Gotcha

Never pick a fight with somebody who buys ink by the barrel.

The pen is mightier than the sword.

   What should a reporter do when threatened with retaliation for writing something the subject of a story feels is "inappropriate"?
   The answer, as Davy Crockett might have put it is this: Be sure you're right, then go ahead. In journalism, that means the reporter writes the story anyway, especially after a threat. And the more specific the threat, the more emphasis the disputed item should get.
   These thoughts come to mind after reading an expose on TV commentator Bill O'Reilly and allegations that he embellished his role as a young reporter for CBS News covering the Falkland Islands dispute in 1982.
   It seems O'Reilly has claimed he was in the war zone amid the violence when he was really in Buenos Aires covering a protest demonstration that did not even rise to the level of a riot, according to other reporters who were there. The story first appeared in Mother Jones magazine, and was then picked up by the New York Times.
   In an interview with a Times reporter, O'Reilly  reportedly said there would be repercussions if the reporter wrote something that O'Reilly deemed "inappropriate." Consequently, the New York Times duly reported what O'Reilly said: "I am coming after you with everything I have. You can take it as a threat." (New York Times, 24 February 2015, Page 1)
   
   O'Reilly is a very potent force in conservative media through his daily commentary show on the Fox News Network. Whether he still considers himself a reporter is another issue, because he certainly is not neutral in his coverage and comments on daily events. But as a former reporter, he should know better than to threaten reporters.
   O'Reilly has gone full tilt in defending his claims, and has invited other CBS News crew members who were at the scene to join him on his TV show and "hash it out," according to the Times report.
   They have declined the invitation. Or, as one put it, he was familiar with the way O'Reilly runs his show, pointing out that "Nobody gets a fair shake. He just wants to beat them up, call them names." (NYT, 2/24/15, page B8).

   So now it's a battle over who has the loudest voice or the more influential coverage, broadcast or print. Put another way, which do you want: Opinion or objective, neutral coverage?
   Fox News has long touted its coverage as "fair and balanced" and used the slogan, "We report, you decide."
   Hah!

But to be fair and balanced, we must point out that MSNBC commentators also have a strong slant in their coverage. However, they make no claims that they are anything other than strongly liberal.