In a smug fugue of self-righteous gloatation, Billo told Fox News viewers Monday he brought down Seattle's "nutty-left newspaper," the Seattle Post Intelligencer, after confronting Publisher Roger Oglesby who refused to be "interviewed" as he stepped out of his
car at his Capitol Hill home and ambushed by squeaky O'Reilly Mini-me, Jesse Watters.
O'Reilly's investigation and exposure of Oglesby and the paper's "outlandish left-wing zealotry'" was, he says, what caused Seattleites' "critical mass."
"It's clear even in left-wing Seattle the folks want no part of the left-wing operation."
(The sale of the paper was announced Friday by the Hearst Corporation. It's the oldest in Seattle and has long, if not always, been second to the home-owned Times... O'Reilly claims that newspapers are in trouble because they're too liberal, never mind the Internet, or that the Times while stodgy would never be described as "conservative" by any conservative. O'Reilly is always careful to castigate the P-I, and Seattle -- but never Hearst, one of the county's largest media corporations. That's because the bestsellingness of authors like O'Reilly is seen to correllate with author asskissedness with the not-so-gentle media giant. Billo wouldn't want to screw up his chances for a write-up in Parade, the nations largest circulation print magazine...).
O'Reilly, who hates our freedom, claims he wanted to talk to Oglesby about the paper's refusing to cooperate with the FBI when they were trying to locate two men who were taking pictures and "acting suspiciously on a ferry."
Although he claims to have broken this story, it had raged for weeks in the msm, and the blogs before Billo noticed it. In the incident, the P-I would not publish pictures of two unknown men who might have been Middle Eastern who were acting "suspicious" on the Washington state ferry in 2007.
Shamefully, The Seattle Times and the teevee stations ran the pictures despite the men were guilty of nothing. The Post-Intelligencer took a lot of heat, but was exonerated later when the men were discovered to be European "ferry-buffs."
The AP:
Last summer, the FBI launched an international search for two men after crew members and riders on a Washington State Ferry reported their unusual behavior — namely that they were taking pictures below deck, in areas that don't hold much interest for most tourists.
A ferry captain snapped their photo, which was passed along to the FBI.
Turns out the men, both citizens of a European Union nation, were captivated by the car-carrying capacity of local ferries.
"Where these gentlemen live, they don't have vehicle ferries. They were fascinated that a ferry could hold that many cars and wanted to show folks back home," FBI Special Agent Robbie Burroughs said Monday.
We will miss the Seattle P-I.
I am sad to see the PI go down as well, but the fact is that the PI has maintained poor journalistic standards and offers us nothing unique from that which is available elsewhere or online.
The same can be said of the Seattle Times, but one of them had to be the first to go.
Posted by: mirobeh | January 13, 2009 at 12:25 PM
It does not matter why they are going to be gone. Just be glad they are going. Duff's mom will get over it. BillO can take credit. I want to get some credit.
The sooner that rag is flushed down the crapper, the better.
Next in line should be the New York Times. Sink that bitch.
Thanks for the bright spot in my day.
Posted by: chucks | January 13, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Liberal or conservative leanings aside newspapers are experiencing economic challenges because the model that drives them (classifieds for profits) has changed. It is more economical for advertisers to narrow their approach and target audiences more specifically on the Internet and other, more personal media which, in some cases is even more liberal (or conservative) than the PI. The current economic problems for the PI have nothing to do with content, just plain old economics, which Bill O'Reilly has no right to take credit for.
Posted by: Ray in Boise | January 13, 2009 at 12:36 PM
'O'reilly takes credit for bringing down the seattle post-intelligencer'
The PI didn't need any help, it brought itself down. However I will miss the paper and I'll be sad to see such an area icon bite the dust.
...and who cares what O'Reilly tries to take credit for...he is a 'non-event' who happens to be in love with himself
Posted by: Duffman | January 13, 2009 at 12:38 PM
I read in the Tacoma paper that being an all on-line paper is still a possibility for the PI
Posted by: sparky | January 13, 2009 at 04:32 PM
The Pee-Eye brought itself down. Bill O just has it in for Seattle and this state - that's as plain as the nose on your face. That's because he unfairly characterizes this state as a haven for secular progressives.
An extreme right-winger ? I don't think so - he is a traditionalist that leans conservative but calls himself an independent. He is better on TV than on the radio. One thing he actually was though - was pretty much down the middle in the Presidential race. He was objective and said that McCain blew it and Obama ran a great campaign - go figure...
Posted by: KS | January 13, 2009 at 09:35 PM
I think turning into an online paper is a good idea although at this point, they're hardly the first. I'm think crosscut probably does that better.
Also, too bad they didn't go the way of The Stranger or Seattle Weekly. How is the Weekly doing anyway? They seem to have a lot of ads that appeal to a certain market...so there's profitability out there if you know where the niche is.
Anyway, I don't take the papers and haven't read them for years but I preferred the PI. I don't like Frank Blethen's politics.
Posted by: joanie | January 13, 2009 at 10:22 PM
yeah I would have thought that OReilly would use his powers to bring down the Stranger first.
Posted by: gonna_blow | January 14, 2009 at 12:10 AM
Reading Steve Young's attribution of Franken's win to O'Reilly seems to fit this column very well:
"The more venom the right threw at Franken, the more money came in to his campaign and the less he had to spend to get a camera or microphone in front of him. Franken had already had notoriety but the Republicans attempt to turn Franken into Fagin gave his race a national je ne sais quoi.
Meanwhile, O’Reilly, continued to attack Franken as well as whomever didn’t lay down for Bill’s side of an argument. O’Reilly’s public skewering of then presidential candidate, Chris Dodd, who fought back toe to toe, sent Dodd’s campaign coffers to over-flowing. Bill’s frequent jabs and well-publicized distaste for Keith Olbermann that fueled the MSNBC franchise’s rating confirms he has yet to learn that there’s always a hook hidden within the bait.
It’s not a stretch to believe that without O’Reilly, Franken wouldn’t not have entered the Senate race, let alone won."
Let's continue to give credit where credit due.
Posted by: joanie | January 14, 2009 at 12:38 AM
In regards to Rachel Maddow, it's easier to be 'civil' when you only have on people you basically agree with 'cept the topic of who hates Bush more...we'll see how that works over the next 4 years. Ironic as it may seem to some, it's those awful Fox Shows that have dissenting opinions while the ones on MSNBC don't like to dirty up the air with people that disagree (notable exception: Morning Joe)
"One of the compliments I hear most frequently about her is that Maddow doesn't shout at her guests and treats them with civility.
Which is true -- unlike those bearish types over at Fox News arguing with guests whose opinions they don't share, thereby running the risk of viewers learning something in the exchange."
Posted by: Puget Sound | January 14, 2009 at 04:40 AM
Check out major fish wrap here. Neat website.
http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/flash/
Posted by: Habu | January 14, 2009 at 04:49 AM
You sure are grumpy, Puts..is your wife making you sleep on the couch these days??
If you watched Rachel regularly, you would know that she often has people on her show that she disagrees with.
Fox admitted that they were fed talking points from the White House. Is that really the job of a news network?
Posted by: sparky | January 14, 2009 at 05:45 AM
...of note: Pat Buchanan, whom she regularly engages. [but it appears he is a 'token' guest]
Posted by: Duffman | January 14, 2009 at 05:49 AM