Bill O’Reilly has been forced out of his position as a prime-time host on Fox News, the company said on Wednesday, after the disclosure of settlements involving sexual harassment allegations against him. His abrupt and embarrassing ouster ends his two-decade reign as one of the most popular and influential commentators in television.
That's the title of The New York Times article. I can't say that I am heartbroken or shocked; it was in the air.
Under force out, Vocabulary.com says simply
2. v terminate the employment of; discharge from an office or position
and supplies the following synonyms: can, dismiss, displace, fire, give notice, give the axe, give the sack, sack, send away, terminate.
But, as an anglo-Italian woman who likes to keep abreast of the latest trends in the English language, I am curious as to the difference in meaning between fired (AmEng) and forced out. The former I am familiar with; much less so with the latter. Was Bill O'Reilly sacked (BrEng) or not? What is the difference in meaning?
Best Answer
Both being fired and being forced out imply that the person had no choice but to leave. However, there are some legal and technical aspects that are specific to being fired that may not apply to being "forced out."
Being fired means that employment was terminated by the employer in a manner consistent with law and the employee's contract, or terms of employment. Often, someone who is fired will receive a severance package of some kind, and may be legally eligible for unemployment benefits.
Being forced out, in the context of employment, could mean that someone was given the choice to either resign or be fired. For instance, in political or high profile situations, an employee may opt to resign rather than be fired in order to protect their reputation.
In some cases, "forced out" could be used if the writer is unsure of whether the person in question was technically fired or resigned. For example, former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was forced out of his position after allegations that he colluded with the Russian government, and at the time, different sources offered different accounts as to whether he was "fired" or "resigned."
The article you cited quotes a representative from Fox saying:
Since the announcement was phrased as an agreement, "forced out" in this context likely means that O'Reilly chose to resign rather than being fired in order to avoid the negative connotations of being "fired," and to make the incident appear less contentious.
As other answers have pointed out, in this particular case there is reason to believe that because the network itself was under pressure from advertisers and the public, the phrase "forced out" could refer to pressure on the network exerted from external sources. In that sense, this is a unique case of the term. Ultimately, the explicit implications are the same: that O'Reilly had no choice but to leave, regardless of whether he was fired or resigned.
UPDATE: In this particular case, it's been widely reported that O'Reilly is getting a big monetary payout ($25 million). This is likely a result of negotiation between O'Reilly and the network to reach an agreement consistent with the company's contractual obligations. By having both sides accept the terms of his dismissal, the network can be assured that O'Reilly won't sue them for wrongful termination, and O'Reilly can go on a long, expensive vacation. According to The New York Times: