• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ed Schultz Denounces Colbert/Stewart Rally

I think she is suggesting that they are less relevant. I don't see any of the MSNBC pundits having disciples here like Beck does.

Which is highly subjective ... and I reject the notion it's less relevant, and also reject the notion there are no MSNBC disciples.... sounds like pee-nauer, sounds like has-zee-le-put. And disciple is such a strong word - defender may be a better description.
 
I think she is suggesting that they are less relevant. I don't see any of the MSNBC pundits having disciples here like Beck does.

That's exactly what I was suggestion. I typically lean left and do not watch any of the left-wing pundits. Although some might make good points from time-to-time, I don't care about their type of programming. For me, the best information happens when I have no idea where the informer leans.

What I do find interesting, though, is why the right pundits have much better ratings than the left ones. And that is the point I brought up earlier.
 
Which is highly subjective ... and I reject the notion it's less relevant, and also reject the notion there are no MSNBC disciples.... sounds like pee-nauer, sounds like has-zee-le-put. And disciple is such a strong word - defender may be a better description.

Why are the ratings for right leaning shows so much higher than left-leaning ones?
 
Why are the ratings for right leaning shows so much higher than left-leaning ones?

Because ratings are based on viewership. What ratings are NOT based on is relevance. Because 1 person heard (for example) a hateful comment vs. 1,000 people hearing it doesn't make what was said any less relevant.
 
Because ratings are based on viewership. What ratings are NOT based on is relevance. Because 1 person heard (for example) a hateful comment vs. 1,000 people hearing it doesn't make what was said any less relevant.

People don't watch irrelevant people. How can Nina Totenberg be relevant if no one has heard of her?
 
People don't watch irrelevant people. How can Nina Totenberg be relevant if no one has heard of her?

I would say the opposite - channels wouldn't put irrelevant people on their channel as guests - it's not good for ratings, which is why media outlets exist in the first place.
 
What I do find interesting, though, is why the right pundits have much better ratings than the left ones. And that is the point I brought up earlier.
There are several possible explanations. Do you claim to know which one is correct?
 
I would say the opposite - channels wouldn't put irrelevant people on their channel as guests - it's not good for ratings, which is why media outlets exist in the first place.


Irrelevant? No, I think that is the wrong word. More like less controversial. For instance, Ann Coulter is a regular on Fox despite being a blow hard idiot. Why? Because the dumb **** she spews gathers train-wreck minds to pay attention.
 
There are several possible explanations. Do you claim to know which one is correct?

I don't really know the answer. My best guess is that the baby-boomer aged population typically lean more right than not, and like their dose of extreme thinking. But I could be wrong. What is your take?
 
I don't really know the answer. My best guess is that the baby-boomer aged population typically lean more right than not, and like their dose of extreme thinking. But I could be wrong. What is your take?

That's pretty interesting given that the baby-boomers are the hippies of the 1960's. You're saying they've come over to the dark side and lean more right now?
 
That's pretty interesting given that the baby-boomers are the hippies of the 1960's. You're saying they've come over to the dark side and lean more right now?

I think they just want to keep the government out of their medicare.
 
Last edited:
For the most part, I generally question the seriousness of rallies for political change, period.
 
Not everyone was a hippy, Ockham. :doh

Anyhoo, I thought it was a welll known fact that the average age of Fox News viewers is in geriactic land.

TV viewers' average age hits 50 - Entertainment News, TV Ratings, Media - Variety

Rush Limbaugh: The Man Who Ate the G.O.P. | Politics | Vanity Fair

It's well known because you want it to be so...and you just googled it... but really... vanity fair and variety? MoveOn.org info wasn't available or did Media Matters just feed this info to Vanity Fair?

I tend to go with something a little less fluffy and overtly liberal.

Ratings - TVNewser

If you check the daily ratings -- you'll see the 24-55 category and then notice FNC beating their competition handily in that demographic. They've been doing that consistently for years maybe even a decade now. :2wave:
 
It's well known because you want it to be so...and you just googled it... but really... vanity fair and variety? MoveOn.org info wasn't available or did Media Matters just feed this info to Vanity Fair?

I tend to go with something a little less fluffy and overtly liberal.

Ratings - TVNewser

If you check the daily ratings -- you'll see the 24-55 category and then notice FNC beating their competition handily in that demographic. They've been doing that consistently for years maybe even a decade now. :2wave:

The link did not work.
(ps. no need to be a dick... I am just trying to have a discussion here and haven't got the foggiest why you felt compelled to mention Media Matters or Moveon.)
 
The link did not work.
Just tried it and it works for me. :shrug:

(ps. no need to be a dick... I am just trying to have a discussion here and haven't got the foggiest why you felt compelled to mention Media Matters or Moveon.)

ps, no need to call me a dick - I'm just trying to have a discussion here too and haven't got the foggiest why you felt compelled to characterize misinformation as fact.
 
I don't really know the answer. My best guess is that the baby-boomer aged population typically lean more right than not, and like their dose of extreme thinking. But I could be wrong. What is your take?
I have a theory, but I don't know if it's correct, so I don't see the point of posting it. One thing that I do know is that we don't know the real explanation.
 
I have a theory, but I don't know if it's correct, so I don't see the point of posting it. One thing that I do know is that we don't know the real explanation.

Thanks for being civil, mpg. I have theories, too... but as I stated before, I am not sure either. Having said that, I'd be interested in hearing your take.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mpg
Just tried it and it works for me. :shrug:

The link worked at home.



ps, no need to call me a dick - I'm just trying to have a discussion here too and haven't got the foggiest why you felt compelled to characterize misinformation as fact.

Well then, try to be less smarmy. My original quote (in reference to why right leaning pundits have more viewership) was:

I don't really know the answer. My best guess is that the baby-boomer aged population typically lean more right than not, and like their dose of extreme thinking. But I could be wrong. What is your take?
 
Well, if you are to mean that younger people are more apathetic than they used to be, I would say that is typically false.
 
Back
Top Bottom