Glenn Beck scores over 3 million viewers

[Orlandude]

Maybe. Maybe not. Being a media planner/buyer, I know advertisers don't necessarily need the fractional ratings (or the talking heads) of cable news, which have a long way to go to catch up to the broadcast networks. Just as an example...the ABC Evening News with Charles Gibson will easily draw anywhere from 7-10 million viewers every night....consistently...without the hype. (Source: Nielsen Station Index, May 2009). Beck is just getting a lot of publicity "hype" at the moment...both negative and positive. That always skews the ratings. When that wears off, which it wll, his numbers will likely stabilize right where they were before. Despite what the cable news networks like to claim, all of their ratings are fractional compared to broadcast television, unless it's some major event like the Super Bowl which will draw 50-60 million viewers. Advertisers simply use cable news networks to augment their media mix of buys. Their rates are also much cheaper than broadcast TV because their audiences are smaller.

 

[Spiff]

It's frightening that he has 3 million fans. That's alot of mental cases we have among us.

 

[Apollo]

^lol since coming back from vacation, Beck has gotten crazier.

Some people are saying that he is trying to get fired. Let's see if it works.

 

[Apollo]

Not necessarilly. People always slow down and stop to watch the scene of an accident. Just because they tuned in doesn't mean they are fans, they just want to see what all the drama is about. But for sure, most of them may be the hardcore right that still want to support him. If he got 30-35 million, then I'd be worried.

As for myself, you couldn't pay me enough to watch his bullshit. I have that channel blocked. If I want to see a clown, I go to a circus.

Tha's my thinking. I know a liberal blog that watches the show just to see the craziness and then reports on it.

It is nice to watch a loon on television.

 

[chance1]

glenn beck has clearly lost his mind

pressure i imagine

he's a big star now

it won't last

as for advertisers pulling out ............... that will blow over

 

[bike10]

I wonder what the collective IQ is of those 3 million?

 

[Jack Springer]

I wonder what the collective IQ is of those 3 million?

I wonder what the IQ is of the 15 people that watch the Keith Oberman show?

 

[G-Lexington]

That's a quarter the number that bought Milli Vanilli's "Girl You Know It's True".

Lex

 

[MLSFreak]

I notice several people on these forums attacking Keith O. and Rachel M. for the same bullshit Glenn B. and Limbaugh spew. The difference is that Keith and Rachel actually provide facts to back up what they say and when they are wrong they have actually admitted it and corrected themselves. They do their research before they start talking, which is more than I can say for Glenn "Oligarhy" "Walk softly and carry a big stick" Beck. Facts are not kind to people like Beck and his crew because more often than not, the facts let them know exactly what they are; professional bullshitters.

But seriously, can anyone give me a constructive criticism of Keith and Rachel? Maybe an example of when they have not backed up their points of view with facts? I would love to hear it. I realize this is slightly off topic but I'm just curious.

 

[chance1]

I notice several people on these forums attacking Keith O. and Rachel M. for the same bullshit Glenn B. and Limbaugh spew. The difference is that Keith and Rachel actually provide facts to back up what they say and when they are wrong they have actually admitted it and corrected themselves. They do their research before they start talking, which is more than I can say for Glenn "Oligarhy" "Walk softly and carry a big stick" Beck. Facts are not kind to people like Beck and his crew because more often than not, the facts let them know exactly what they are; professional bullshitters.

But seriously, can anyone give me a constructive criticism of Keith and Rachel? Maybe an example of when they have not backed up their points of view with facts? I would love to hear it. I realize this is slightly off topic but I'm just curious.

we must be on a different forum cuz i don't see many criticizing keith o or rachel m at all

facts are like assholes - everyone has them

as for keith o - his mean spiritedness and wanton attacks on anything republican - whether it's topical or not (see his continued assault on sarah palin) is way over the top

recently in addressing the issue of atty gen holder looking at resp for the cia and unwarranted torture .................... keith had a visual of gwb and dick cheney on the screen lower left with graphics beneath them saying

1 - "american torturers"
2 - "getting away with murder"

and of course his "guests" on his show are nothing more than head nodders who by definition agree with keith's POV - "isn't it right ...................." is how he starts his "questioning"

and he does it so seriously too

glenn beck for sure is somewhat carnival barker like - i guess he wants to be like rush

and they say things that are red meat for their far right constituents

but not like keith o

who gets away with it because ...................

the media only assaults right wing journalists - like rush and sean hannity and now glenn beck, who i think will have a much shorter life span (career wise)

it's really that simple

as for the MOrons here who suggest that anyone who listens/watches glenn beck is somehow less of a human being i would only say to them

GET A GRIP

your opinion is your opinion and you're not better than anyone else

should be a simple thing to understand

for those who are soooooooooooooo smart

 

[wastingmymind]

Just to clear this up, Rachel Maddow is all facts. When she pulverizes idiots like Pat Buchanan, all facts.

 

[chance1]

I guess you missed MLS's question and challenge, chance1. He wrote:




Seems like a pretty clear challenge to me, chance1: an example? You know, not hysteria, an example? Think you can do that? I bet you can try, so c'mon.

he said he often sees criticism of keith/rachel on JUB - that's what i am responding to dear sir - check it why dontcha

as for facts? calling bush and cheney murderers? uh huh

i would call that hysteria and libelous

but on JUB that's facts

 

[chance1]

Just to clear this up, Rachel Maddow is all facts. When she pulverizes idiots like Pat Buchanan, all facts.

Pat Buchanan is no idiot - he's quite .................. smaaaaaaaaaart

and Rachel and he have excellent give/takes

as they are both ......... smaaaaaaaaaaart

you don't like his politics so you call him an idiot

that's not ................ smaaaaaaaaart

that's dumb

 

[MLSFreak]

Okay, for one, they did authorize torture, at least Cheney did, therefore one can logically call them torturers. Cheney has been very vocal on what he thinks about "enhanced interrogation techniques". Now I know that Cheney or Bush wasn't actually the ones physically torturing prisoners but isn't it the same? Would a banner calling Bush/Cheney "Torture Enablers" been more appropriate? I'm not sure why this is so outrageous to some. It's the TRUTH.

And what is it that Keith/Rachel get away with? Possibly having a point of view that is actually backed up by facts? Some may call it opinion but when you substantiate with facts it's hard to argue with it.

Which brings me back to my original question. "can anyone give me a constructive criticism of Keith and Rachel? Maybe an example of when they have not backed up their points of view with facts?

I know many do not like Keith/Rachel and find them smug and snobby but have you really listened to what they say? Try to look past what you might think they are and just listen.
I watch MSNBC, FOX, and CNN. I cannot stand Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Dobbs, etc. but I do listen to what they are saying and I see a recurring theme. For the most part, they speak on idealogy, opinion without fact, fear. That is why it is so easy for Keith/Rachel to call them out on their bullshit.

Keith/Rachel mostly have people who agree with them on their shows because I venture to say conservatives are too afraid to be interviewed by them. It's not easy to bullshit people who have their facts straight. *case in point Rachel owning Dick Army on Meet the Press several weeks ago* Calling these people out for bullshit is exactly what needs to be done, which again I open the floor for anyone to call Keith/Rachel out on their supposed "bullshit". Here is your chance.

I'm not trying to make enemies nor am I trying to endulge in name calling with other Jubbers, etc., I just want a healthy debate.

BTW, I love JustUsBoys and I've been a member for a couple years now if not more. I've seen some of everyone's best work and worst and I love it!!! Keep it up Ya'll! *said with a (Southern) KY accent...lol.

 

[Centexfarmer]

facts are like assholes - everyone has them

Facts, are also like statistics, used partially (either way) they can either be used for support or illumination.

IMO, neither of the examples that you've provided do anything other than to "support" their viewers fucked up view of things.

 

[chance1]

No, chance1, what he said he "notice[d] several people on these forums attacking Keith O. and Rachel M. for the same bullshit Glenn B. and Limbaugh spew," meaning that right wingers try to create an equivalency, a false one. So his question is clear and it remains unanswered. Aren't you going to answer it? He asked:



As you handle the cable beat, I thought you'd be the perfect person to *COUGH* disabuse him of his notion.

hard to notice "several people on this forum" if ur talking about "right wingers"

there's a handful perhaps

remember we're talking about a % of the 15

as for "facts" .............

is it a fact that gwb and dick cheney were torturers? i must've missed that one

yet keith blo-verman had a standing shot of the 2 with those words on the screen as he "interviewed" another partisan about the subject

funny .............. i have never seen a fox commentator with a picture of obama with a swastika or even eating arugula for that matter with a chryon saying "dumb shit" or "socialist" or anything for that matter

msnbc allows keith blo-verman to stoop to that level because they have no standardss

you may not like fox's POV - that is your right

and their primary hosts are center and right of center

but they do not stoop to the level of keith

not even close

course u good general do not watch the stuff

so take a hike

and take some pictures will ya?

at least ur good at that

 

[chance1]

Wow! I I don't agree at all with you here Chance. I do agree with MLSFreak though.



1. I do. But why would anyone criticize people who are dead on correct?

2. Because O'Reilly, Beck and Hannity, not to mention the airheads and the stalkers they have for correspondents are not biased or mean spirited...please. And Sarah deserves it. She's a lunatic.

3. That's because we DID torture and got away with murder. Cheney himself has confessed to that.

4. Because FOX's guests are so liberal and fair? Like Karl Rove for instance, is unbiased and credible? lol Also, No one on the right has the balls to go on their shows. I just keep thinking about Michelle Bachman on Hardball. She won't go back and blames Matthews for her own words and stupidity. LMAO!

5. Yeah, that liberal media...I'm sure that all media is evil and have an agenda against these losers. The only media that has anything good to say about Fox is Fox and their fans. Moron is anyone who believes the biased and utter bullshit and racism, homophobia, paranoia that FOX spews.
At least with MSNBC they provide credible sources and quotes. Also, find me anything, anywhere, a youtube vid, an article where those 3 bozos (Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly) show support or sympathize or understanding AT ALL for gay rights. I would love to see that. As for Olbermann and Maddow and almost all of MSNBC, I can find you TONS of youtubes where they show support for us.





6. That's because they ARE murderers. How many people have died thanks to them? How many lies did they tell us just to get us into Iraq? How about Katrina? How many people died under their watch? Not to mention 9/11...they knew an attack was imminent and were warned and yet they ignored them.

7. I wouldn't. These are facts. They may not have done the actual killing themselves but they are responsible for them.

8. He is an idoit. You can be smart and be a total shithead. Please don't make me post a youtube of him showing what an idiot he is.

9. I wouldn't call them excellent give and takes. I would call them Rachel SCHOOLING Buchanan.

I appreciate the effort above and the civil tone

If you truly believe that the former Pres and VP are murderers then there is nothing I can say to you other than ............ I strongly disagree

Was JFK and LBJ murderers for sending troops to Vietnam?

With regard to torture - there seems to be proof that waterboarding worked and saved lives - enhanced interrogation was used - as the standards set did not anticipate the world we live in now

i do not agree with but defend the discussion about torture and if it should be used - i understand a great man like john mccain does not agree with using it - i respectfully disagree with him

the idea of putting cia personnel or dick cheney on trial for torture is absurd and is a red herring - ask pres. obama if u don't believe me

presidents make mistakes - all do

gwb is no different

they are not liable for their mistakes - they were elected

katrina was not handled well - mistakes all around - IMO prob more so on the local side in not being prepared, not evacuating, having a shitty police force, having a shitty infrastructure - seems like mississippi is rebounding a lot better than louisiana

should the govt be condemned for their lack of action and steps taken to prevent? sure

that's it

Fox, unlike MSNBC has opposing points of view - Pat Buchanan is the only non liberal i can think of that appears on msnbc while Bill O'Reilly has guest who disagree with his POV ALL the time not head nodders like keith o

I agree with you on the gay support - no question - Keith O is a supporter as is rachel - as is the network - it is a liberal network - they are to be commended for that

You can post a youtube of anyone looking like a dope - Pat B is no exception

I find him to be terribly bright and occasionally funny - i don't agree with him on most issues - he is practically an isolationist and does not believe in the US engaging in wars outside of our borders for the most part

I think Rachel is wonderful - smart - she needs to grow a pair and have guests on her show that don't just head nod

sorry for the ramble here but wanted to respond

hope all is well

 

[Centexfarmer]

you may not like fox's POV - that is your right

and their primary hosts are center and right of center

but they do not stoop to the level of keith

not even close

Wha? What???



Uh, I'm familiar with the Fox News schedule, please direct me to the schedule where I could find any host on that that cable network that is "center," as you suggest that they have.

In fact, I'd be thrilled to know exactly what criteria that Fox News uses to define "center."

I've even attempted to use the criteria that I'm incapable of "independent" thinking, and that I need the likes of a Fox News "commentator" to tell me how to think, and even they seem to be remiss in providing a definition.

I seem to recall some grievances when Alan Colmes left "Hannity and Colmes," but the only thing that I can garner from that is that the critics (at the time) were concerned that without Colmes everyone would see what a douchebag Sean Hannity REALLY is, without a buffer.

What's scarry?

What's scarry is the Fox Network's timeshare.

According to Wikipedia, the Fox News Network reaches more than half of the entire American populace on any given day, and there's NO accountabililty for their content.

The Irony?

In a recent online poll Jon Stewart was most recently voted "Most Trusted News Man."

Which, if I'm reading this correctly, Beck, Hannity, and Olbermann, or the "side show," instead of the "commedian" that's pointing that out to everyone.

It's "whacked" to be sure.

 

[Centexfarmer]

No, at Fox you see images of people carrying monkey effigies. You see them questioning his birthplace. You can see them carrying ropes and guns as if to "lynch" him. That's what you see on Fox especially on tyeabagging days. You see them calling him a terrorist, baby killer, they call out
"kill him", etc.....
Oh but yes they do. They are even worse than Keith. Hey, somebody has to call out O'Reilly, Beck and Hannity. Not many people have the balls.

What's worse, is that the "commentators" on Fox News "report" this shit (one has to wonder how much of it they make up), then REPORT the shit, in an attempt to back up the shit that they reported earlier without any sources...and NOW it's Fox News.

As if the "American Public" wasn't the least bit persuaded to "act" from watching Fox News.

 

[MLSFreak]

If you are looking for Rachel to grow a pair of balls I'd redirect you to tonight's show. (9/1/09). Did you happen to watch her interview with Tom Ridge? You will Never see that type of interview on Fox News. It's a true art when you can hand someone's ass to them without raising your voice, cutting them off, etc. much like O'Reilly does with Anyone who makes a valid opposing POV on his show. He cuts them off and goes to a commercial. Rachel even gave Tom the last word before going to commercial.

And by the way, Fox News does not have to spend money creating graphics of nazi symbols, etc. They just rely on old footage. So don't act like they don't do shit like that.

Video below, case in point:

Ok, so I have to post 25 messages before I can post a url? Alright then, I'll direct you to go to youtube and search "Beck: I was wrong -- We're headed toward Fascism, not socialism." Sorry about not being able to post a url yet.


Why use only a portion of the screen like Keith does. Why not take a page out of Glenn's book and use the WHOLE DAMN SCREEN!