Well, I’m not saying people wouldn’t watch him - probably most of the same people who find a way to watch him now as early as he is on. What I meant is the the prime-time viewers wouldn’t watch him because of the perception I noted.
Example: I watch at least the first 15-20 minutes of O’Reilly most nights because he gets the best guests. I made it a point to watch once he started having Beck on, thinking maybe I was wrong in my judgement and that given a prime-time audience Beck could show me something I’d missed.
Instead, he clowns around (see previous post!) with O’Reilly and generally acts like a goofball. I’ve never heard him make a single intelligent point in his segment on BORs show - not even once. He screws around, he mugs for the camera, he engages with supposedly-comical repartee with BOR (who isn’t any funnier) and essentially wastes the viewers time. That segment has gone from “must watch” to “don’t watch” here.
Maybe he would be different in his own show, and I don’t say this just to irritate people who love Glenn Beck. But he squandered the one prime-time opportunity he was given in my opinion.
I think you sell them short in believing that any new network might be a rehash of Glen Beck’s Fox News program or even his radio program. Take a look at Joel Cheatwood’s track record. Quite frankly, the research on Beck’s TV program FAR EXCEEDS that of O’Reilly or others. The producers on that network have become lazy. Beck might see the writing on the wall, and bolt if they try to cut his budget on research.
I would look for more “educational” content like Beck’s Early American Heritage series, and more diversity in presentation. Just a hunch. Given a choice of an arrogant, interrupting O’Reilly and a fresh new approach like Beck/Cheatwood, I would dump O’Reilly in a heartbeat.