, that Bill is one of a class of demagogue who has turned politics into a "team sport," where you root for your side, regardless of whether they are right or not.

And truth is harder to arrive at when you get into this kind of team sport mentality. It's harder even to see when it's being distorted.

There's some basic human psychology at work here. When we agree with someone, we tend to overlook their distortions of the truth. When we disagree, they are jarring. (I'm reminded, tangentially, of a really insightful piece of psychology: we judge others by what they do, but ourselves by what we meant to do. Similarly, we judge someone who shares our views by how well they reinforce those views, while overlooking things that we might otherwise find repugnant.)

I am always amazed watching basketball, for example, when a hard foul by "our" team is a cause for celebration, while one by the other guys is a cause for outrage. This may be human tribal behavior, but when applied to politics, it leads to bad decision making. So, people who share Bill O'Reilly's politics overlook his faults while excoriating someone like Michael Moore for a similar level of exaggeration on the left.

That the O'Reilly Factor has high ratings and many viewers doesn't make him any more respectable. Football (soccer) hooligans love their team too.

That being said, I probably shouldn't have poked fun at people who can come to the oreilly.com website and STILL think that it's the place to reach Bill O'Reilly. And to make those poor souls a stand-in for Bill himself, and to generalize from that to his viewership in general is insulting to those of you who are his fans.

jb   [11.30.07 08:20 AM]

I am blessed to live within listening range of a local NPR affiliate in the Monterey Calif area. I'm not an NPR junkie as music is my muse. But we have a real public servant in Leon Panetta(Chief of Staff for Clinton)who has a non-profit institute that hosts discussions with visiting notables in politics and media. Recently we got to listen to this: ---->Picking Winners from Losers”, with political consultant and commentator James Carville and Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly. Was it a food fight? far from it. Why was it so different from the junk you see on the tube? Both men were engaging, articulate and thoughtful in their comments and quite insightful. Both personalities were toned down and on point. Genuine concern from both guys about the direction of the country was expressed. It was a gem. Was it the context? The moderator? The venue? I don't know........maybe folks just can't help but puff up when they have millions of viewers or listeners on the line and they gotta sell the ad space; hock the soap and kibbles and bits. There is a humble part of all of us and it was shining in both that night.

Tim O'Reilly   [11.30.07 09:34 AM]

jb --

I think you're absolutely right on -- and you demonstrate the point I've been trying to make, that my disgust with Bill O'Reilly is not based on his politics. What bothers me is the cynical way most of the Fox properties play to extremes in search of ratings, and not only that, do many things that are at variance with the values that they ostensibly avow in their public positions (e.g. the sexual pandering that was in that now-censored video that I pointed to on YouTube).

Bill O'Reilly in a different context may be a thoughtful commentator on politics. As a "culture warrior," he has a destructive, polarizing pose that panders to the worst in many people.

That's also why I mentioned Bill O'Reilly's comment on Colbert that his show was an act. While he said it in a way that was ambiguous, I think what he said was true.

weiesblitz   [01.08.08 07:14 PM]

Hello Tim
I mean no disrespect, however even though this is not a site for Bill O'Reilly it appears that he is the only reason anyone is making any posts on your site. Maybe I am wrong.
ThX


Post A Comment:

 (please be patient, comments may take awhile to post)




Remember Me?


Subscribe to this Site

Radar RSS feed

BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE

CURRENT CONFERENCES