Survey:Melissa Harris Perry Needs A New Job. So, What Should Be Her Next "Hard Working Career"?

[Rexx Taylor]

Tampon earring model. It's Spring and the new cuntrag designs will be out soon. I think we're all excited to see what innovations will be out there and how they look hanging from some moron's earlobes.

she should of called her show,,"All White People Are Racists".

 

[Rambunctious]

I hear Al Sharpton will soon need a chin and ass wiper...

 

[flacaltenn]

I think Hilliary is gonna need a replacement for Huma Abedin in a couple months..
Perfect match..

 

[flacaltenn]

Or maybe a job at a California vineyard in their tasting room. She good at whine..

 

[JQPublic1]

Considering her Ph.D. and nominal journalistic skills, Melissa will do just fine. B.E.T. and other Black media outlets would be happy to have her. Noticeably though, there is a clandestine element occurring in the media. Progressive or liberal talk shows have taken a substantial hit over the past few years. Olbermann, Sharpton, Shultz and now Harris. Conservative media has expanded without a single loss that I know of. Even the racist hacks have enjoyed a splurge in popularity. With fewer voices for Liberalism and freedom, the RW zealots and racists have an open field to spew their propaganda without opposition. This is the equivalent of "book burning." And we know where that leads....

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Semen retriever at cow farms.

 

[Oldstyle]

Tampon earring model. It's Spring and the new cuntrag designs will be out soon. I think we're all excited to see what innovations will be out there and how they look hanging from some moron's earlobes.

she should of called her show,,"All White People Are Racists".

She'll do what all progressives do when they can't cut it in the real world...she'll work "educating" our young people at the college level! You can take her classes..."Black Lives Matter" and "Wake the Vote" at Wake Forest...this next semester. (I'm not kidding...that's what they're called!)

 

[Oldstyle]

Considering her Ph.D. and nominal journalistic skills, Melissa will do just fine. B.E.T. and other Black media outlets would be happy to have her. Noticeably though, there is a clandestine element occurring in the media. Progressive or liberal talk shows have taken a substantial hit over the past few years. Olbermann, Sharpton, Shultz and now Harris. Conservative media has expanded without a single loss that I know of. Even the racist hacks have enjoyed a splurge in popularity. With fewer voices for Liberalism and freedom, the RW zealots and racists have an open field to spew their propaganda without opposition. This is the equivalent of "book burning." And we know where that leads....

What "clandestine element" are you referring to? A lack of ratings? Dude...if nobody is willing to watch your show because they think you're full of shit...there is nothing "clandestine" about your show being cancelled. Nobody watching...means no sponsors buying air time...means no network! Olbermann was a sputtering idiot. Sharpton is a buffoon. Shultz was a blowhard. Harris blames a lack of network support on her being black.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

did she ever claim that white people created aids to take out all the gays and blacks?

 

[JQPublic1]

Considering her Ph.D. and nominal journalistic skills, Melissa will do just fine. B.E.T. and other Black media outlets would be happy to have her. Noticeably though, there is a clandestine element occurring in the media. Progressive or liberal talk shows have taken a substantial hit over the past few years. Olbermann, Sharpton, Shultz and now Harris. Conservative media has expanded without a single loss that I know of. Even the racist hacks have enjoyed a splurge in popularity. With fewer voices for Liberalism and freedom, the RW zealots and racists have an open field to spew their propaganda without opposition. This is the equivalent of "book burning." And we know where that leads....

What "clandestine element" are you referring to? A lack of ratings? Dude...if nobody is willing to watch your show because they think you're full of shit...there is nothing "clandestine" about your show being cancelled. Nobody watching...means no sponsors buying air time...means no network! Olbermann was a sputtering idiot. Sharpton is a buffoon. Shultz was a blowhard. Harris blames a lack of network support on her being black.

I know about the Nielsen ratings system and how it works. It isn't a matter of how many people are watching the show:

To be sure, networks are interested in knowing how many people watch their programming, and freely tout or play down Nielsen’s wider audience measurements. But the numbers that networks and advertisers actually use — to sell ads, to set prices, and to decide on the fate of a show — are commercial ratings. In other words, advertisers don’t care how many people are watching a show nearly as much as they care how many people are watching their ads. Nielsen provides this number, which takes into account everything from next-day DVR viewing to fast-forwarding through commercials. If every Nielsen Family watched a show the day after it aired but skipped through all its ads, that show would probably be canceled.

Nielsen's ratings are based on random samples where every household member of the "Nielsen families" is equipped with a remote box adorned with buttons to record their tv watching experiences. These 200,000 families are the people who decide what shows stay or go. But it isn't the show that matters, it is how long they watch the commercials. But independent of that, If an advertiser doesn't like liberals they can always blame the ratings and manage to keep their liberal customers from being offended.

Until recently, progressive talks shows were tolerated by RW business interests if the commercials they paid for were being watched during those shows. But now, with so much at stake in the political arena, the livelihoods of liberal tv talk show hosts are hanging precariously over an abyss.
WHY? Because more White people are being seduced into the fold of RW neoconservatism and liberal opinion tv is suffering because of it.

 

[Zander]

Glory hole service provider.

 

[Oldstyle]

Considering her Ph.D. and nominal journalistic skills, Melissa will do just fine. B.E.T. and other Black media outlets would be happy to have her. Noticeably though, there is a clandestine element occurring in the media. Progressive or liberal talk shows have taken a substantial hit over the past few years. Olbermann, Sharpton, Shultz and now Harris. Conservative media has expanded without a single loss that I know of. Even the racist hacks have enjoyed a splurge in popularity. With fewer voices for Liberalism and freedom, the RW zealots and racists have an open field to spew their propaganda without opposition. This is the equivalent of "book burning." And we know where that leads....

What "clandestine element" are you referring to? A lack of ratings? Dude...if nobody is willing to watch your show because they think you're full of shit...there is nothing "clandestine" about your show being cancelled. Nobody watching...means no sponsors buying air time...means no network! Olbermann was a sputtering idiot. Sharpton is a buffoon. Shultz was a blowhard. Harris blames a lack of network support on her being black.

I know about the Nielsen ratings system and how it works. It isn't a matter of how many people are watching the show:

To be sure, networks are interested in knowing how many people watch their programming, and freely tout or play down Nielsen’s wider audience measurements. But the numbers that networks and advertisers actually use — to sell ads, to set prices, and to decide on the fate of a show — are commercial ratings. In other words, advertisers don’t care how many people are watching a show nearly as much as they care how many people are watching their ads. Nielsen provides this number, which takes into account everything from next-day DVR viewing to fast-forwarding through commercials. If every Nielsen Family watched a show the day after it aired but skipped through all its ads, that show would probably be canceled.

Nielsen's ratings are based on random samples where every household member of the "Nielsen families" is equipped with a remote box adorned with buttons to record their tv watching experiences. These 200,000 families are the people who decide what shows stay or go. But it isn't the show that matters, it is how long they watch the commercials. But independent of that, If an advertiser doesn't like liberals they can always blame the ratings and manage to keep their liberal customers from being offended.

Until recently, progressive talks shows were tolerated by RW business interests if the commercials they paid for were being watched during those shows. But now, with so much at stake in the political arena, the livelihoods of liberal tv talk show hosts are hanging precariously over an abyss.
WHY? Because more White people are being seduced into the fold of RW neoconservatism and liberal opinion tv is suffering because of it.

With all due respect, JQ...this isn't about Nielson ratings...it's about the general public not trusting what liberal talk show hosts are telling them and tuning them out. There's little respect these days for the journalistic integrity of MSNBC, or even for the New York Times or news magazines like Time for that matter. Why? Because they allowed themselves to become so slanted in their coverage that you couldn't believe what they were telling you.

 

[JQPublic1]

Considering her Ph.D. and nominal journalistic skills, Melissa will do just fine. B.E.T. and other Black media outlets would be happy to have her. Noticeably though, there is a clandestine element occurring in the media. Progressive or liberal talk shows have taken a substantial hit over the past few years. Olbermann, Sharpton, Shultz and now Harris. Conservative media has expanded without a single loss that I know of. Even the racist hacks have enjoyed a splurge in popularity. With fewer voices for Liberalism and freedom, the RW zealots and racists have an open field to spew their propaganda without opposition. This is the equivalent of "book burning." And we know where that leads....

What "clandestine element" are you referring to? A lack of ratings? Dude...if nobody is willing to watch your show because they think you're full of shit...there is nothing "clandestine" about your show being cancelled. Nobody watching...means no sponsors buying air time...means no network! Olbermann was a sputtering idiot. Sharpton is a buffoon. Shultz was a blowhard. Harris blames a lack of network support on her being black.

I know about the Nielsen ratings system and how it works. It isn't a matter of how many people are watching the show:

To be sure, networks are interested in knowing how many people watch their programming, and freely tout or play down Nielsen’s wider audience measurements. But the numbers that networks and advertisers actually use — to sell ads, to set prices, and to decide on the fate of a show — are commercial ratings. In other words, advertisers don’t care how many people are watching a show nearly as much as they care how many people are watching their ads. Nielsen provides this number, which takes into account everything from next-day DVR viewing to fast-forwarding through commercials. If every Nielsen Family watched a show the day after it aired but skipped through all its ads, that show would probably be canceled.

Nielsen's ratings are based on random samples where every household member of the "Nielsen families" is equipped with a remote box adorned with buttons to record their tv watching experiences. These 200,000 families are the people who decide what shows stay or go. But it isn't the show that matters, it is how long they watch the commercials. But independent of that, If an advertiser doesn't like liberals they can always blame the ratings and manage to keep their liberal customers from being offended.

Until recently, progressive talks shows were tolerated by RW business interests if the commercials they paid for were being watched during those shows. But now, with so much at stake in the political arena, the livelihoods of liberal tv talk show hosts are hanging precariously over an abyss.
WHY? Because more White people are being seduced into the fold of RW neoconservatism and liberal opinion tv is suffering because of it.

With all due respect, JQ...this isn't about Nielson ratings...it's about the general public not trusting what liberal talk show hosts are telling them and tuning them out. There's little respect these days for the journalistic integrity of MSNBC, or even for the New York Times or news magazines like Time for that matter. Why? Because they allowed themselves to become so slanted in their coverage that you couldn't believe what they were telling you.

Well, I respectfully ask you this: How did you come to your conclusion? Faux News isn't the paragon of truth and virtue any more than MSNBC or other major media sources you mentioned. Yet, because of their "conservative" slant their talking heads remain viable...regardless of how truthful their presentations are.. Conservative fairy tales sell well in this country and so it seems that platform is good at telling Americans what they WANT to hear rather than the truth. The truth doesn't sell, especially when it uncovers racism and bigotry.

 

[Oldstyle]

Considering her Ph.D. and nominal journalistic skills, Melissa will do just fine. B.E.T. and other Black media outlets would be happy to have her. Noticeably though, there is a clandestine element occurring in the media. Progressive or liberal talk shows have taken a substantial hit over the past few years. Olbermann, Sharpton, Shultz and now Harris. Conservative media has expanded without a single loss that I know of. Even the racist hacks have enjoyed a splurge in popularity. With fewer voices for Liberalism and freedom, the RW zealots and racists have an open field to spew their propaganda without opposition. This is the equivalent of "book burning." And we know where that leads....

What "clandestine element" are you referring to? A lack of ratings? Dude...if nobody is willing to watch your show because they think you're full of shit...there is nothing "clandestine" about your show being cancelled. Nobody watching...means no sponsors buying air time...means no network! Olbermann was a sputtering idiot. Sharpton is a buffoon. Shultz was a blowhard. Harris blames a lack of network support on her being black.

I know about the Nielsen ratings system and how it works. It isn't a matter of how many people are watching the show:

To be sure, networks are interested in knowing how many people watch their programming, and freely tout or play down Nielsen’s wider audience measurements. But the numbers that networks and advertisers actually use — to sell ads, to set prices, and to decide on the fate of a show — are commercial ratings. In other words, advertisers don’t care how many people are watching a show nearly as much as they care how many people are watching their ads. Nielsen provides this number, which takes into account everything from next-day DVR viewing to fast-forwarding through commercials. If every Nielsen Family watched a show the day after it aired but skipped through all its ads, that show would probably be canceled.

Nielsen's ratings are based on random samples where every household member of the "Nielsen families" is equipped with a remote box adorned with buttons to record their tv watching experiences. These 200,000 families are the people who decide what shows stay or go. But it isn't the show that matters, it is how long they watch the commercials. But independent of that, If an advertiser doesn't like liberals they can always blame the ratings and manage to keep their liberal customers from being offended.

Until recently, progressive talks shows were tolerated by RW business interests if the commercials they paid for were being watched during those shows. But now, with so much at stake in the political arena, the livelihoods of liberal tv talk show hosts are hanging precariously over an abyss.
WHY? Because more White people are being seduced into the fold of RW neoconservatism and liberal opinion tv is suffering because of it.

With all due respect, JQ...this isn't about Nielson ratings...it's about the general public not trusting what liberal talk show hosts are telling them and tuning them out. There's little respect these days for the journalistic integrity of MSNBC, or even for the New York Times or news magazines like Time for that matter. Why? Because they allowed themselves to become so slanted in their coverage that you couldn't believe what they were telling you.

Well, I respectfully ask you this: How did you come to your conclusion? Faux News isn't the paragon of truth and virtue any more than MSNBC or other major media sources you mentioned. Yet, because of their "conservative" slant their talking heads remain viable...regardless of how truthful their presentations are.. Conservative fairy tales sell well in this country and so it seems that platform is good at telling Americans what they WANT to hear rather than the truth. The truth doesn't sell, especially when it uncovers racism and bigotry.

So what you're basically saying is that FOX News succeeds because most Americans are conservative? And that networks like MSNBC flounder because few Americans are far left liberals? Could it possibly be that Americans are smarter than you give them credit for? That they understand that MSNBC and CNN are slanted to the left...and that FOX News is slanted to the right? That they came to view Keith Olbermann as a ranting buffoon? You can BE slanted, JQ but only to a point...when you are no longer believable because you've stopped even attempting to provide factual news...you're going to lose your audience. Olbermann turned his show into farce and was too arrogant to realize it was happening.

 

[Oldstyle]

As for what is "truth"? Was the story that first came out about Mike Brown or Trayvon Martin the "truth" or was what MSNBC reported a fabrication of what a small group of liberals WANTED those two young men to be? When you manipulate the truth to make what's happened conform to your political views then you aren't telling the "truth"...you're a propagandist.

 

[JQPublic1]

So what you're basically saying is that FOX News succeeds because most Americans are conservative? And that networks like MSNBC flounder because few Americans are far left liberals?

No, it isn't that most Americans are conservative, FAUX News just tells them what they want to hear and the truth then no longer matters. Networks like MSNBC flounder because the majority of Americans do not want to hear anything to remind them how racist and corrupt this country is. Do that and it is an automatic fail.

Could it possibly be that Americans are smarter than you give them credit for? That they understand that MSNBC and CNN are slanted to the left...and that FOX News is slanted to the right?

Smartness is not the issue. The cancelled Liberal talk shows may have had millions of viewers but the Nielsen factor is what counts. If those 200, 000 families were all "conservatives and made it a strategy to not watch the commercials on liberal talk shows, the millions of viewers who liked those shows didn't matter. You can see the case for claims of corruption here can' you?

That they came to view Keith Olbermann as a ranting buffoon? You can BE slanted, JQ but only to a point...when you are no longer believable because you've stopped even attempting to provide factual news...you're going to lose your audience. Olbermann turned his show into farce and was too arrogant to realize it was happening.

I don't think Keith Olbermann was near as ranting a buffoon as Hannity or Bill O'reilly. Those 200,000 families were paid well to favor those idiots and watch their commercials.

As for what is "truth"? Was the story that first came out about Mike Brown or Trayvon Martin the "truth" or was what MSNBC reported a fabrication of what a small group of liberals WANTED those two young men to be?

That has nothing to do with the 200,000 families who pressed the buttons on their little boxes as instructed.

When you manipulate the truth to make what's happened conform to your political views then you aren't telling the "truth"...you're a propagandist.

When you control the random samples that affect a show's rating, the truth is little more than a speed bump in the road. Liberals, apparently have little or no control over that process.

 

[Oldstyle]

So what you're basically saying is that FOX News succeeds because most Americans are conservative? And that networks like MSNBC flounder because few Americans are far left liberals?

No, it isn't that most Americans are conservative, FAUX News just tells them what they want to hear and the truth then no longer matters. Networks like MSNBC flounder because the majority of Americans do not want to hear anything to remind them how racist and corrupt this country is. Do that and it is an automatic fail.

Could it possibly be that Americans are smarter than you give them credit for? That they understand that MSNBC and CNN are slanted to the left...and that FOX News is slanted to the right?

Smartness is not the issue. The cancelled Liberal talk shows may have had millions of viewers but the Nielsen factor is what counts. If those 200, 000 families were all "conservatives and made it a strategy to not watch the commercials on liberal talk shows, the millions of viewers who liked those shows didn't matter. You can see the case for claims of corruption here can' you?

That they came to view Keith Olbermann as a ranting buffoon? You can BE slanted, JQ but only to a point...when you are no longer believable because you've stopped even attempting to provide factual news...you're going to lose your audience. Olbermann turned his show into farce and was too arrogant to realize it was happening.

I don't think Keith Olbermann was near as ranting a buffoon as Hannity or Bill O'reilly. Those 200,000 families were paid well to favor those idiots and watch their commercials.

As for what is "truth"? Was the story that first came out about Mike Brown or Trayvon Martin the "truth" or was what MSNBC reported a fabrication of what a small group of liberals WANTED those two young men to be?

That has nothing to do with the 200,000 families who pressed the buttons on their little boxes as instructed.

When you manipulate the truth to make what's happened conform to your political views then you aren't telling the "truth"...you're a propagandist.

When you control the random samples that affect a show's rating, the truth is little more than a speed bump in the road. Liberals, apparently have little or no control over that process.

Let me see if I follow your "logic" here...

You believe that most Americans are actually liberals...yet they've been tricked with "lies" that FOX News tells them which prompts them to watch FOX News rather than MSNBC? And that somehow conservatives are also controlling the Nielsen ratings to get liberal shows cancelled?

I'm curious...did someone TELL you that was what was going on...or is this a theory you came up with on your own?

 

[JQPublic1]

So what you're basically saying is that FOX News succeeds because most Americans are conservative? And that networks like MSNBC flounder because few Americans are far left liberals?

No, it isn't that most Americans are conservative, FAUX News just tells them what they want to hear and the truth then no longer matters. Networks like MSNBC flounder because the majority of Americans do not want to hear anything to remind them how racist and corrupt this country is. Do that and it is an automatic fail.

Could it possibly be that Americans are smarter than you give them credit for? That they understand that MSNBC and CNN are slanted to the left...and that FOX News is slanted to the right?

Smartness is not the issue. The cancelled Liberal talk shows may have had millions of viewers but the Nielsen factor is what counts. If those 200, 000 families were all "conservatives and made it a strategy to not watch the commercials on liberal talk shows, the millions of viewers who liked those shows didn't matter. You can see the case for claims of corruption here can' you?

That they came to view Keith Olbermann as a ranting buffoon? You can BE slanted, JQ but only to a point...when you are no longer believable because you've stopped even attempting to provide factual news...you're going to lose your audience. Olbermann turned his show into farce and was too arrogant to realize it was happening.

I don't think Keith Olbermann was near as ranting a buffoon as Hannity or Bill O'reilly. Those 200,000 families were paid well to favor those idiots and watch their commercials.

As for what is "truth"? Was the story that first came out about Mike Brown or Trayvon Martin the "truth" or was what MSNBC reported a fabrication of what a small group of liberals WANTED those two young men to be?

That has nothing to do with the 200,000 families who pressed the buttons on their little boxes as instructed.

When you manipulate the truth to make what's happened conform to your political views then you aren't telling the "truth"...you're a propagandist.

When you control the random samples that affect a show's rating, the truth is little more than a speed bump in the road. Liberals, apparently have little or no control over that process.

Let me see if I follow your "logic" here...

You believe that most Americans are actually liberals...yet they've been tricked with "lies" that FOX News tells them which prompts them to watch FOX News rather than MSNBC? And that somehow conservatives are also controlling the Nielsen ratings to get liberal shows cancelled?

I'm curious...did someone TELL you that was what was going on...or is this a theory you came up with on your own?

Here is my logic: Many Americans are politically neutral...that is how governmental power changes from liberal to conservative and back again from time to time. Are you still with me? Now, let's eliminate all the crap about that and get to the core of why progressive or liberal talk shows of late are cancelled more frequently than right wing talk shows. The simple answer s linked to the 200,000 family sample used in the Nielsen ratings. When you get the opportunity read:
The Outrage Industry: Political Opinion Media and the New Incivility
By Jeffrey M. Berry, Sarah Sobieraj

 

[Oldstyle]

You want me to go out and buy a book that will explain how the Nielsen ratings are being used by conservatives to get liberals off the air? I'm sorry, JQ...but I like to read things that are at least a little reality based. I won't be spending money on "The Outrage Industry". If you'd like to explain (since ostensibly you HAVE read this informative tome?) how the whole Nielsen ratings thing is being manipulated to destroy liberal expression in the media...I would LOVE to hear what you've got to say!

 

[JQPublic1]

You want me to go out and buy a book that will explain how the Nielsen ratings are being used by conservatives to get liberals off the air? I'm sorry, JQ...but I like to read things that are at least a little reality based. I won't be spending money on "The Outrage Industry". If you'd like to explain (since ostensibly you HAVE read this informative tome?) how the whole Nielsen ratings thing is being manipulated to destroy liberal expression in the media...I would LOVE to hear what you've got to say!

1. The "tome" is based on a study. And you can probably find a copy in your local Library...that is, if you are really interested.

2. The Internet is rife with examples of bias in broadcasting and politics affects it all. To be brief I will give you a good example of that.

In 2003 the Phil Donahue show was the highest rated show on MSNBC, yet, the show was cancelled after the host openly opposed the Iraq invasion. I don't believe things just happen for no apparent reason. For me , the Donahue shoe cancellation is a direct link to the political expediencies the RW Nielsen company continues to exert on foes of it's corporate stockholders...