Theory and Society

, 40:315 | Cite as

A structural hermeneutics of The O’Reilly Factor



There has been a significant rise in opinion and talk-based programming on American cable news channels since the mid-1990s. These news analysis programs are often politically partisan in their interpretive approach. This article examines one of the most prominent and popular of these shows, The O’Reilly Factor using the theoretical tools of structural hermeneutics. The program produces a radically simple and partisan schema for interpreting the news, but to do so it relies on the constructed persona of the host, a complex underlying meaning structure formulated around binary oppositions, and a number of rhetorical techniques. The show simplifies, but is not itself simple. To simplify the news in a way that suggests partisan conclusions that still seem relevant rather than cartoonish, individual episodes and segments of the show frame issues in terms of a meaning structure that leads strongly to partisan conclusions, but affords an appearance of the reasonable consideration of diverse views. It is suggested that this kind of deep analysis of meaning structures is important for making sense of how news analysis programs and mediated partisanship function as a cultural system.


Media News analysis Structural hermeneutics Partisanship Cultural systems 


  1. Alexander, J. (2004). Cultural pragmatics: social performance between ritual and strategy. Sociological Theory, 22, 527–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, J., & Smith, P. (1993). The discourse of American civil society: a new proposal for cultural studies. Theory and Society, 22, 151–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander, J., & Smith, P. (2003). The strong program in cultural sociology: Elements of a structural hermeneutics. In J. Alexander (Ed.), The meanings of social life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, B. (2004). News flash: Journalism, infotainment and the bottom-line business of broadcast news. New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Auletta, K. (2003). Vox fox. The New Yorker. 26 May 2003.Google Scholar
  6. Bae, H. S. (1999). Product differentiation in cable programming: the case in the cable national all-news networks. Journal of Media Economics, 12(4), 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baum, M. A. (2003). Soft news goes to war: Public opinion and American foreign policy in the new media age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Baum, M. A., & Groeling, T. (2008). New media and the polarization of American political discourse. Political Communication, 25, 345–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ben-Porath, E. (2007). Internal fragmentation of the news: television news in dialogical format and its consequences for journalism. Journalism Studies, 8, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 2005. O’Reilly Factor flash. November 2, 2005. Retrieved September 17, 2009,
  11. 2006. O’Reilly Factor Flash. December 1, 2006. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  12. Borges, J. L. (1964). Labyrinths. New York: New Directions.Google Scholar
  13. Clayman, S. (2005). Arenas of interaction in the mediated public sphere. Poetics, 32, 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coe, K., Tewksbury, D., Bond, B. J., Drogos, K. L., Porter, R. W., Yahn, A., et al. (2008). Hostile news: Partisan use and perceptions of cable news programming. Journal of Communication, 58, 201–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Conway, M., Grabe, M. E., & Grieves, K. (2007). Villains, victims and the virtuous in Bill O’Reilly’s ‘No-Spin Zone’: revisiting world war propaganda techniques. Journalism Studies, 8(2), 197–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Williams, B. A. (2001). Let us infotain you: Politics in the new media environment. In W. L. Bennett & R. M. Entman (Eds.), Mediated politics: Communication in the future of democracy (pp. 160–181). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fishman, M. (1980). Manufacturing the news. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  18. Foucault, M. (1980). In C. Gordon (Ed.), Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  19. Fox News. (2007a). Whoopi Goldberg on Hollywood politics., February 2, 2007. Retrieved September 17, 2009.,2933,249899,00.html.
  20. Fox News. (2007b). The disgrace of Vermont., January 18, 2007. Retrieved September 17, 2009.,2933,244476,00.html.
  21. Fox News. (2009a). The O’Reilly factor: about the show. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  22. Fox News. (2009b). Gingrich on Bill Clinton and health care., September 23, 2009. Retrieved December 10, 2009.,2933,554224,00.html.
  23. Fox News. (2009c). Liberal one-two punch: education and media., September 30, 2009. Retrieved September 17, 2009.,2933,557983,00.html.
  24. Gans, H. (1979). Deciding what’s news. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  25. Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Goffman, E. (1963). On face-work. In Goffman (Ed.), Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
  27. Horton, D., & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.Google Scholar
  28. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jacobs, R. N. (2000). Race, media and the crisis of civil society: From the Watts Riots to Rodney King. Port Chester: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jakobson, R. (1990). Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. In L. Waugh & M. Monville-Burston (Eds.), On language: Roman Jakobson (pp. 115–133). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kurtz, H. (1997). Hot air: All talk, all the time. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  32. Los Angeles Times. (1995). Battle of the cable stars: Turner unfazed by Murdoch all-news network challenge. Los Angeles Times, November 30. Retrieved December 8, 2009.
  33. Media Matters for America. (2005a). O’Reilly defended S.F. comments but omitted key portion. Media matters for America, November 15, 2005. Retrieved on December 10, 2009.
  34. Media Matters for America. (2005b). O’Reilly said ACLU ‘certainly is aiding and abetting the enemy’; Gingrich joined in smearing group. Media matters for America, December 12, 2005. Retrieved on December 10, 2009.
  35. Morris, J. S. (2005). The Fox News factor. The Harvard Journal of Press/Politics, 10/3, 56–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Reilly, B. (2000). The O’Reilly Factor: The good, the bad, and the completely ridiculous in American life. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  37. O’Reilly, B. (2001). The no spin zone: Confrontations with the powerful and famous in America. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  38. O’Reilly, B. (2006). Culture warrior. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  39. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2004). Pew Research Center Biennial News Consumption Survey. The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Retrieved October 20, 2008.
  40. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2006). News Consumption and Believeability Study. The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Retrieved October 20, 2008
  41. Potter, D. (2006/7). His way: how Roger Ailes’ game plan created Fox’s cable domination. American Journalism Review, 28/6, 78.Google Scholar
  42. Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2007). The state of the news media 2007: An annual report on American Journalism. Retrieved December 10, 2009.
  43. Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2008). The state of the news media 2008: An annual report on American Journalism. Retrieved October 20, 2008.
  44. Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2009). The state of the news media 2009: An annual report on American Journalism. Retrieved December 10, 2009.
  45. Robinson, R. (1953). Plato’s earlier dialectic. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  46. Schudson, M. (2003). The sociology of news. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  47. Scott, G. A. (2002). Does Socrates have a method? Rethinking the Elenchus in Plato’s dialogues and beyond. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Silvia, T. (2001). Global news: Perspectives on the information age. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  49. Stelter, B. (2009). O’Reilly marks 100 months at no. 1. New York Times, April 1. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  50. Sunstein, C. (2001). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Tsfati, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2003). Do people watch what they do not trust?: Exploring the association between news media skepticism and exposure. Communication Research, 30/5, 504–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tuchman, G. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual: an examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77/4, 660–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tuchman, G. (1973). The technology of objectivity: doing ‘objective’ TV news film. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 2/3, 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vlastos, G. (1982). The Socratic Elenchus. The Journal of Philosophy, 79, 711–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Webster, J. G. (2005). Beneath the veneer of fragmentation: television audience polarization in a multichannel world. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 366–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Cultural SociologyYale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations