I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
1.3 billion in total carriage fees. they dont need one goddamn cent from advertising to be profitable.
word is since they are due for renegotiation in 23 and 24 they want that increased to 1.8.......
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
1.3 billion in total carriage fees. they dont need one goddamn cent from advertising to be profitable.
word is since they are due for renegotiation in 23 and 24 they want that increased to 1.8.......
Carriage fees from who? Is that AT&T, cable, or the total of all them?
Also, that's a big number, but what's their expense line? They have an EPS of $2.80 which is fine, but not out of this world. Neflix is almost $10, Chase is $13. So advertising dollars are important.
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
Correct, no matter how much some want to spin it otherwise, what happened yesterday was good for our country.
Sure if you think silencing one of the only critical truth telling voices of all time is good for democracy...
You've really got your old school Stephen Colbert fake conservative thing going today.
I'm rewriting my company safety manual to cover situations and practices that we will never be affected by, in order to do business with one of our larger corporate clients that require a one size fits all all industry safety program. Lost in the halls of a bureaucratic nightmare. I am losing sanity to all of the hollow verbiage that will not actually make anyone safer, but could save our customer in the event that something happens to one of us. Basically I am in the thralls of the deep state and trying to cast off my shackles.
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
this is great point. this will likely have them burrow further down the hole.
Without a doubt. He will probably start a crazy-ass podcast that they'll all flock to or something, and it will go the way of Alex Jones.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
Correct, no matter how much some want to spin it otherwise, what happened yesterday was good for our country.
Sure if you think silencing one of the only critical truth telling voices of all time is good for democracy...
You've really got your old school Stephen Colbert fake conservative thing going today.
I'm rewriting my company safety manual to cover situations and practices that we will never be affected by, in order to do business with one of our larger corporate clients that require a one size fits all all industry safety program. Lost in the halls of a bureaucratic nightmare. I am losing sanity to all of the hollow verbiage that will not actually make anyone safer, but could save our customer in the event that something happens to one of us. Basically I am in the thralls of the deep state and trying to cast off my shackles.
So similar story.. and maybe a word of caution. About a decade ago we won a deal with a major corporation. We already had plenty of deals with bigger ones, but these guys had the strangest requirement. They required a BCP in the event of a Pandemic. We were so annoyed that we had to put this together for something so stupid as a global pandemic... We didn't know shit.
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
Correct, no matter how much some want to spin it otherwise, what happened yesterday was good for our country.
Sure if you think silencing one of the only critical truth telling voices of all time is good for democracy...
You've really got your old school Stephen Colbert fake conservative thing going today.
I'm rewriting my company safety manual to cover situations and practices that we will never be affected by, in order to do business with one of our larger corporate clients that require a one size fits all all industry safety program. Lost in the halls of a bureaucratic nightmare. I am losing sanity to all of the hollow verbiage that will not actually make anyone safer, but could save our customer in the event that something happens to one of us. Basically I am in the thralls of the deep state and trying to cast off my shackles.
So similar story.. and maybe a word of caution. About a decade ago we won a deal with a major corporation. We already had plenty of deals with bigger ones, but these guys had the strangest requirement. They required a BCP in the event of a Pandemic. We were so annoyed that we had to put this together for something so stupid as a global pandemic... We didn't know shit.
Yes there is a requirement for a global pandemic preparedness involved in this, because even though the governments of the world couldn't get it right our small (under 50 employees) company needs to be ready for anything..It seems the biggest concern though is that we have a plan in place to provide full service and all staffing of their needs should a pandemic wipeout our entire workforce. Basically a way around force majeure clauses
Post edited by static111 on
Scio me nihil scire
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,333
Tucker who? Fox News hosts avoid Carlson's name after ouster
By DAVID BAUDER
Today
NEW YORK (AP) — The day he was fired, Tucker Carlson was nearly invisible on the Fox News prime-time lineup that he used to dominate.
“We're not talking about him,” former colleague Sean Hannity said in one of the two very brief mentions of Carlson's name on Fox News on Monday night. In contrast, his ouster was the lead story on ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts.
Carlson was abruptly bounced from his popular prime-time show earlier in the day without any explanation from Fox. It was less than one week after Fox had agreed to pay $787 million to settle a lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems over the network's dissemination of bogus election conspiracy theories, and it came as more legal threats loom.
Brian Kilmeade took over Carlson's hour, telling viewers that Carlson and Fox had agreed to part ways, “as you may have heard.” He swiftly moved on to other stories.
Hannity led his hour-long broadcast with a story on Hunter Biden, the president's son, and interviewed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin.
Carlson's name came up when Hannity did a segment on the other big media story of the day, CNN's firing of anchor Don Lemon. He brought on Kellyanne Conway, former aide to President Donald Trump, to criticize Lemon as a studio audience cheered.
“We're not talking about Tucker,” Hannity said, unprompted. “I don't have any details on it. He had a massive audience and he had a huge following. This guy (Lemon) had nobody.”
Fox's other prime-time host, Laura Ingraham, didn't mention Carlson. Instead, she criticized Democrats in her lead story, “Whatever Happened to Hope and Change?” She also did a segment on a contest in Belgium where people pretended to screech like seagulls.
Carlson, Hannity and Ingraham appeared close in November 2020. That's when they engaged in a three-way text conversation bashing their own network's news division following the presidential election, according to documents revealed earlier this year as part of Dominion's lawsuit.
Fox has said that rotating guest hosts will occupy Carlson's old time slot until a full-time replacement is named.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,333
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,333
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
It will be interesting to see Tucker vs. the Time Slot, if you will. We've largely forgotten about Bill O'Riley but times continue to evolve in worse and more cultish ways.
My guess is that the people upset with Fox News are a loud but small minority on Twitter and that most viewers will continue to watch the channel regardless of on-air personalities. But I don't know that means that Tucker is going to fall into obscurity at the same rate.
Oh well, none of this matters. At the end of the day, there's a huge market for "news" that starts with "wait until you hear this outrageous story" and someone will be there fill that demand. The rest of this is just a sideshow to the growing anger of a third of America.
"We" have only forgotten about Bill Oreiily because that's what the deep state wanted. Sheeple!
I think you mean the Deep State threw the switch on the Covid microchip, don’t you?
I’m loving the Fauxsnooze meltdown but it’s only going to make things worse. Their viewers aren’t going to jump to some reasonable source for their news.
True, This had nothing to do with lies and costing the company 3/4 bn dollars. It was the deep state getting rid of critical truth telling media just like the fascist dictatorships that the radical left want the US to become.
Bill O'Reilly had more viewers than Tucker when he was canned. No one is untouchable. I also read that many companies refused to advertise with him. Viewers mean nothing if they don't drive up advertising dollars, so presumably the value of the viewers wasn't 'optimized'.
I fail to see what this comment has to do with the deep state victimization of Tucker "America's hero" Carlson? Are you saying the deep state will see to it that no woke advertising dollars come his way ensuring a much lower viewership wherever he lands next? If so that makes perfect sense.
Haha, no. I was talking about your first sentence, the 750mm settlement. No one is untouchable when you cost your company that much money. And while he was a ratings juggernaut in cable, I'm not sure that translated to advertising dollars that matched that viewership. If Little House on the Prairie pulled in 2.5MM viewers every single night, the ad dollars would be enormous. From what I read, too many companies are hands off on his show.
Because they have been directed by the deep state to spend their dollars elsewhere!
Undoubtedly.
Some on the right say that Tucker will just be stronger somewhere else. I call total bullshit on that. Where's Bill? Still doing low rent talks? What about Megyn Kelly? The reality is that Tucker might make more money somewhere else, but his reach is diminished. Nothing is easier for the right wing than turning on the tv at 8PM. No podcast or any other modern tool will connect him with his audience like 8PM on Fox.
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,333
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
did any have the level of draw and pull he seems to have had?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
he'll be able to reach the younger folks who are into tech and like to watch podcasts.
he's already brainwashed the older segment of the population that watch him daily, but won't seek him out in alternative avenues.
that leaves the folks my age (nearly 50) that won't be recruited to his cult, not having watched him on tv yet, nor willing to spend time on finding where he is/downloading this app/etc.
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
did any have the level of draw and pull he seems to have had?
That's a good question.
I don't disagree w/ Dewie's point that some people will seek him out where ever he goes, but I just don't see the majority of Fox's audience going elsewhere for tucker when fox news is already right there in their living room.
I also agree w/ Dewie's point that he could be replaced by someone equally toxic, but my point still stands: Tucker without the reach of Fox News is good for our country.
Maybe time will prove me wrong, but the diminished audiences of those other former fox personalities suggests I'll be right.
Bill O Reilly is a perfect example someone else mentioned. He was MASSIVE. and now no one even knows/cares where he is.
It's only been a handful of years but things have changed a bit. I could envision a scenario where Tucker starts a podcast that rivals Joe Rogan's reach. Still wouldn't have the same influence as his Fox show though, largely for the reasons you mentioned above. Agreed.
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
That’s kinda my point. He’s still established dick bag that they adore and now someone else will fill that void, whether at Fox or whatever alternative they turn to. 70 year olds now how to work the internet. It’s not 1993 anymore. They type their shit into duckduckgo or click on the same Facebook links and off they go.
It’s not going to get better just because Tuck’s out of a gig. It might get better in 20 years as some of these rubes age out.
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
That’s kinda my point. He’s still established dick bag that they adore and now someone else will fill that void, whether at Fox or whatever alternative they turn to. 70 year olds now how to work the internet. It’s not 1993 anymore. They type their shit into duckduckgo or click on the same Facebook links and off they go.
It’s not going to get better just because Tuck’s out of a gig. It might get better in 20 years as some of these rubes age out.
All of that is possible, but in the short term, Tucker's pro-Putin agenda doesn't have Fox's reach. That in and of itself is a good thing.
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
did any have the level of draw and pull he seems to have had?
O'Reilly had a larger draw when he went off the air than Tucker. Drudge pointed out that Tucker was like 2.8 and O'Reilly was like 3.5
And no one cares what he says anymore.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,455
I think you’re wildly underestimating how much his audience appreciate having their victim complex justified. Time to stop pretending that things like this do anything but strengthen their resolve.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
I’d love for you to be right but recent history says you're not, whether it’s Tucker or someone filling his shoes.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
did any have the level of draw and pull he seems to have had?
O'Reilly had a larger draw when he went off the air than Tucker. Drudge pointed out that Tucker was like 2.8 and O'Reilly was like 3.5
And no one cares what he says anymore.
I think that is more a reflection of people's tv habits changing over the last decade though. Every show has smaller ratings than in the past.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
Also, that's a big number, but what's their expense line? They have an EPS of $2.80 which is fine, but not out of this world. Neflix is almost $10, Chase is $13. So advertising dollars are important.
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
NEW YORK (AP) — The day he was fired, Tucker Carlson was nearly invisible on the Fox News prime-time lineup that he used to dominate.
“We're not talking about him,” former colleague Sean Hannity said in one of the two very brief mentions of Carlson's name on Fox News on Monday night. In contrast, his ouster was the lead story on ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts.
Carlson was abruptly bounced from his popular prime-time show earlier in the day without any explanation from Fox. It was less than one week after Fox had agreed to pay $787 million to settle a lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems over the network's dissemination of bogus election conspiracy theories, and it came as more legal threats loom.
Brian Kilmeade took over Carlson's hour, telling viewers that Carlson and Fox had agreed to part ways, “as you may have heard.” He swiftly moved on to other stories.
Hannity led his hour-long broadcast with a story on Hunter Biden, the president's son, and interviewed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin.
Carlson's name came up when Hannity did a segment on the other big media story of the day, CNN's firing of anchor Don Lemon. He brought on Kellyanne Conway, former aide to President Donald Trump, to criticize Lemon as a studio audience cheered.
“We're not talking about Tucker,” Hannity said, unprompted. “I don't have any details on it. He had a massive audience and he had a huge following. This guy (Lemon) had nobody.”
Fox's other prime-time host, Laura Ingraham, didn't mention Carlson. Instead, she criticized Democrats in her lead story, “Whatever Happened to Hope and Change?” She also did a segment on a contest in Belgium where people pretended to screech like seagulls.
Carlson, Hannity and Ingraham appeared close in November 2020. That's when they engaged in a three-way text conversation bashing their own network's news division following the presidential election, according to documents revealed earlier this year as part of Dominion's lawsuit.
Fox has said that rotating guest hosts will occupy Carlson's old time slot until a full-time replacement is named.
TELEVISION
NBCUniversal CEO Shell departs over ‘inappropriate conduct’
The front door, threshold of welcome — and perilous border
Seeking a rebound, CNN turns to Charles Barkley, Gayle King
New this week: 'Judy Blume,' Rodrigo y Gabriela, Minecraft
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Do you disagree with the sentiment that tucker having less of a reach / audience is a good thing for America?
Fox News is everywhere. You think your average 60-70yo is going to seek out whatever podcast or website he starts up on a regular basis?
I can't imagine NewsMax or OAN picking him up... no one will want to insure them.
Theres no such thing as truly de-platforming anyone.
Would that recent history include the last ten years, where the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & others have lost audience interest after parting ways with Fox?
Because that recent history says I'm correct.
did any have the level of draw and pull he seems to have had?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
he's already brainwashed the older segment of the population that watch him daily, but won't seek him out in alternative avenues.
that leaves the folks my age (nearly 50) that won't be recruited to his cult, not having watched him on tv yet, nor willing to spend time on finding where he is/downloading this app/etc.
www.headstonesband.com
I don't disagree w/ Dewie's point that some people will seek him out where ever he goes, but I just don't see the majority of Fox's audience going elsewhere for tucker when fox news is already right there in their living room.
I also agree w/ Dewie's point that he could be replaced by someone equally toxic, but my point still stands: Tucker without the reach of Fox News is good for our country.
Maybe time will prove me wrong, but the diminished audiences of those other former fox personalities suggests I'll be right.
www.headstonesband.com
And no one cares what he says anymore.