Reply
Sat 6 May, 2006 12:35 pm
Quote:
Overstating The O'Reilly Factor's viewership nearly threefold, O'Reilly claimed to have "6 million people watching me every night"
Summary: Bill O'Reilly dramatically overstated the amount of nightly viewers of his television program, saying, "I already got the 6 million people watching me every night." In fact, according to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor averaged 2,274,000 viewers a night in the first quarter of 2006.
During the April 27 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Bill O'Reilly dramatically overstated the amount of nightly viewers of his television program, saying, "I already got the 6 million people watching me every night." In fact, according to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor averaged 2,274,000 viewers a night in the first quarter of 2006.
The Nielsen television ratings monitored "all regularly scheduled programs" airing from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, which included the Factor, which airs at 8 p.m. While the show's repeat broadcast -- which airs at 11 p.m. ET -- was not included, it would need to have nearly twice as many viewers as the initial, primetime broadcast for O'Reilly to reach the 6 million viewers he claimed watch his program each night. Additionally, the number of Factor viewers in the key marketing demographic -- 25 to 54 years old -- was down 24 percent from the first quarter of 2005, averaging about 450,000 viewers.
From the April 27 broadcast of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:
O'REILLY: It doesn't matter what my percentage of gain is at The Factor in the world of cable news. I am so far ahead of everyone else, if I grow 1 percent or lose 1 percent, it doesn't matter. I already got the 6 million people watching me every night. If one of my competitors adds 200,000 viewers, they can run around screaming, "Oh, look at our percentage. Look how high we're up." And it's nothing, it means nothing, because they have nothing.
LINK TO ARTICLE
Even if the clown had six million viewers, that would only be two percent of the population--and hardly evidence that this stroke's ranting appeals to any significant portion of the population. As the figures you have provided suggest he has less than one percent of the population tuning in, by the time you subtract the leftwingnuts who tune in just to get pissed off at him, he's meaningless. Of course, for purposes of selling time to an advertiser, he's got a modest (very modest) claim for selling advertising time to a very specific (and not very bright) demographic . . .
Since a specific and not necessarily very bright demographics is often what the advertiser is looking for I suppose that makes him a success in a back handed sort of way.
Personally it is nothing I would want to brag about
I expect the usual suspects any minute making the case that this is still more viewers than MSNBC and CNN viewers in his time slot...
or something to try to mitigate that one of their icons got caught lying...
O'reilly is no match for the vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television.
McGentrix wrote:O'reilly is no match for the vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television.
So, you're saying that from an advertiser's standpoint, he's not that successful?
How about that Peabody he said he won?
McGentrix wrote:O'reilly is no match for the vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Unless you meant that the "vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television is no match for O'Reilly", in which case... I don't.
JustanObserver wrote:McGentrix wrote:O'reilly is no match for the vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Unless you meant that the "vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television is no match for O'Reilly", in which case... I don't.
Yeah - you know McGentrix.
He couldn't resist the unwieldy, backhanded try to get in a word of support... O'Reilly's a man after McG's own widdle bitty heart.
The reason the Democrats consistently fail in ratings on both radio and TV is the same reason they fail to win elections. They have nothing to say. What little they do manage to screech about is generally lies or half-truths.
Or outright stealing.
Just ask the kids at the Gloria Wise Girls & Boys Club.
I could have sworn that all of Hollywood was liberal democrats that poison our children's minds with all the TV and radio and movies they make. Now Sierra is telling me that Hollywood is a failure because they have higher ratings that O'Reilly?
Something is wrong with this picture.. help us out here Sierra. Neilson ratings keep telling me that Lost and Survivor beat the crap out of OReilly and Hannity when it comes to viewers.
SierraSong wrote:The reason the Democrats consistently fail in ratings on both radio and TV is the same reason they fail to win elections. They have nothing to say. What little they do manage to screech about is generally lies or half-truths.
That would be facinating... if it had anything to do with the subject of this thread.
And if you somehow think that the Republican talking heads do little more than "screech" out lies and half-truths themselves, you may need your head examined.
It's only a lie if he intends to deceive. I'm starting to think that he truly (however wrongly) believes everything he says.
snood wrote:JustanObserver wrote:McGentrix wrote:O'reilly is no match for the vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Unless you meant that the "vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television is no match for O'Reilly", in which case... I don't.
Yeah - you know McGentrix.
He couldn't resist the unwieldy, backhanded try to get in a word of support... O'Reilly's a man after McG's own widdle bitty heart.
You must have deep into that compost pile you call a brain to get that one snood. I bet you are very proud of yourself for coming off as a complete moron though.
I was not supporting O'Reilly, I was denigrating the public that watches American Idol and the other crap found on broadcast TV. Is that you? I bet you are a regular voter, aren't you.
O'Reilly or American Idol ... either way, the same company profits. I gotta say, they at least know what they're doing.
McGentrix wrote:snood wrote:JustanObserver wrote:McGentrix wrote:O'reilly is no match for the vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Unless you meant that the "vacuous entertainment found on broadcast television is no match for O'Reilly", in which case... I don't.
Yeah - you know McGentrix.
He couldn't resist the unwieldy, backhanded try to get in a word of support... O'Reilly's a man after McG's own widdle bitty heart.
You must have deep into that compost pile you call a brain to get that one snood. I bet you are very proud of yourself for coming off as a complete moron though.
I was not supporting O'Reilly, I was denigrating the public that watches American Idol and the other crap found on broadcast TV. Is that you? I bet you are a regular voter, aren't you.
Yeah, I know ,
McG - you don't even
care about those talking heads like Hannity, Limburger and O'Reilly... your whole raison d'etre posting on this thread was to make a comment on the mentality of the general tv viewing public.... I believe you, I really do....
I want to know what the phrase "You must have deep into that" is supposed to mean. Them there profound inty-lick-chew-alls like McWhitey just leave me behind when they gets to expoundin' . . .
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace