On Tuesday, Gabe Sherman of New York Magazine reported that Rupert Murdoch is set to pull the plug on "The O'Reilly Factor," amid accusations of sexual harassment against Bill O'Reilly.
Fox News recently paid $13 million to five women in order to settle their claims, and over 90 advertisers washed their hands of the long-time host. Meanwhile, a small but vocal group of feminists gathered outside Fox News headquarters to demand the firing of the beloved conservative commentator.
Shortly after O'Reilly flew the coop for a long vacation, presumably waiting for the heat to die down, Nielsen reported that "The O'Reilly Factor" turned in its best-ever ratings when the scandal broke, resulting in a 28 percent increase in viewership from the previous year.
This, of course, begs the question: Can Fox News survive in a post-O'Reilly era?
The answer, unfortunately, is no.
Who would take O'Reilly's place?
Setting aside the fact that, since 1996, Bill O'Reilly has piloted Fox News from a laughingstock to the most watched cable news channel, history shows that the only way to keep a ship from sinking is by having a replacement star waiting in the wings.
Such was the case with Megyn Kelly. When Kelly's departure was announced, many predicted doom and gloom for Fox News, but Rupert Murdoch had an ace up his sleeve by the name of Tucker Carlson, who turned out to be a rating goldmine.
Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be another Tucker Carlson waiting in the wings this time around.
Unless Fox News has inked a deal with Rush Limbaugh, there's nobody else out there with big enough guns to outdraw O'Reilly, and I doubt anyone is tapping Murdoch on the shoulder and saying, "Hey, don't you think it's time to give Greg Gutfeld yet another show?"
The only possible scenario that makes sense is to bump Tucker Carlson-- a proven performer-- to O'Reilly's time slot and fill Carlson's time slot with an up-and-comer like Tomi Lahren.
However, with Glenn Beck countersuing Lahren in an attempt to keep her from working, this doesn't seem plausible-- especially since Lahren is still under contract with The Blaze until September and Beck, like a psychologically abusive lover, refuses to let Lahren leave the house without his approval.
Besides, being a top performer at The Blaze isn't the same as being a top performer at Fox News.
Just because you hit .400 for the Binghamton Rumble Ponies in AA doesn't mean you'll be a hotshot for the New York Mets.
Murdoch risks alienating his audience
But the real mistake would be to kowtow to a gaggle of angry feminists. What message would that send to the so-called angry white male audience addicted to the Fox News Channel? That would be like Rachel Maddow donating her salary to the Pro-Life Action League and changing the name of her show to The Chick-fil-A Political Theatre Hour.
And let's not forget one critical detail: Bill O'Reilly hasn't been convicted of any wrongdoing. Settling a case out of court is not an admission of guilt.
Kowtowing to a gaggle of feminists is one thing when the angry feminists have a rock solid case to stand on, but kowtowing to the feminist crowd because there's a possibility that there might be something behind the sexual harassment accusations is absurd.
In fact, it's a solid nine on the 10-point Maxine Waters Absurdity Scale, because it's a lot like calling for Trump's impeachment before any evidence of wrongdoing has been found.
So, what is Rupert Murdoch to do?
Simple. Instead of canning Bill O'Reilly, extend his show to two hours instead of one. That will really give the feminists something to complain about, and when you stop to think about it, isn't that the whole point of Fox News in the first place?
