1. There is no "horn" attached to O'Reilly. The illustration includes little dialog bubbles, like in comic books, with pointy parts of the bubbles aimed at O'Reilly's mouth. Maybe the host missed that when his producer or whoever briefed him on his outrage during a break.

2. The illustration is by no stretch a caricature, defined by Merriam-Webster as "exaggeration by means of often ludicrous distortion of parts or characteristics." It is a series of straightforward renderings of O'Reilly as he looks on camera. A variety of unnatural colors are used, but not in the service of exaggerating anything about O'Reilly or making him look bad.

O'Reilly's ginned up outrage comes from Roger Ailes' mudslinging, dirty-politics playbook. The idea is to attack the critic, as the network did with our own Hamilton Nolan yesterday and as it has been doing with journalists and other targets for years now. But some of O'Reilly's emotion may very well be real: emerging evidence, as reported by Arango and Steinberg, that this old routine is getting boring and driving away viewers is apparently causing some very real panic over at Fox.

[TVNewser]

(Ward Sutton illustration via Times)

Earlier this year, a colleague of mine said, he was writing a story about CNN’s gains in the ratings and was told on deadline by a Fox News public relations executive that if he persisted, “they” would go after him. Within a day, “they” did, smearing him around the blogs, he said. (I did not ask him for a comment because the information was of a private nature.)

Carr never names the colleague in question, but we hear it is media reporter Tim Arango. The facts line up: For the March 5 edition, Arango wrote a story about CNN gaining on Fox News among young viewers thanks to the Democratic presidential primary.

The day the story appeared, Jossip reported rumors that Arango "just returned to the Times after two months of 'medical leave,' which many allege may have been a stint in rehab."

Jossip also alleged that Arango had written flattering articles about CNBC in an attempt to secure a job with the financial news network, and hinted his CNN article was an attempt to do the same.

Fox PR, it seems, delivered the revenge they promised Arango, and in a particularly personal form — all for basic journalistic coverage of their ratings dip. Arango once worked at the Post, and as a former member of the News Corp. tribe may have been targeted for especially harsh treatment. But the smear against him would clearly have been meant to send a message to all journalists covering Fox News, or at least those clued in enough to know what was happening, such as Arango's colleagues at the Times: any attempt at fair and balanced coverage of the network itself would be severely punished.

Fox News chief Roger Ailes, like his former boss Richard Nixon, has been running a down-and-dirty campaign against opponents who, due to self-imposed ethical constraints, feel unable to respond in kind. As more of his tactics are exposed, the question becomes whether Ailes will be pressured to rein in his PR machine, or whether his self-created enemies, like the Times, will start throwing some mud of their own.

As Carr noted in his column:

Part of me — the Irish, tribal part — admires Fox News’s ferocious defense of its guys. I work at a place where editors can make easy sport of teasing apart your flawed copy until it collapses in a steaming pile, but Lord help those outsiders who make an unwarranted or unfounded attack on me or my work. Our tactics may be different, but we, too, are strong for our posse.

A Times "posse??" Please let it involve leather chaps and boots with spurs on them, and also an alliance with a bandana-wearing Keith Olbermann.

[Times]