FOX Mushroom Farm is probably not doing star manure-shoveler Bill O'Reilly any favors by not putting him on a bullshit short-term temporary suspension--just throwing that out there. At present count, he has about seven or eight former colleagues calling b.s. on his accounting of his experiences covering the Falklands War. He's gone so far as to threaten a NYT reporter with "everything I have" over the issue. A time-out might defuse attention on this issue for the network and their star, but right now, he is totally being a story. Journalists (real or FOX News) tell stories--but it isn't helpful for them to become them.
Steve M. describes the wagon-circling that conservative media are engaging in--I think this is very awkward of them (and really--Alger Hiss?*) O'Reilly's fault in recounting his Argentinian experiences doesn't really have an ideological basis, and his reporting in the "No-Spin Zone" should certainly account for something if the byword of "Fair and Balanced" is to have any meaning at all, no? He's simply being called an inaccurate reporter who is exaggerating and got on everyone's nerves. That's not about politics. That's about their experience of working with him.
O'Reilly has a documented issue with "truthiness". People have argued over where he even grew up--a tiresome business involving zip codes and the kerning on a mortgage statement, his school athletic career, and whether the tabloid news program Inside Edition won a Peabody or a Polk Award (a Polk--after he left). He's fluffed up his closeness to tragedy regarding his investigation into the JFK murder. It's sort of like he's made a story that is better than reality that he wants everyone else to respect.
But journalists don't usually do that--their job is to root out the truth. Making a fictional self is kind of like brand-building. It's, to use the wrestling terms, a work, when he's trying to claim his business is a straight shoot.
I also don't think we can leave out that other journalists might be a little concerned with what an O'Reilly means to their profession when he is "that guy". The guy who sexually harasses producers. The guy who is a bully in his private life, and who threatens other reporters, like Emily Steele and Amanda Terkel as part of his public life. If anyone has ever worked with an abusive colleague, whom one has witnessed reaming out a subordinate employee, trainee or intern on a regular basis, and never being reprimanded, do you not think about literally or figuratively "socking them"? His kind of imprint probably doesn't leave a good taste and there is good cause to question his professionalism.
In other words--yes, people might be out to get O'Reilly. I don't see the left/right divide being necessary for that.
(If you ask me, Whittaker Chambers was a flake with a damn good story, and the jury is permanently out on Hiss. I'm just a punk-ass blogger, though, and I only advance that comment because McCarthy and Nixon made their bones on that shit, and the hell with them both.)