Bill O'Reilly attempts to explain the popularity of Gangnam Style - General

a lot of people don't know the lyrics to madam butterfly but yet a lot of people cry from it. I think that comedy can transcend language barriers and that plays in the song in question. Though it's interesting, during the interview why bring up a child's book with meaning that couldn't be published. Bill O'Reilly has several best sellers still on the top ten right now so why bring up a book. Maybe it has to do with Steven Colbert. last week Colbert on his show made a segment on his ranking in this years time's 100 important people and made a call to buy his new book, Colbert is 5 on the top 100 where Psy is in the lead and beating Colbert's book is Bill O'Reilly. If Gangnam Style is meaning less and Gangnam Style is comedic in value then comedic in value is meaningless If Papa bear thinks Colbert is childish Then Papa bear can think Colbert's work is childish Colbert has a best selling comedic book. Then a comedic book by Colbert would be childish and meaningless by Bill's show. By bringing in Psy in then he has someone surpassing Colbert as meaningless all indirectly downplaying Colbert's book. It's so crazy it has to be true. Not really but I hope the Colbert Show uses this clip and makes an unusual connection with it concluding that Bill O'Reilly is using Psy and Colbert's book to get money.

So O'Reilly brought in a goddamned psychiatrist just to tell him that people listen to Gangnam Style because it makes them feel good? That sounds like a goddamned waste of time and money.

[QUOTE=V3nom;38688078]So O'Reilly brought in a goddamned psychiatrist just to tell him that people listen to Gangnam Style because it makes them feel good? That sounds like a goddamned waste of time and money.[/QUOTE] Fox.

[QUOTE=V3nom;38688078]So O'Reilly brought in a goddamned psychiatrist just to tell him that people listen to Gangnam Style because it makes them feel good? That sounds like a goddamned waste of time and money.[/QUOTE] Most likely he's not a real psychiatrist. He's merely there to say something that everyone can disagree with just to make bill look good when he disagrees.

[QUOTE=reedbo;38691046]Most likely he's not a real psychiatrist. He's merely there to say something that everyone can disagree with just to make bill look good when he disagrees.[/QUOTE] He just found one that did agree with him. The problem with hiding the illusion that an expert opinion would side with him is that the expert mentioned his bias with the meaningful children's book comment so it's not purely an expert witness but a personal opinion biased by his own rejection.