Wednesday Links and Open Thread

  • Tuesday’s numbers: Bill O’Reilly-Sean Hannity-Rachel Maddow 1-2-3.
  • Videos: Anna Kooiman revisits F&F, talks about new
  • Concha: MSM tries to spike Rice story; MSNBC plays race, gender cards.
  • Caruso: Why is an Obama political appointee reporting on Rice for CNN?
  • Videos: Tucker sounds off debates on spying.
  • Stelter’s Tuesday newsletter: 16 entries on O’Reilly/Fox; 1 on Susan Rice.
  • We know O’Reilly salary why not others?  Today’s firing demand, O’Whine.

32 thoughts on “Wednesday Links and Open Thread”

  1. I didn’t know that Brian Stelter had a daily newsletter.

    At the end of it they ask for feedback. I’m going to write in and tell them that there isn’t enough on Fox News and O’Reilly and that Brian needs to really dig in and stop paying so little attention. I wonder if they’ll take me seriously.

  2. I just read FTVLive where he says to fire BOR, those opportunistic Liberal bastards are doing a good number on his advertisers, I saw like 8+ of them dropping his show

    FOX News should tell these advertisers once you drop out you can never advertise on FOX News again!

  3. Amidst the vulture-circling by O’Reilly haters, today marks ten years since an infamous O’Reilly Factor segment. On the heels of a fatal car crash in Virginia Beach by a criminal illegal alien, Bill and Geraldo debated illegal immigration, sanctuary cities, and how had Virginia Beach not been a sanctuary city, the driver would have been deported. After about five minutes of verbal fireworks, Bill and Geraldo suddenly, civilly complimented the ability to have a fair and balanced debate on FNC, leaving the viewers to decide who was right. The segment ended as they wished each other a happy Easter.

  4. NEWSWEEK spiked the Monica Lewinsky story until Drudge broke it anyway. The Rice omission again shows why the liberal media can not be left unchecked. “All the news that’s fit to print” is more like “All the news we want to tell you”.

  5. Anyone know if any of the following ‘celebs’ have weighed in on Mr. Bill’s ‘predicament’ – for lack of a better name?

    Howard Stern
    Rush Limbaugh
    Drudge
    Mark Levin
    Hugh Hewitt
    Laura Ingraham
    Michael Savage
    Michael Medved
    Mike Huckabee
    Neal Boortz
    Mike Gallager
    Glenn Beck

  6. I’m still so upset that Red Eye is ending. Poor Andy Levy – he looked so sad these past two nights when he was hosting. The ratings have been pretty good. I don’t understand why it’s been cancelled. Is it a cost-cutting decision?

    • Monday he looked awful, but his voice sounded kind of rough even when he was joking around. Last night he said he was sick. I wonder if he would have even come in if Tom was there and/or it wasn’t the last week. So, his looking sad seems to be more about being ill.

      The ratings only started going up a lot once Trump was elected. The show was not doing well for a while. Especially in the demo. 2016 was the second worst year for the show in the 25-54 demo. I think the demo numbers were what kept it around all of these years.
      [The Hannity rerun that airs two hours before Red Eye had 68% more demo viewers in Q1 2017 than Red Eye and Fox and Friends First airs two hours after Red Eye and it had 22% more demo viewers in Q1 2017 than Red Eye (in 2016, F&FF only beat Red Eye by 9% in the demo).]

      I don’t think it is necessarily about “cost-cutting” but more about maximizing profits. They say it is not about ratings, but if the show was more valuable to Fox, it would be continuing.
      Also, Red Eye plans what the stories they are going to talk about probably 10 hours before the show actually airs. That makes the show unable to talk about late breaking news. Fox probably wants to be more flexible in that time slot.
      So, if news coverage is doing really well and a rerun of something else could be more timely and make more money with one, then why would they keep Red Eye going? If they felt the show could be valuable in another time slot, they would have probably been moved, but that seems to not be the case.
      [Also, some people are bringing up the O’Reilly settlements and advertisers for a reason Red Eye is canceled, but that is ridiculous. The $13 million number was mostly from one settlement over a decade ago. Plus, FNC made over $1.5 billion last year and just had their best ratings quarter ever. Every advertiser could leave O’Reilly and the network would still make a massive amount of profit. Even with the advertisers leaving, one week of revenue made from O’Reilly’s show could probably pay for Red Eye for a year.]

      There is a good chance that this was in the works for a while and they are just doing it now. The show can be disappointed that they were not told further in advance and that Fox didn’t support them more, but they can’t be too mad that they were canceled.
      They were given a longer chance than they probably deserved and they didn’t make enough of an effort to make changes and make the show more valuable to the network. They clearly didn’t pay much attention to the ratings over the years. They should have been doing more to improve ratings in those down years.
      There was no evidence that the show was going to keep the same viewer numbers once the overall network numbers started going down. In fact, it looks like the show’s March total viewers were down around 10% from February and likely were the lowest they had been since October.

      Red Eye was dispensable to the network. The show likely wasn’t bringing in enough money. The show had become mostly irrelevant. It got very little attention. There are a lot of people who have surpassed them when it comes to good conservative-libertarian humor.

  7. Megyn Kelly Free to Appear on NBC
    Just like Mr. Bill has generated good ratings MON & TUE due in part to viewers like me — who tune in to see if he comments on the controversy — I bet if Megyn made a cameo appearance on NBC or MSNBC this week she would trigger a spike in viewers for the same reason. Even though I don’t think she would say much if anything at all. Gloating is not a good look for anyone…especially when you’re a newbie.

    The only one with past ties to Fox News I’ve heard speak out is Jedediah Bila when ABC’s The View did a segment on Bill’s accusers. She simply made a somewhat emotionless statement (paraphrasing), “They need to hold him accountable, but probably won’t because he generates so much ad revenue.”

      • Please enlighten me and Brian Steinberg, Senior TV Editor for Variety, who made the same point about ratings — how you think they work.

        • Perhaps you should look up how Nielsen actually collects ratings data, and realize that your personal viewing habits, unless you’re a Nielsen family, don’t mean squat.

          • Now that viewers know after three nights that BOR is probably not going to comment, will his ratings gains start to subside?

            Stay tuned.

  8. Today’s most popular links:
    5 spike Rice story
    4 Anna Kooiman revisits
    3 political appointee
    2 firing demand
    And the most popular link in today’s links…
    1 We know O’Reilly’s salary, why not others?

    • Re: “We know O’Reilly’s salary, why not others?”

      Not getting that post by Bob Somerby. Of course, I seldom do. 🙂

      At a minimum it seemed like cherry picking given that Matt Lauer’s, Megyn Kelly’s, Brian Williams, Robin Roberts, George Stephanopoulos, Jimmy Kimmel, Rachel Maddow and Howard Stern (Amer. Got Talent) to name a few have all had their salaries published at some point.

      I’m not saying all the published numbers were accurate — but that wasn’t Somerby’s point.

Comments are closed.