MSNBC Reaches New Low.Averaging 55,000 Viewers.Can Anyone Explain This Liberal Dilemma?

[Pogo]

...Al Jazeera is news, right? Low ratings in a news channel isn't necessarily bad. Not that they indicate it's well done, but high ratings tend to indicate it's not well done. There's a certain degree of inverse relationship.

And if you squint juuuust right you can see pigs fly. There is no need to always twist reality to fit your prism, Pogo. I assure you A-J America would rather have ratings that would attract advertisers and thereby allow them to pay their employees and keep the lights on. They recently replaced some of their American feed with A-J English shows, meaning those who signed on less than 2 years ago are being squeezed out. I wonder who will hire a talking head with A-J America on their resume?

SMH - you two have no clue how broadcast ratings work.

I don't know what Jazeera's ratings are (since I don't traffic in advertising) but again, you don't need to "lead" in the ratings to pay the bills. If the ratings of channels A, B, C, D and E fall in that order, they're all making money, even if E isn't making as much as A. They're all paying their bills because they're all selling ads --- that is, assuming selling ads is how they generate income, which is certainly not the only way. The only difference is A has more money left over than E does. So what? It's not some kind of sports event.

Can't comment on programming changes either but program changes happen for all sorts of reasons, not necessarily money or ratings.

I sense that summa y'all STILL haven't gotten over this idea that broadcast ratings measure some kind of "approval" vote. They don't. They measure attention, and that's a different animal.

---- which is why I point out that high ratings on a "news" channel are likely to be a red flag. News is neutral; it simply is what it is. If those hypothetical channels A through E above are doing straight accurate news (all thing being equal) their ratings should all be exactly the same. But if they're in a position to compete with each other, well that's a different story. Now you've got to start sweetening, tweaking and manipulating the news. Because you've got to do something that sets your channel apart from the others. And since you can't just manufacture news, you have to twist what's available. And the more you do that, the less objective you are.

In the old daze when "news" meant the 6pm alphabet network report, you got pretty much straight news. There wasn't the concept of "selling" news; it wasn't there for that purpose. It was there in fact to look good for the FCC that you were providing a public service. Nobody made money on it; those Huntley-Brinkleys and Douglas Edwardses and their ilk were subsidized by the Beverly Hillbillies and Mister Eds that came on after them.

That's why it's so hilarious when Brian Williams goes on Jimmy Fallon's Tonight show and says, "every night I'm down in the studio doing the broadcast that pays for your little hobby here", because the reality is the opposite.

Once again, Pogo, you lead with your monumental ignorance - and with studied verbosity - as though the number of words could hide your ignorance. A simple search of A-J America's ratings - a search that would have taken far less time than your response - reveals numbers so poor they make MSNBC look great, that A-J has recently made drastic cost-cutting moves and that one analyst described the station as an "irrelevant" news outlet. Rather than squirting your predictable silliness and wasting precious bandwidth please consider gathering a bit of info BEFORE you post.

Why would I give a shit what anybody's ratings are? Once again for the slow-eyed, I. Do. NOT. Buy. Or. Sell. Advertising. It's literally the only thing in broadcasting I've never done. It has no relevance what AJ's ratings are. What the hell would I do with that info anyway?

"Numbers so poor" -- compared to what...

Compared to what? Perhaps you didn't notice but you've been posting on the MSNBC ratings thread and yet even their PATHETIC ratings are many times those of A-J America. Jeez ... you must love listening to the sound of your voice, even if it's only in your otherwise empty head. A news station can't get much lamer than "irrelevant."

Ratings are always relative - so yes, "compared to what"? You can't come out with a value judgment without a comparator.

A rating number of X means ---- what? You don't have the slightest idea, do you? I suspect you think it's like some kind of ...what -- fooball score? You think ratings are -- what, some kind of absolute? Like a pH level or a currency value?

On what basis do you compare ratings of in this case MSNBC and Al Jazeera, neither of which I might add are posted in this thread? What's the point? What should the comparison be compared to what it is? Compared to a radio station? Compared to a newspaper?

Don't feel bad, we've got a wag on here trying to compare them to a football game. He's even sillier than you are.

 

[Pogo]

It is fascinating, I must say, that armchair wags are running around with this number (55,000 in the title) that nobody even bothered to document. Apparently we're all just supposed to take the OP's word for it -- oh, a thread is posted on the internets, it must be factual, let's run with it...

Partisan hacks.

 

[SAYIT]

It is fascinating, I must say, that armchair wags are running around with this number (55,000 in the title) that nobody even bothered to document. Apparently we're all just supposed to take the OP's word for it -- oh, a thread is posted on the internets, it must be factual, let's run with it...

Partisan hacks.

Your GOOGLE icon doesn't work? MSNBC's pitiful numbers have been compared here to those of both Fox News (of which they are a small fraction) and A-J America (which they dwarf). Rather than simply admit the obvious - that loony-lib MSNBC is lame and losing ground - you post mounds of silliness in a pathetic attempt to mitigate (or obfuscate) the obvious.

 

[Pogo]

It is fascinating, I must say, that armchair wags are running around with this number (55,000 in the title) that nobody even bothered to document. Apparently we're all just supposed to take the OP's word for it -- oh, a thread is posted on the internets, it must be factual, let's run with it...

Partisan hacks.

Your GOOGLE icon doesn't work? MSNBC's pitiful numbers have been compared here to those of both Fox News (of which they are a small fraction) and A-J America (which they dwarf). Rather than simply admit the obvious - that loony-lib MSNBC is lame and losing ground - you post mounds of silliness in a pathetic attempt to mitigate (or obfuscate) the obvious.

My Google works fine; I didn't write the OP. I'm saying you're all running with this number that nobody's ever seen.

What the number is is not the point; the point is y'all are just willing to take hearsay as gospel and run with it. That says a lot about what you're here for.

And once again, "lame", "pathetic" "dwarf" etc all relate to relative numbers -- the relativity of which you have show absolutely zero comprehension. Compared to what? Do you understand even what the phrase "compared to what" means? Doesn't seem so. You keep avoiding it like it's some sort of toxin.

I guess I'll have to keep stating the obvious until it sinks in -- you don't have the vaguest inkling what it is we're even talking about.

And if I DID Google that number and found -- whatever -- what would it mean?
You have no clue, do ya?

 

[HenryBHough]

News anchor wannabes need to pay attention to their made-up stage names!

Attention to that with which they rhyme.

Imagine:

Ed, rhymes with RED

Fred, rhymes with DEAD

Nancy/FANCY

Connie/COMMIE

Now, let's see......what could possibly rhyme with "Brian"?

 

[Pogo]

News anchor wannabes need to pay attention to their made-up stage names!

Attention to that with which they rhyme.

Imagine:

Ed, rhymes with RED

Fred, rhymes with DEAD

Nancy/FANCY

Connie/COMMIE

Now, let's see......what could possibly rhyme with "Brian"?

Good point.

What rhymes with "Tucker"?

 

[Politico]

And remember when we were all laughing at MSNBC when their average share of nightly viewers were around 300,000 while Fox was always over 2 Million? You have to wonder what it costs to air a 30 second ad by this point. Then again, who would want to advertise on MSNBC when no one with any real intelligence is watching. Maybe it's because they have the most bigoted/imbecilic/doltish band of democrats working the evening shift spewing lies about conservatives. And to think they haven't fired Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz by now. MSNBC: Night Of The Living Turkeys.

Found this earlier today:

Crowd of 54 347 makes case for Allen-Pearland to be national record for high school football attendance Dallas Morning News

A single high school football game nearly outdrew the average evening veiw of that crappy network.

HOLY CRAP BATMAN!

MSNBC doesn't even run real news and just sucks up to the government:

Nearly 7 in 10 reporters and journalist say that the Obama Administration has been spying or collected data on them, according to a Pew Research Center survey. Some are saying that the fear and threat of spying has effected how they write stories, handle sensitive information or pursue a source, with some leaving the field of investigative journalism, says RT’s Lindsay France.

What use is MSNBC if it won't hold the government to account, and we have to rely on a Russian funded media organization that spins propaganda to get decent news stories.

Yes let's make a point about MSNBC by posting a video from RT lol.

Pointing out that their content is more interesting and often more intelligent in discussion than on MSNBC. Trashy celebrity gossip and making big stories over superbowl equipment, doesn't stimulate the mind.

Two different things. MSNBC is uninteresting. RT insults peoples' intelligence.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Can anyone explain why anyone would watch a network getting sued for lying

...Fox getting sued LOL that is what I call lying ..Sweet ...........nobody is suing Brian Williams

Paris Votes To Sue Fox News
Huffington Post‎-14 hours ago
PARIS(AP) —Paris City Council authorized Mayor Anne Hidalgo on Wednesday to sue Fox news ...

 

[Pop23]

Can anyone explain why anyone would watch a network getting sued for lying

...Fox getting sued LOL that is what I call lying ..Sweet ...........nobody is suing Brian Williams

Paris Votes To Sue Fox News
Huffington Post‎-14 hours ago
PARIS(AP) —Paris City Council authorized Mayor Anne Hidalgo on Wednesday to sue Fox news ...

But they do, what network hasn't been sued??

MSNBC's ratings were less in an average night then the number of people that showed up to several college football team practice games.

Truly pathetic!

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Can anyone explain why anyone would watch a network getting sued for lying

...Fox getting sued LOL that is what I call lying ..Sweet ...........nobody is suing Brian Williams

Paris Votes To Sue Fox News
Huffington Post‎-14 hours ago
PARIS(AP) —Paris City Council authorized Mayor Anne Hidalgo on Wednesday to sue Fox news ...

But they do, what network hasn't been sued??

MSNBC's ratings were less in an average night then the number of people that showed up to several college football team practice games.

Truly pathetic!

sure gramps whatever you say wooo hooo

 

[Pop23]

Can anyone explain why anyone would watch a network getting sued for lying

...Fox getting sued LOL that is what I call lying ..Sweet ...........nobody is suing Brian Williams

Paris Votes To Sue Fox News
Huffington Post‎-14 hours ago
PARIS(AP) —Paris City Council authorized Mayor Anne Hidalgo on Wednesday to sue Fox news ...

But they do, what network hasn't been sued??

MSNBC's ratings were less in an average night then the number of people that showed up to several college football team practice games.

Truly pathetic!

sure gramps whatever you say wooo hooo

I get it

As always, you got nothin

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

And remember when we were all laughing at MSNBC when their average share of nightly viewers were around 300,000 while Fox was always over 2 Million? You have to wonder what it costs to air a 30 second ad by this point. Then again, who would want to advertise on MSNBC when no one with any real intelligence is watching. Maybe it's because they have the most bigoted/imbecilic/doltish band of democrats working the evening shift spewing lies about conservatives. And to think they haven't fired Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz by now. MSNBC: Night Of The Living Turkeys.

Found this earlier today:

Crowd of 54 347 makes case for Allen-Pearland to be national record for high school football attendance Dallas Morning News

A single high school football game nearly outdrew the average evening veiw of that crappy network.

HOLY CRAP BATMAN!

MSNBC doesn't even run real news and just sucks up to the government:

Nearly 7 in 10 reporters and journalist say that the Obama Administration has been spying or collected data on them, according to a Pew Research Center survey. Some are saying that the fear and threat of spying has effected how they write stories, handle sensitive information or pursue a source, with some leaving the field of investigative journalism, says RT’s Lindsay France.

What use is MSNBC if it won't hold the government to account, and we have to rely on a Russian funded media organization that spins propaganda to get decent news stories.

Yes let's make a point about MSNBC by posting a video from RT lol.

Pointing out that their content is more interesting and often more intelligent in discussion than on MSNBC. Trashy celebrity gossip and making big stories over superbowl equipment, doesn't stimulate the mind.

Two different things. MSNBC is uninteresting. RT insults peoples' intelligence.

Fox insults people's intelligence and its in poor tatste to watch that crap...

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Can anyone explain why anyone would watch a network getting sued for lying

...Fox getting sued LOL that is what I call lying ..Sweet ...........nobody is suing Brian Williams

Paris Votes To Sue Fox News
Huffington Post‎-14 hours ago
PARIS(AP) —Paris City Council authorized Mayor Anne Hidalgo on Wednesday to sue Fox news ...

But they do, what network hasn't been sued??

MSNBC's ratings were less in an average night then the number of people that showed up to several college football team practice games.

Truly pathetic!

sure gramps whatever you say wooo hooo

I get it

As always, you got nothin

sure gramps stay calm and masturbate to Fox news

 

[Roadrunner]

So to host their shows, they go out and get people they feel will push left wing politics the best.

Is that why conservative Joe Scarborough gets 3 hours per day while no one else - not even their star Rachel Maddow - gets more than 1 hour a day?

Joe Scarborough is not a conservative, he is an entertainer.

He will say anything MSNBC tells him to say.

 

[Mac1958]

So to host their shows, they go out and get people they feel will push left wing politics the best.

Is that why conservative Joe Scarborough gets 3 hours per day while no one else - not even their star Rachel Maddow - gets more than 1 hour a day?

Joe Scarborough is not a conservative, he is an entertainer.

He will say anything MSNBC tells him to say.

Further, he's definitely what they would call a RINO, and he criticizes his own party regularly.

Even still, MSNBC viewers would love to be rid of him, for purity's sake..

MSNBC is what it is, and I suspect everyone knows what that is.

.

 

[Roadrunner]

So to host their shows, they go out and get people they feel will push left wing politics the best.

Is that why conservative Joe Scarborough gets 3 hours per day while no one else - not even their star Rachel Maddow - gets more than 1 hour a day?

Joe Scarborough is not a conservative, he is an entertainer.

He will say anything MSNBC tells him to say.

Further, he's definitely what they would call a RINO, and he criticizes his own party regularly.

Even still, MSNBC viewers would love to be rid of him, for purity's sake..

MSNBC is what it is, and I suspect everyone knows what that is.

.

I last watched Mornin' Joe one morning when Mika was pawing all over Tiki Barber.

 

[Synthaholic]

All of these "examples" have been proven to be lies?

If you say so.

10. Was verified by the hotel manager. But if you want to be on Team Liar, I don't care; nothing new.

I don't say so. You are saying so.

But are these "tall tales" (lies), as you claim, or are you the liar?

Am I to take it that you don't believe Bryan Williams is a liar?

I'm starting to take it that you are a liar, since you are now deflecting instead of answering whether all of your examples are indeed "tall tales" (lies).

I'm 'starting to take it that you are a very lazy poster. I don't care about your broad sweeping baseless allegations. Go fishing somewhere else.

You made allegations. Have those allegations been proven?

Yes or no, you sniveling weasel.

 

[Synthaholic]

And remember when we were all laughing at MSNBC when their average share of nightly viewers were around 300,000 while Fox was always over 2 Million? You have to wonder what it costs to air a 30 second ad by this point. Then again, who would want to advertise on MSNBC when no one with any real intelligence is watching. Maybe it's because they have the most bigoted/imbecilic/doltish band of democrats working the evening shift spewing lies about conservatives. And to think they haven't fired Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz by now. MSNBC: Night Of The Living Turkeys.

Found this earlier today:

Crowd of 54 347 makes case for Allen-Pearland to be national record for high school football attendance Dallas Morning News

A single high school football game nearly outdrew the average evening veiw of that crappy network.

HOLY CRAP BATMAN!

MSNBC doesn't even run real news and just sucks up to the government:

Nearly 7 in 10 reporters and journalist say that the Obama Administration has been spying or collected data on them, according to a Pew Research Center survey. Some are saying that the fear and threat of spying has effected how they write stories, handle sensitive information or pursue a source, with some leaving the field of investigative journalism, says RT’s Lindsay France.

What use is MSNBC if it won't hold the government to account, and we have to rely on a Russian funded media organization that spins propaganda to get decent news stories.

Yes let's make a point about MSNBC by posting a video from RT lol.

Pointing out that their content is more interesting and often more intelligent in discussion than on MSNBC. Trashy celebrity gossip and making big stories over superbowl equipment, doesn't stimulate the mind.

Two different things. MSNBC is uninteresting. RT insults peoples' intelligence.

What's RT? Russia Today?

 

[Synthaholic]

So to host their shows, they go out and get people they feel will push left wing politics the best.

Is that why conservative Joe Scarborough gets 3 hours per day while no one else - not even their star Rachel Maddow - gets more than 1 hour a day?

Joe Scarborough is not a conservative, he is an entertainer.

He will say anything MSNBC tells him to say.

Bullshit.

 

[Synthaholic]

Further, he's definitely what they would call a RINO, and he criticizes his own party regularly.

What stance of his makes him a RINO? Rationality?

Are you looking for someone who never criticizes their own Party? You've got that already on FOX.