People have the right to call out anyone they want but it's false to claim there is equivalence between the two situations. As I mentioned before, Bill O'Reilly is as much an nonpartisan journalist as Jon Stewart.
it doesn't matter whether the person is a "serious" newsreader, or a "non-serious" joke-reader.
Williams used a fake war attack to gain credibility with viewers.
Bill Oreilly used an entire fake war experience in Falklands, in order to PUNK another journalist. "I didn't see YOU in the warzones of the falklands". He should have said "I didn't see YOU in the violent protests in Buenos Aires". That would have been accurate.
Besides, if we are arguing about whether or not it matters OReilly lied... then we already accept that he changed the country of his conflict, maybe sprinkled in saving the reporter's life... and maybe he "almost died" 3 times, maybe that was bullshit. Maybe he witnessed a suicide, maybe he didn't.
If we're saying it's okay for pundits to completely lie about war experience, I understand... when Rachel Maddow brags on her show about her secret mission to Nkorea or Iran, I hope nobody complains lol...