Views » October 21, 2009

BS at BU: The O’Reilly Factor

By Daniel Gewertz

Last month I received an e-mail from my alma mater, Boston University, containing the following invitation: “Save the Date! Alumni Weekend! October 23. A Conversation with Bill O’Reilly: ‘A Bold Fresh Look at the Future of News.’”

The BU college hosting the event? The College of Communication (COM), home to the university’s Department of Journalism. In addition to a “conversation” between the face of FOX’s “The O’Reilly Factor” and another BU alum, Bill Wheatley (retired executive vice-president of NBC News), the evening will include a presentation of six “Distinguished Alumni Awards,” an honor already bestowed upon Mr. O’Reilly.

See anything wrong with this picture? Not COM Dean Tom Fiedler, the man responsible for choosing O’Reilly as the night’s star attraction.

“I would argue that Bill O’Reilly is a role model for our students,” Fiedler told me recently. “I grant that his is a controversial path, and it may not be the path that all would choose.”

A role model?

“We are honoring Bill O’Reilly for living an honorable life,” Fiedler explained. “He has generously supported Boston University.”

“An honorable life.” It would take an article far longer than this one to catalog the deceptions, evasions and bullying tactics of O’Reilly.

Let me mention, but not stress, the millions of dollars that, according to the Washington Post, O’Reilly paid to his former producer, Andrea Mackris, to settle her sexual harassment case in 2004.

Another, more recent case:

On May 31, 2009, Dr. George Tiller, the Kansas abortion provider, was murdered at his local church. During the months leading up to this crime, O’Reilly often referred to the doctor as “Tiller the baby killer.” When criticized for his frequent use of the phrase, O’Reilly claimed he was directly quoting others. This was quickly disproved with voluminous videotape evidence.

I asked Dean Fiedler: Did this specific case give him pause?

“That would be a good issue to bring up as a question at the O’Reilly evening,” Fiedler replied. “Why is he so provocative? O’Reilly is a controversial figure, so this will be a rare opportunity to hear directly from him about why he does what he does.”

So, is it fair to say that the evening is part of the grand old tradition of American colleges allowing controversial, or even hated, public figures a platform to air their views?

Fiedler suddenly changed course. “Colleges ought to provide platforms for the most controversial views, but this evening is not that kind of platform,” he said. “This is an evening where we are giving distinguished alumni awards to people who we think highly of. Bill O’Reilly was deemed to be a role model earlier in his career, and I’m certainly not going to second guess that decision.”

This reminds me of the scene in 1930s gangster films when the notorious gangster’s old immigrant mother is questioned by the cops. “All I know is he’s a good boy,” she says in a defensive, sniveling tone. “He’s always been good to me.”

Is it naïve to hope that prestigious American universities bear some responsibility to improve society? Or is it obvious to all but the misguided optimist that the purpose of American higher education is simply to prepare a student for a high-paying job? And to then pray that the alumnus earns so much money that he donates sizable amounts back to the poor, old, lovable academic mother that raised him?

In a time when broadcast media, both of the mainstream and stridently partisan varieties, are widely criticized for degrading the American political debate, is it too much to ask that one of our foremost schools of journalism refrain from honoring O’Reilly, no matter how generous he’s been?

Is money, in the end, all? Can the dean imagine any situation in which the university might withhold high alumni honors from a famous, generous graduate?

“Yes, of course. I would not be part of honoring someone with a criminal record,” said Fiedler. And then he paused, as if to think of another impediment to academic honors. “But your political views, or being a so-called bully on the air: that’s really not relevant.”

A criminal record. That’s the main ethical criterion. It made me think back to my own days at BU, the early 1970s, when I saw speakers such as Yale chaplain William Sloane Coffin and Catholic priest and peace worker Daniel Berrigan hold forth from a university podium. Both served time in jail.

Fiedler does regret one small aspect of Friday’s event: the title, “A Fresh, Bold Look at the Future of News.” Doesn’t it sound like a toadying, sycophantic nod to O’Reilly’s memoir, A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity?

“I didn’t choose the title and I’m dismayed it came out that way,” he said.

None of Fiedler’s kind words toward O’Reilly approach the praise heaped upon him by former BU President John Silber, a man who’s earned as much as $6.1 million in a single year, even while in retirement. In a letter to the Boston Herald last year, Silber wrote that O’Reilly “continues to be a remarkably evenhanded journalist of whom we at BU continue to be proud. He is a worthy mentor to students.”

The outmoded BU motto, from its Methodist past, is “Learning, Virtue, Piety.” A new one? “Show Me The Money.”

• Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
• Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  Daniel Gewertz is a coward. Don’t worry Dan-Man, O’ Reilly won’t interview you. But then again, now he might. Quick Dan, head for the hills!

  Posted by bookworm on Oct 22, 2009 at 6:35 PM

  How is Daniel Gewertz a coward? Seems to me like he made his points clearly and concisely. BU ought to be ashamed, honoring a “journalist”—- I use that term extremely loosely in O’Reilly’s case—in part because he’s a big donor. BU has done nothing but further debase the profession and prove once again that honors are for those with bucks and celebrity, not for their contributions to society. Only thing O’Reilly has ever contributed is the further polarization of the country.

  Posted by vman on Oct 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM

  Daniel, as a journalist, I think you’re misreading the meaning behind the award.  The award comes from the College of Communication, not specifically from the Department of Journalism.  Bill O’Reilly is not a journalist, he is a communicator.  Like the PR folks who tell you that toxic sludge is good for you, O’Reilly tells people what his boss wants him to in return for a paycheck.  The message he often communicates is a load of vile, hate-filled, misogynistic, disgusting, self-righteous, gay-bashing, racist, self-serving crap on a shingle from a bigoted, fanatical, intolerant, egotistical, power-abusing, pandering, vindictive, war-mongering, ideologically-driven, pro-big-oil, anti-environment, out-of-touch far-right fundamentalist.  But here’s the amazing thing about Bill O’Reilly:  people listen to him!  In just a few minutes every night, he can convince people that everything they learned about truth, justice and the American Way is wrong, that the lessons learned in Kindergarten about fair play and being kind to one another are rubbish, and that science is only useful when it reinforces your point of view.  That is a truly remarkable power of persuasion, and it must be what the College of Communication recognized (unless it merely bestowed this honor to repay financial donations).

  Mind you, we’d all appreciate O’Reilly if his powers of persuasion were used in an ethical manner to disseminate the truth for the good of humanity.  It is a shame that Boston University was misguided enough to place the bar at not spending time in jail.  In so doing they err by not examining the assumed premises: (a) that the law is always correct, (b) that the law-breakers are always incorrect and (c) those who do have not spent time behind bars, but who have made a lot of money must be worthy of recognition.  Next, they may honor Rush Limbaugh.  And my children will attend school elsewhere.

  Posted by nyvegan on Oct 22, 2009 at 7:45 PM

  O’Reallly?

  Posted by frank67 on Oct 23, 2009 at 11:55 PM

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also featured Pulp Friction
Lines Drawn in the Sandinistas
Mind the Gap

Full contents
Previous issues
Subscribe and save!