Can't make up my mind on Bill O'Reilly ?

First of all I am not a judgemental person. I don't judge (or a least I try not to because judgement is in human nature and it happens often on the subconscious level to a certain degree) from someone else point of view or by rumors. I've always heard about Bill O'Reilly by friends or in the media, overall it was negative things but also some funny thoughts too, so I've finally watched several videos of Bill O'reilly on youtube (without reading the comments of course, I want to make up my own mind).

They say don't judge a book by its cover and I'm a true believer of that but in human relationships you rarely get the chance to read the whole book. From what we know so far about the human psyche, you only get to read a certain amount of pages and very often it's the pages the person chose to show you,
so.....

From what I've seen in these interviews, there is a pattern of heated arguments and sometimes (too often..) insults. That I can understand when It happens from time to time, but 3 /4 of the time the discussion end up being a dispute between to opinions or to sides of a debate, that's where I got a bit confused and start questioning myself:

Is the O'Reilly factor really newsworthy? by that I don't mean to offend any viewers or fans of the show but I'm not American and I don't know each and every TV program, I just want to know where this show stand on the channel categories ?
When I usually watch the news or debates and shows about more serious matters I want not only to be informed of the different positions that surrounds a problem, different points of vue, that what make a debate democratic. That probably where it get heated on Bill O'Reilly because every time the guest differs from his point of vue and add precise argumentation, that guest is cut out and can't seem to finish his/her sentences.
To my vue, I think a TV host must be tolerant to a degree where he/her listens to what the guest has to say and after that putting his/her point of vue. That goes without saying that the guest point of vue must be respected (to a certain point as long as the argument is decent and non-prejudicial)even it stand for exactly the opposite of what the host believes in. After all it's a talk show and it is (at least It's supposed to be ?) about the guest point of vue, or at least a consideration of 2 vues.
Just for point out an example, let's consider the interview of Jon Stewart. When he questions the relevance of the daily show and mentions that the show can have serious repercussions on America.... I mean come on lol, Jon Stewart is on COMEDY CHANNEL for Dilbert's sake !! certain things are meant to be taken seriously some are not. Now I was really relieved and hopeful when Bill mentionned "America", Stewart's best seller because that may be the only relevant matter that could cause an issue in term of what example to give to the viewers...

Another video was the interview of Colbert from the Colbert report.
The show started as Bill pointed out the joke made about him and how Colbert made fun of him in his show (he made a funny Bill O'Reilly impersonation as you can see ) and as the show evolves Bill gets a bit annoyed, and says that they made a studies and found that the portion of viewers are stoners (same as Jon Stewart viewers) and he wonders how can people love the show....
But don't judge too fast, this interview was one of his best I've seen because he respected everything Colbert had to say and I must say they were pretty funny together and Bill was very understanding (considering he's a huge part in Colbert stories lol) and that's that image of Bill I want to see more often.

Then again I tend to see the best in everyone.