Six sponsors have pulled ads from O'Reilly ' s show - is he on the chopping block? (Reagan, illegal)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay, he's a pig when it comes to women, as were a couple of other Bills - Clinton and Cosby. I have no issue with these companies refusing to have their spots on his show, they don't want their name to be associated with his. Enough of them refuse to run ads during his show he will lose that show. Makes sense to me.
What I do have an issue with is the increasingly common tactic of corporations to essentially attempt to blackmail entities, such as saying they will boycott the entire channel until he is fired. That takes the corporation from making a prudent business decision to exerting their values on another entity and tryiny to force particular internal decisions on them. I like it even less that they make a big news item out of it.
People think that type of undue influence is great when they don't like a particular person or policy but they forget that it sets a precedent. The pendulum swings when it comes to social mores, the children of the wild flappers became the moralistic stalwarts of the 50's. Got news for you, I work in the schools, the latest batch of young kids are acting more conservative than their older siblings did at the same age.
And it will be their world to worry about-- 2 --kids change their minds-as they grow up-- right now under mom n pop and what they tell them- or rebel of what they experience at home- the world will change and they adapt- they may NOT be the ruling facture- see todays news- the millenials killing marriage- that doesn't sounds traditional to me...
This puts fox into a seriously bad spot. If they keep o'reilly, they lose money on advertising and also (perhaps) some viewers. They really can't get rid of him, he is their number one talk show host. His time slot has been providing an audience that is unlikely to turn the channel after his show, as a way to prop up the audience for the later talk shows, like watters & carlson. The whole evening lineup collapses if he is taken out.
The fact that he is allowed to stay says it all he is a big money maker for Fox anyone else would be gone. I actually enjoy his shows from time to time and he is very bright but very few companies would allow someone like this to remain. One of the women isn't even suing him, just wanted to get her story out.
While this is only O'Reilly I would expect that other companies will pull ads from the entire network since Fox is basically condoning his behavior.
Twenty-two companies so far have pulled ad buys from Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor" amid allegations of sexual harassment against host Bill O'Reilly, according to a report by Yahoo News.
The mass exodus came after the New York Times published a report on Saturday revealing that at least five women took a total of $13 million in settlements from O'Reilly or 21st Century Fox after making allegations of sexual harassment and other behavior against the top host.
First Trump, now O'Reilly of Fox News, one way or another demonstrating their true colors when it comes to respecting women (or not really). I suspect Trump supporters will have all their usual justifications, excuses and alternative facts when it comes to this sort of thing, but apparently the companies pulling their ads are doing so regardless, because they DO care how women think and feel (even if profit driven)!
All I can say is I've always had a dislike for the dude. O'Reilly is just as bad as those CNN crap holes.
I still support our president though, just in case this is a Trump bashing thread. I didn't vote for the guy but I don't see him as the anti Christ the left is making him out to be.
And, it's getting old, so old I feel like he's been president for four years already.
Okay, he's a pig when it comes to women, as were a couple of other Bills - Clinton and Cosby. I have no issue with these companies refusing to have their spots on his show, they don't want their name to be associated with his. Enough of them refuse to run ads during his show he will lose that show. Makes sense to me.
What I do have an issue with is the increasingly common tactic of corporations to essentially attempt to blackmail entities, such as saying they will boycott the entire channel until he is fired. That takes the corporation from making a prudent business decision to exerting their values on another entity and tryiny to force particular internal decisions on them. I like it even less that they make a big news item out of it.
People think that type of undue influence is great when they don't like a particular person or policy but they forget that it sets a precedent. The pendulum swings when it comes to social mores, the children of the wild flappers became the moralistic stalwarts of the 50's. Got news for you, I work in the schools, the latest batch of young kids are acting more conservative than their older siblings did at the same age.
"Learnme" to do a search before starting a new thread.
I did a search, since I was sure a thread about this must have surely got started, but I didn't use the search function like I should have. I only scanned the recently started threads. My bad...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No thread about Fox News darling O'Reilly?
