The O’Reilly Factor: 100 Months In A Row #1

April 18th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

o'reilly

Bill O’Reilly, my favorite conservative talk show host, has accomplished the impossible: his show The O’Reilly Factor is the number 1 in cable news for 100 consecutive months.

He has consistently defeated MSNBC and CNN during his timeslot (8PM). In fact, O’Reilly is so popular that he has more than the other shows at the same time combined.

The O’Reilly Factor led all programs with an average of 3,434,000 viewers in March. It posted a 29% year to year growth in viewership and a 43% increase in the 25-54 demo with an average of 755,000. The first quarter of 2009 was yet again a major success: he continued to beat all the competitors combined.

The man himself explained his success as follows: “I think it’s because we give stuff away or maybe folks just find the hour honest and fun to watch.”

What I like most about The Factor is O’Reilly’s honesty and his understanding of politics and conservatism. Unlike certain other talking heads, O’Reilly cannot be possibly called a “loon” or even an “ideological partisan hack.” He is conservative, sure, but he takes responsibility for mistakes, and he criticizes Republicans as well as Democrats.

I think that millions agree with me when I say that when you listen to O’Reilly, you know that he believes what he says, that he does not ’spin’ the news (much), but that he is a conservative who looks at politics from a conservative perspective. He’s honest, intelligent, passionate yet reasonable: and that’s exactly why his show been the number one in cable news for 100 months in a row already.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Michael Merritt
    April 19th, 2009 at 01:03
    Reply | Quote | #1

    O’Reilly isn’t perfect, but he’s better than a lot of the other talking heads on Fox by a long shot. I take issue with his preferred method of interviewing and some of his first amendment knowledge, but other than that, he’s a good guy.

  2. Interested
    April 19th, 2009 at 05:20
    Reply | Quote | #2

    this success deserves to have legislation put upon it to allow failed programs to have equal (or more) airtime.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.