Here’s why Rush survived pressure on advertisers while O’Reilly didn’t


#1

Here’s why Rush survived pressure on advertisers while O’Reilly didn’t
Posted by William A. Jacobson
Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 9:50pm

  1. Conduct (O’Reilly) versus Words (Limbaugh)

Conduct was at issue with O’Reilly. Multiple alleged instances over a long period of time involving demands for sexual favors in return for career advancement (or threats to damage careers) simply is more abhorrent than saying mean things to someone who testified on Capitol Hill about a political issue. Though O’Reilly never was proven to have engaged in the conduct, the notion of multiple high figure settlements worked against any presumption of innocence, even though lawsuits are settled all the time even if the accusations are not true. That O’Reilly never publicly and forcefully defended himself created the impression that there was a there there.

3. Centralized (O’Reilly) versus Dispersed Advertising (Limbaugh)

There was a relatively small stable of advertisers on O’Reilly, since it was just a one hour show on a single network. The advertiser base presented a relatively well defined target. With Limbaugh, by contrast, he was on hundreds of local radio stations, and a high percentage of the advertising was local. So the anti-Limbaugh forces had thousands of advertisers to deal with, from national brands to the local tire store. While Limbaugh’s national advertisers were targeted, they were less of a factor than the attacks on O’Reilly advertisers.

I think #3 was a big factor. With O’R the attackers could focus very narrowly. Rush’s business model - how he sells his show - makes for there being thousands of sponsors of his show. And makes sponsors part of his revenue, not all of it.


#2

Limbaugh is also much smarter than O’Reilly, Rush has been under constant attack for decades from far better organized groups and even a couple Presidents; not to mention some high profile members of Congress.

O’Reilly is a moron who is entirely dependent on his structure to deal with attacks, these “standard approaches” leave the target vulnerable and the moronic nature of O’Reilly meant he lacked the intelligence needed to turn the tables and put his attackers on the defensive.

Condemn Limbaugh and your own credibility will eventually diminish, condemn O’Reilly and there is no danger of personal loss of anything.

O’Reilly was a populist tool with no integrity, that is just not a foundation that will stand in the face of multiple storms.


#3

O’R had become rather narcissistic as time went by and as money filled his pockets. He was a struggling school teacher and then wannabe reporter when he leveraged himself into a spot of TV that resonated with the conservatives. I started watching O’R not long after he went on the air at FOX. And as time went by his ego grew as did his fan base. I have not been a regular watcher for the past several years, his arrogance just was out of control…


#4

Rush was dumped by Snapple which then proceeded to fade into near oblivion.


#5

Pretty good description of my reactions to Mr. O’R for quite some time now. I too had dropped watching his show on a regular basis several years ago. :Thud:


#6

The same thing started happening to Lifelock when they dropped Rush to appease the Left over that slutty college girl who went before Congress to say she wanted the taxpayers to give her 2 grand a year for birth control, Lifelock came running back when they realized how much business they were losing over their “stand”.

Also, Rush started his own ice tea company that is better than Snapple anyway, I order it all the time :slight_smile:


#7

I dumped O’Reilly when he went after the Red Cross for buying blood refrigerators so the massive amount of blood that was donated after 9/11 would not go to waste, O’Reilly thought they should have started a Red Cross handout program and give cash to 9/11 victims instead; I don’t know how much in donations he cost the Red Cross with that smear campaign but I lost all respect for his character and intelligence at that point.

Like Rush says, O’Reilly is the real life version of Ted Baxter


#8

I remember that, I think he aptly called her the Georgetown whore.


#9

[ATTACH]2852[/ATTACH]


#10

I don’t know the specifics of the case you’re referring to, but I don’t mourn the Red Cross suffering for donations. I’d happily see them go the way of the dinosaurs.


#11

My opinion was always that Oreilly was overblown anyhow. I do understand his ratings though. He was literally down the middle politically. You were never sure on what side of an issue he would fall.

How he was labeled as a Conservative always mystified me.


#12

O’R always impressed me as unprincipled and egotistical, playing envy politics.


#13

What’s your beef with Red Cross?


#14

I can’t remember a lot of the specifics, but the jist is that I understand that the bigwigs at least are up to their underkicked rear ends in “overhead expense” crookery.


#15

Fair enough. Don’t know much about that, but big charities end up with bureaucratic bloat a lot – it’s a thing that comes with spending other people’s money or from crony capitalist conditions that favor large corporations. I know they’re pretty good folks and do a lot of good around these parts.

Summary on Guidestar shows $2.66 billion in revenue and $2.72 billion in expenses and net assets of $986 million for 2016. It says the National Red Cross spend $2.4 billion in programs; which no doubt includes operational expenses; $116 million in administration; and $170 million on raising funds. Its 2015 Form 990 shows salaries and wages at $1.2 billion. President and CEO Gail McGovrern had a salary of $517 million with an additional $40,000 from related organizations. Fifteen additional officers had salaries above the quarter million mark. Lots of info there. Not sure how to judge it, but it is a multi-billion dollar organization.


#16

well first off if I may…they tell the truth with their banner. "WHen there’s an emergency, we’re the first ones there’ and finish it off with the truth…'asking for your money.

Don’t you remember 9-11. Very slow to never giving that money out…millions…that they took in…to any victims. Of course. they must pay their CEO’s and staff.


#17

See above. I don’t know anything about donations, millions and Red Cross and 9/11. Don’t know if I forgot or never read about it. I don’t know what someone’s beef with Red Cross might be, hence the question. Now I can find out.

I also don’t know what fair compensation is. I’m not sure anyone should make half a million a year, but the CEO of my local nonprofit hospital organization, a much, much smaller organization, pulls down $1.5 million per year.


#18

True. Ask ANY Vietnam Vet what he thinks of the Red Cross and be prepared to hear a lot of profanity. When GIs were being paid around $300–including combat pay–per month, the ARC was paying it’s people $200K per year and the DoD gave them SOLE authority to approve or disapprove requests for emergency leaves. The guy at Long Binh (about 30 miles NE of Saigon) had a date with a “doughnut dolly” one weekend and couldn’t be bothered to sign off to allow my CO to go home to Hawaii where his wife had miscarried their first child until AFTER his 4-day weekend–and she committed suicide in the interim before he could get home to be with her. I don’t give them a nickel.


#19

well let me tell you something else. GOODWILL IS NOT a charitable organization, they’re not even Christian. It is a for profit business an the guy who started it is a genius. Now this is fine. YOu get a charitable donations for giving to them and they generally sell the stuff so that it is available to a lot of people. Just know what you’re financing. The CEO makes about 4million per year. AND they’ve just recently gone to selling online. THey won’t sell jewely donations anymore in their stores. All jewelry is sent to the main office in Maryland so they can sort through it. Seems it has come to their attention that they’re missing some good stuff.


#20

Much smaller organization, with $45.7 million in expenses and $44.9 million in revenue in 2015. It gave out $17 million in grants. Its president and CEO James Gibbons received $587,000 from Goodwill that year. He also received another $127,000 from related organizations. Looks like he’s paid more than the CEO of the much larger Red Cross. But he’s not making $4 million per year from Goodwill Industries. Goodwill has nine other officers who are paid between $100,000 and $200,000 per year. I’ve viewed Goodwill with some suspicion over the years.