Last week, FOX News icon Bill O’Reilly made a series of insulting and demeaning remarks on-air about highly-esteemed female journalist, Helen Thomas. In today’s digital world, the reaction to this type of offensive behavior is swift and pervasive (just ask Don Imus). The Women’s Media Center (WMC) coordinated an online campaign among its followers demanding a public apology from O’Reilly, and soon after, a representative from the WMC was invited to O’Reilly’s show to discuss the incident.
In theory, the ability to immediately enlist thousands of people to speak out against O’Reilly’s behavior and consequently instigate a public debate seems like a picture-perfect example of the democratizing effects of technology. But unfortunately, the end result is not quite as idyllic as one would hope. For one, from a purely pragmatic point of view, it’s not clear the WMC actually came out on top. The scandal culminated in a contrived on-air squabble between O’Reilly and a representative from the WMC on the O’Reilly Factor, where O’Reilly somehow managed to transform himself from bully to victim in the course of a six-minute sound byte. Although his comments about Thomas were inarguably offensive and probably sexist, O’Reilly appeared halfway reasonable as he defended his right to make jokes and speak critically about a female journalist. At a minimum, his righteous indignation likely struck a chord with those frustrated with the confines of our politically-correct culture.
Yet, even ignoring the strategic drawbacks with the WMC approach, there is a far more important social cost to these manufactured culture wars – the gradual decay of the honesty and efficacy of our public discourse. Forcing apologies is a means to silence voices, not a means to creating a public dialogue about important issues like sexism. While O’Reilly can and should be critiqued for his boorish behavior, the reaction should not be one that effectively acts as censorship. O’Reilly did his part to create a discourse about the incident by bringing someone from the WMC on his show, yet rather than having a candid conversation about gender, the two exchanged a barrage of accusations, the WMC representative demanding “respect” and an apology for Thomas while O’Reilly accused the WMC of hypocrisy for failing to defend Sarah Palin.
Taking offense and making accusations is an impediment to honest discussion. We all have little to gain from an insincere apology, and we have much to lose by policing the airwaves for offending remarks if the end result is forcing retraction. Let people speak, and I think we’ll all be surprised at how little it stings if we just let it go.
People seem to take everything too seriously today. Yes, the comments may have been offensive, but if you don't like it, turn him off. Same goes for Howard Stern- I can't believe how many people hate him, yet they still listen. Facinating. If you really want to hurt them, change the chanel and move on!
I agree with the author; It's only when people make a stink about something does it grow to become a cause. This can be great for some causes, but bad in others, particularly when the cause is mainly to show displeasure in an opinion. I doubt Thomas gives a rat's ass about what O'Rielly said about here. Why give him any fuel? Her career will speak for itself.
This sounds like a purely tactical error. The WMC doesn't in any way impede free speech by condemning O'Reilly for his comments or even asking for an apology. They can't silence him or actually force him into an apology, so where is free speech violated? By now, however, everyone should know that it is impossible to have a real debate on the O'Reilly Factor, where he is allowed to yell over his guests and oversimplify their points into straw man arguments. He is paid to stifle debate and he is very good at it. The WMC should have just released a statement or sent a representative to another TV show. I agree with your point about accusations, they certainly don't make for a good conversation, but demanding an apology (after having made your argument) is reasonable.
Post new comment