The problem is that Fox, like most news networks, follow the money, and didn't fire the man on principle, but rather because advertisement revenue had been cut. The man has been spouting racist/sexist/whatever other bigoted nonsense for over two decades. You think Fox suddenly got an ethics itch overnight? Of course not. Fox is still as crusty and biased as ever, but, still, I'm happy to see Bill O'Reilly gone. Maybe he wasn't fired for the right reasons, but it's nice to see him fired. Take what you can get.
And yeah I'm always right so.....You're welcome world. I need more words. Um wish Bernie Sanders would've won; that guy was cool n stuff. I really enjoyed the vine of him running to the sonic theme song. Did you guys see that? Search it. It's good I promise. More words....
He’s a known sex criminal (I think the recording of phone calls, and the 15 or so women coming forward are more than enough evidence-wise). That alone should justify him being fired and being sent to jail
But he’s also a terrible reporter. Not that Fox is known for its journalistic integrity, but I’ve never watched a Bill O’Reilly show without a feeling that was being incredibly biased. He’s dishonest, and bad at expressing himself. He should be fired, especially by a news netwrok, if he’s terrible at reporting the news without obvious bias, and obvious lack of understanding
7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.
Ask, Seek, Knock
7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
9 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
The Narrow and Wide Gates
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
I am not saying he didn't commit these sexual assaults, but I do believe he deserves a chance to prove himself. I haven't heard very minimal evidence of these accusations other than woman saying he did this to them. Again, I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I'm saying that Fox should have done a better job defending their, some would say, most prized possession, if you will. I say that there is too little proof to say he is guilty, and Fox should've gone into further investigation on the topic.
A common practice that you see nowadays is for corporations to part ways with their employees at the hint of scandal. He is innocent until proven guilty, and without the outcome of a trial there is no way to actually measure his guilt or innocence.
It is completely within Fox's rights to fire him. The firing was a publicity stunt in order to keep favorability in the eyes of the media/people. It's too bad there aren't any corporations who will actually see it through with a tenured employee.
Either way, if he's guilty he deserves what he gets. If he's innocent, he deserves what he gets. If there's a settlement, we will never know.
Personally I'm surprised people still watched him. The fact that he lasted so long on Fox is impressive. I mean sure what he did was wrong, but it does not tie into his performance at work. This is just like the Oscars awarding Casey Affleck for best actor yet he allegedly raped a girl. Let the law take care of this as that is their jurisdiction, and The Oscars should not punish him on behalf of that. Same goes to Fox. Am I sad that he is gone? No. I just don't think that Fox should have intervened on his life outside of Fox. I get that the network doesn't want to be associated with that kind of behavior, but they should not be involved in his personal life, especially in reaction to allegations/accusations (which may or may not even be true - and if they are then Bill is an asshole). No matter how horrible and unjustifiable his actions were (because I am in no way, shape, or form defending those who rape), I think the only people that should be enforcing any negative repercussions are the law. If the criminal justice system mandated that he be removed from the network, then I support that. Ultimately, if he was sentenced to jail for a given term, then he would be off the air anyways. I think Fox is doing this just to look after their own ratings and reviews (trying to show that they don't support these actions and do not want bad publicity from this much attention). Yet, firing Bill may in fact hurt Fox's ratings and reviews even more so than keeping him on. It's like how Tomi Lahren was suspended/terminated from The Blaze (a show that nobody really gave a crap about until she brought her strong voice to it). Now the show is doing poorly.
Personally, I had a hard time agreeing with much of anything he said, although I am a Conservative myself. With all of his outbursts and yelling, the only reason Fox had kept him around was because he was the head of Fox. Nobody ever openly named him that, but every Fox viewer knows who Bill O'Reilly is, and they would mostly agree he is looked up to by the majority of the network.
A lot of what he said was definitely extreme, but he was the reason some people watched Fox News. It will be different (and a bit quieter) now that he's gone.
It's clear they were just out to get him. I seriously doubt he did any of what he's accused of. If it were true, you'd have one, maybe two accusations, but something like 15 came up. That is a clear ploy by women at the company to jump on the lawsuit bandwagon to empty the guy's pockets and enrich themselves. It wouldn't surprise me if Murdoch himself orchestrated the whole thing, O'Reilly had way too much freedom on his program and was probably challenging the network's intended rhetoric more than the leadership was comfortable with.