well according to O'Reilly the interview was unedited except for a commercial break, but overall I found the interview to be pretty lame.
I really expected that one or both would raise some great points and press them home, but neither really did. I would say O'Reilly won overall, but neither really got into much and they only exchanged a few questions each.
There were 2 (at least) disappointments for me personally. The first was when O'Reilly was pinning Moore down on labelling Bush a liar for leading us into Iraq under the pretense that Iraq had WMD and strong ties with AlQueda. O'Reilly said it was a mistake rather than a lie and Moore really floundered in his response. He did mention once that Cheney set up a task force in the CIA to "make" evidence that Iraq had WMD, but then let it go. I thought that should have been the point Moore focused on.
Then Moore, at the end of the interview/debate asked O'Reilly if he would be willing to sacrifice his child to secure Fallujah. O'Reilly said he would be willing to sacrifice himself(which implies not his child) and Moore then came back with a brilliant question "Would you sacrifice someone else's child?" and O'Reilly visibly stumbled. Moore, instead of remaining silent and letting Bill struggle longer and possibly respond with something really stupid said "You would really go to Iraq? Let's sign you up" which just got a couple laughs from both of them and the debate was over.
As I said in my OP I have no use for either man believing them to be empty self promoters, but as such I think the least they could have done was provide a few more sparks.