Politics & Media
Apr 20, 2017, 05:58AM

Bill O’Reilly and the Altamont of Fox News

The left is cheering the demise of O’Reilly, but liberals have nothing to boast about. 

Rsz bill oreilly.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

After Bill O’Reilly’s implosion, Fox News has an opportunity to provide a service for journalism. It has a chance to investigate, thoroughly and publicly, the alleged atmosphere of sexual harassment that led to O’Reilly’s firing. It has a chance to take the high ground and establish itself as a real journalistic enterprise instead of a soft-core version of the old porn mag Leg Show.

Fox can show its true conservative honor by fearlessly and publicly investigating itself, in the process challenging the shared assumptions of its right-wing viewers.

That phrase, “challenging the shared assumptions of its viewers,” is similar to a phrase from the 1970 National Magazine Award, which was given to Rolling Stone. The award praised Rolling Stone for “challenging the shared assumptions of our readers.” Rolling Stone won an award for its coverage of the hippie disaster at the Rolling Stones concert at the Altamont Speedway in California. The Stones, jealous that they’d missed Woodstock, mounted their own show and hired the Hell’s Angels for security.

Rolling Stone investigated the hubris, lack of planning, and drug-fueled idiocy that led to chaos and deaths at the concert. Calling it “rock & roll’s worst day,” a Rolling Stone writer described the scene this way: “Flickering silhouettes of people trying to find warmth around the blazing track reminded one of the medieval paintings of tortured souls in the Dance of Death.” A writer in the equally radical 1960s magazine Ramparts observed, “We all seemed beyond the law at Altamont, out there willingly, all 300,000 of us, Stones and Angels included, and on our own.”

“Beyond the law”—a phrase that seemingly applies to Fox and its attitude towards sexual harassment. Risking alienating its advertisers and core audience, in 1969 Rolling Stone showed balls, the same searching moral inventory that would be missing more than four decades later when the magazine shrank from responsibility for publishing a rape hoax. The Altamont coverage was an inspiration to Hunter Thompson. In an undated letter from Thompson to Rolling Stone editor Jann Wenner, Thompson observed: “Your Altamont coverage comes close to being the best journalism I can remember reading, by anybody.” (Source: Thompson’s book Fear and Loathing at Rolling Stone.)

It’s worth noting that Thompson, who, through no fault of his own, spawned generations of journalists who think velocity and glibness are substitutes for hard work, honor and honesty, could also be candid with himself despite his leftist politics. Recall Thompson’s article about the Kentucky Derby, in which he wanted to find the illiterate, racist and inbred face at the Derby that represented the worst of redneck America. After days of overindulging, Thompson found the face—it was his own, reflected in the bathroom mirror. When covering Watergate, Thompson called Pat Buchanan “the one person in the Nixon administration with a sense of humor” and the two met in Washington for beers.

The left is cheering the demise of O’Reilly, but liberals have nothing to boast about. Propaganda sites like Vox and the Huffington Post are just as reactionary as Fox, and the more mainstream media is not any better. The liberal media was largely quiet during the sexual assaults that were part of the Occupy movement several years ago. In 2011 I visited the Occupy site in Washington a couple of times and asked about the rapes. I was told by someone, a journalist, “Well, you know, people get drunk, go into a tent to sleep and try and feel up somebody.” These are the same journalists who went nuts about a conservative political conference when they heard that a sexual assault had occurred—before it tuned out that the entire thing had been made up by New Republic fabulist Stephen Glass.

What’s needed in the O’Reilly case is for a tough reporter willing to thoroughly investigate the dark side of O’Reilly’s No Spin Zone. A journalist like Charles Lane, who went against his hipster staff at the New Republic to expose liar Glass. Or William F. Buckley, the National Review founder who chased the John Birchers out of the conservative movement. Or Lowell Bergman, the man who rebelled against his employer CBS for their “pre-censorship” of a story about the tobacco industry.

I’d say the best man for the job is probably Fox reporter James Rosen, who stood up to the bullies in the Obama administration and is the author of The Strong Man, a terrific book about John Mitchell and Watergate. But who knows? I recently took to Twitter to offer Rosen some sarcastic observations about O’Reilly, and the Nixon scholar and Buckley acolyte blocked me.

  • The Rolling Stones have never been hippies, so I'm not sure Altamont was a hippie disaster. It was a disaster of poor planning, for sure.

    Responses to this comment
  • This is an odd piece. Left folks can certainly cover up sexual assault by powerful people—Bill Clinton (who's admittedly more of a centrist) would be a big example. But Fox's troubles go well beyond O'Reilly, and to suggest that Vox has similar problems seems very odd. Fox covered up O'Reilly's crap for years, and that's not even mentioning Ailes. They seem to have a serious, pervasive culture of sexual harassment. Thinking that Fox is going to investigate itself adequately seems like wishful thinking at best...

    Responses to this comment
  • Also, to say the Stones did Altamont out of Woodstock envy isn't on the mark. They had been getting a lot of flack for their high ticket prices, and this was a way to stem the blowback.You don't try to recreate Woodstock with the reactionary Hell's Angels as your event security.

    Responses to this comment
  • I agree the Stones weren't sorry they skipped Woodstock, Chris, but I'm sure at the end of the Let It Bleed tour they wanted to do something comparable. However, OF COURSE at that period they were hippies. Look at their clothes, Mick's press conferences, following up Sgt. Pepper with the very hipped Satantic Majesties Request, etc. Keith, retrospectively, might say they weren't hippies, claiming he carried a gun and all, but just remember the Hyde Park Concert after Brian died, with Mick wearing a dress and all the (dead) butterflies they planned to release.

    Responses to this comment
  • I see your points Russ, but they never seemed to have a real connection with the flower children like, say, true hippies like the Greatful Dead. Their songs weren't about peace and love or any of that. I see them as adopting some of the surface elements of the hippies but being apart from the movement in general. I can't see Keith as a hippie, and certainly not Charlie Watts. David Crosby and Jerry Garcia I can see as real hippies.

    Responses to this comment
  • I think we can all agree that the Stones in 1969 saw themselves as counterculture (all hippies are counterculture, but not all counterculture is hippies). Altamont was a setback for the cc because hopeful types thought the kids could gather en masse and stage a huge event without screwing themselves up. Not true, as it turned out.

    Responses to this comment
  • You miss the larger picture, Chris. The Stones were of that era, clothed on Carnaby Street, Brian at Monterrey Pop festival, songs like "Dandelion," "We Love You," and "Street Fighting Man." Once hippies were out of fashion, they'd moved on, but almost all the bands of time were hippies.

    Responses to this comment
  • Oh, I think I settled this matter.

    Responses to this comment
  • But the kids weren't staging the event. The Stones were, and the Rolling Stone article explains how every part of the planning prcess was flawed, including such basics as not having the stage high enough so people couldn't rush it.

    Responses to this comment
  • No argument that Altamont was sloppily organized. When I was a kid I read that the event was thrown together just so the Stones could have cool footage for the "Gimme Shelter" doc. Little did they know.

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment