2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I was applying that principle to MSNBC itself, not the advertisers who pay to be on MSNBC.

The point I was trying to make is that MSNBC doesn't need to have a jillion viewers or appeal to a wide range of viewers as long as they have a niche group that is loyal to them. They do. They have figuratively convinced 10%, 100% of the way. Or 90 or 95 or 80, whatever.

It was clear in my head, but obviously lost something in translation.

I sort of got it. But then, I'm a "senile old man," so you never can tell. In radio, ratings are determined by two general measurements: cumulative listeners and time spent listening.. Obviously day parts and demographics are also measured. The station I worked for in Houston was never #1 in cume (that's usually the best newser or maybe urban or rocker) but we were always number one in TSL. In other words, we didn't have as many customers, but ours stayed in the store the longest. We also had the highest exclusive cume: listeners who listened to us and nobody else. The money came flowing in through the front door like a tsunami.

When you see some article in your local paper about this or that station being #1, that's almost always a measurement of 12+ listening. Nobody buys 12+. It's good for bragging and not much else. The vast majority of media buyers don't care which station 13-year old listen to. They are focusing their buys on much narrower measurements.

Sorry for the annecdote: In one episode of WKRP, Johnny Fever is looking at a ratings "book" and exclaims "Look what I'm doing with teen age boys!"

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Seriously. Get over it. I'm sorry that all us don't fit your absolutely distorted view on a sane conservative. Shut the ***** up and quit b*tching. You really do whine like a baby boomer. It's getting tiring.

Not saying that you do or don't, but...

It is interesting that no one will admit to it. It's like a dirty little secret.

Those who do watch Faux but won't fess up know that it's completely biased, but agree with what is being said.

Only they want others to think that they are somehow more open minded, or independent than people will think, knowing that they are a Faux viewer.

Tough spot to be in.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

The last time I honest-to-God listened to Rush was around 2006. I stopped watching Fox News regularly in 2008. And really, the only things that kept me watching Fox were Red Eye and the Fox Report.

In my case, for several years I had a show on opposite Rush (and my ratings were better) or I was working in the newsroom when he (or Beck) was on the air. Believe it or not, we weren't "listening" in the customary sense of the word. Mostly it was like the engines in a ship, you notice when they stop.

Fox TV news has never appealed to me. And I've never been a regular viewer.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Not saying that you do or don't, but...

It is interesting that no one will admit to it. It's like a dirty little secret.

Those who do watch Faux but won't fess up know that it's completely biased, but agree with what is being said.

Only they want others to think that they are somehow more open minded, or independent than people will think, knowing that they are a Faux viewer.

Tough spot to be in.

I fully admit the statistics don't seem to help our case. However, I like to think that this board is well above the fray when it comes to politics on the whole. As DrDemento said, "I have always felt that the level of intelligence displayed on this board is far above that of the general American public."

I tend to agree. We have our polar opposites on the USCHO political spectrum, but I think a good analogy here is this:

The USCHO political spectrum is all we "see". But the full spectrum is far, far wider than what we see on here. I think the bulk of the Fox viewers come from x-rays and gamma rays.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Not saying that you do or don't, but...

It is interesting that no one will admit to it. It's like a dirty little secret.

Those who do watch Faux but won't fess up know that it's completely biased, but agree with what is being said.

Only they want others to think that they are somehow more open minded, or independent than people will think, knowing that they are a Faux viewer.

Tough spot to be in.

It may be that some folks aren't candid about their habits. They're of no concern to me. Dmxnkd and I say we aren't regular consumers. Why not just take our word for it? What difference does it make, anyway? Other than reflexive stereotyping?

It may come as a giant shock, but I'm quite capable of forming and expressing my own opinions. I don't need any help. And unlike some of us, when I quote somebody, I attribute it.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

It may be that some folks aren't candid about their habits. They're of no concern to me. Dmxnkd and I, say we aren't regular consumers. Why not just take our word for it? What difference does it make, anyway?

It may come as a giant shock, but I'm quite capable of forming and expressing my own opinions. I don't need any help. And unlike some of us, when I quote somebody, I attribute it.

I'm happy to take your word for it. Just waiting to meet that first person, other than my old man and his buddies, who actually admits to watching Faux.

Oh yeah, and my wealthy brother-in-law.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Agreed. Honestly, I watch Lawrence O'Donnell, Morning Joe, Squawk Box, Mad Money, and "regular" TV.

I don't even like to watch The Kudlow Report anymore.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I sort of got it. But then, I'm a "senile old man," so you never can tell. In radio, ratings are determined by two general measurements: cumulative listeners and time spent listening.. Obviously day parts and demographics are also measured. The station I worked for in Houston was never #1 in cume (that's usually the best newser or maybe urban or rocker) but we were always number one in TSL. In other words, we didn't have as many customers, but ours stayed in the store the longest. We also had the highest exclusive cume: listeners who listened to us and nobody else. The money came flowing in through the front door like a tsunami.

When you see some article in your local paper about this or that station being #1, that's almost always a measurement of 12+ listening. Nobody buys 12+. It's good for bragging and not much else. The vast majority of media buyers don't care which station 13-year old listen to. They are focusing their buys on much narrower measurements.

Sorry for the annecdote: In one episode of WKRP, Johnny Fever is looking at a ratings "book" and exclaims "Look what I'm doing with teen age boys!"

Exactly. Part of my job is media buying for the companies I represent - both TV and radio.

Once target demos are identified, a big factor we look at is frequency and cost. Depending on daypart and cost, if I can reach 20,000 people 4 times in a week for the same price as 200,000 people 1 time, I'm going with the 20,000 4 times. The 200k won't remember that they saw/heard me. I have a real shot at the 20k actually seeing or hearing my message.

Love when they call me wondering if I want to get in on the Packer game. Uh, no thanks!

Surprising (not really) how often i have to talk down business owners who want that 1 Packer spot for the same amount that they could buy 2 weeks on the morning news programs. Vanity...

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Agreed. Honestly, I watch Lawrence O'Donnell, Morning Joe, Squawk Box, Mad Money, and "regular" TV.

I don't even like to watch The Kudlow Report anymore.

Lawrence O'Donnell!??!!

You're a freaking Libstain and a Half!

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I'm happy to take your word for it. Just waiting to meet that first person, other than my old man and his buddies, who actually admits to watching Faux.

Oh yeah, and my wealthy brother-in-law.

I admit to watching Fox from probably 2001 through 2008. At times almost religiously. Hell, I even listened to Beck before he want apesh*t with the Tea Party stuff. This was back when he was on CNN of course.

I'm sure I have a laundry list of other shows I watched and listened to that I wouldn't even consider today. I've become so disenfranchised by the two parties that I'm considering not voting (but only because not voting is more efficient than wasting my vote on a third party).

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I'm happy to take your word for it. Just waiting to meet that first person, other than my old man and his buddies, who actually admits to watching Faux.

Oh yeah, and my wealthy brother-in-law.

Thank you. I'm reminded of William Manchester's book "The Arms of Krupp," which required extensive research in post-war Germany. He couldn't find anybody who would admit to being a Nazi, but got lots of dirty looks when riding in the back of a cab, softly whispering "Die Fahne Hoch," (the Horst Wessel Lied). In "Judgement at Nuremburg" bitter and frustrated war crimes prosecutor Richard Widmark sarcastically suggests to Spencer Tracy it wasn't the Germans who committed all those war crimes, it was Eskimos.

Another annecdote: Manchester writes about the head of the Krupp family during the 3rd Reich who was entertaining a guest on the veranda of his schloss. The guy asks Herr Krupp just how much land do you own, anyway. Krupp replies: "you see that mountain range off in the distance, the one you can barely see? We own to the mountain range beyond that one." Oh. Nevermind.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Lawrence O'Donnell!??!!

You're a freaking Libstain and a Half!

I know, right? I just think he's the only honest person on primetime now. He makes me think critically about my positions. It makes me mentally justify where I stand on the issues and if I can't justify the position, I consider other possibilities.

I like to think of most pundits on primetime as a chainsaw-brandishing Leatherface. Sloppy, inarticulate, and "scary". I see Lawrence as a political fencer. He doesn't bludgeon you with his viewpoints. He uses strategy and cunning to make you agree with him.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Exactly. Part of my job is media buying for the companies I represent - both TV and radio.

Once target demos are identified, a big factor we look at is frequency and cost. Depending on daypart and cost, if I can reach 20,000 people 4 times in a week for the same price as 200,000 people 1 time, I'm going with the 20,000 4 times. The 200k won't remember that they saw/heard me. I have a real shot at the 20k actually seeing or hearing my message.

Love when they call me wondering if I want to get in on the Packer game. Uh, no thanks!

Surprising (not really) how often i have to talk down business owners who want that 1 Packer spot for the same amount that they could buy 2 weeks on the morning news programs. Vanity...

CPM baby. CPM. One time I had to ream out some PR flack for the author Claire Sterling. She was on a tour with her book "The Time of the Assassins" about the attempt on the Pope. This chippie wanted to cancel Sterling's half hour interview with me to do a 60 second hit on local TV. To get the maximum out of our half hour interviews, we pulled out six 90 second short programs, ran each four times a day and then the half hour on Sunday. Each short program, of course, mentioned her name and the title of the book. 24 mentions, over a week, on a station with the highest exclusive cume, TSL and a carriage trade audience (the kind of people who buy books, for example) and this moron wanted to give that up for a 60 second hit on TV.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I admit to watching Fox from probably 2001 through 2008. At times almost religiously. Hell, I even listened to Beck before he want apesh*t with the Tea Party stuff. This was back when he was on CNN of course.

I'm sure I have a laundry list of other shows I watched and listened to that I wouldn't even consider today. I've become so disenfranchised by the two parties that I'm considering not voting (but only because not voting is more efficient than wasting my vote on a third party).

Since we're coming clean...

I've always considered myself left of center. I first discovered cable news in my late 20s. Of course I watched Headline News like everyone else during the first Iraq war, but watching cable "news" channels wouldn't start till several years later. Started watching CNN and Fox.

I used to watch O'Reilly almost every night around the time of the Kosovo conflict and through 911 and the Saddam statue coming down. Thought he was great. A real straight shooter. A breath of fresh air.

Watched Hannity & Colmes back then too. Could never understand why Colmes never called Sean on his crap. Watched Brit Hume too. Slowly but surely, it dawned on me that something just wasn't quite right with this "Fair & Balanced" network.

Why did they sell us this war? Where was the deserved criticism for how badly we handled it after Saddam was defeated? Where was the criticism for Cheney constantly lying about Iraq's involvement on 911? Why is anyone who questions our government at this time treasonous? Why is Lee Greenwood on AGAIN? Why wasn't what Cheney and Libby did to an agent also treasonous? And on and on and on and with every issue, foreign and domestic. How was it possible that the Democrats were wrong on every single issue?

Once I realized I had been duped, and how badly, I obviously never went back. I mean, I always knew that many of them were coming at it from the right's perspective, but when I realized how often they were giving only partial truths or actually lying to help Republicans get elected...

I had wanted to hear other perspectives, not be lied to or indoctrinated.

In my defense, they're not even recognizable now compared to what i was watching back at the start. Haven't been for 10 years. They went all in after 911 figuring that they didn't even have to pretend anymore.

Since the center has shifted to the right, I'm no longer left of center. I'm left of center circa 1995.

As always, I will vote for the lesser of two evils in a month. Unfortunately, with how whackadoo the right has gotten, the lesser evil these days is almost always a Dem.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I think [some people] are getting a little too excited here...

seems that way to me too. the right seems too giddy and the left seems too despondent. I figure the right was really nervous and the giddiness masks their relief, secretly they feared a rout in the other direction; while the left is overlooking how determined and ruthless Obama is. He tried to skate on inadequate preparation and it showed. Next time he'll be much better prepared. He was president of Harvard Law Review, he has the capacity to craft good arguments when he applies himself, he's merely been a bit lazy since he surrounds himself only with fawning admirers. Romney, to be a successful CEO, had to seek out talented people who had strong opinions different than his. No good CEO wants sycophants, they are deadly to a CEOs career. Obama on the other hand seems to enjoy having sycophants at his beck and call. Bottom line, he'll be much better next time. Also, you can be certain that between now and the final debate, a few Predator drones are going to be fired in Libya!

I wonder if you can get a point spread for the VP debate? If so, I'll pick Biden to "beat the spread." He's sort of the Democrat version of Gerald Ford (for those who remember the old Chevy Chase routines on SNL). Ford was an accomplished person, thoughtful and intelligent, who slipped on camera twice, and picked up a stereotype he couldn't shake. I see the same thing in Biden. He stumbles a few times when he ad libs, but when he prepares and focuses his mind he can come across quite well.

So even if Ryan "wins" that debate, Biden will so far exceed expectations that he'll come off as the "winner", just like if a 10-point favorite wins a football game 19 - 17. The losing team beat the spread and that's all the bettors care about; so Biden outperforming expectations will be all the pundits care about.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Seriously. Get over it. I'm sorry that all us don't fit your absolutely distorted view on a sane conservative. Shut the ***** up and quit b*tching. You really do whine like a baby boomer. It's getting tiring.

I wasn't whining about it at all. Get over it yourself. Every time Fox News or Rush is brought up no conservatives watch it. So, I wonder who does? I don't think that's b*tching at all. I think that's a standard run of the mill observation.

I admit to watching Fox News. Although I used to watch it a lot more. Now I turn it on for five minutes at a time so I can get a laugh. Same with Rush.

 

[Rover]

seems that way to me too. the right seems too giddy and the left seems too despondent. I figure the right was really nervous and the giddiness masks their relief, secretly they feared a rout in the other direction; while the left is overlooking how determined and ruthless Obama is. He tried to skate on inadequate preparation and it showed. Next time he'll be much better prepared. He was president of Harvard Law Review, he has the capacity to craft good arguments when he applies himself, he's merely been a bit lazy since he surrounds himself only with fawning admirers. Romney, to be a successful CEO, had to seek out talented people who had strong opinions different than his. No good CEO wants sycophants, they are deadly to a CEOs career. Obama on the other hand seems to enjoy having sycophants at his beck and call. Bottom line, he'll be much better next time. Also, you can be certain that between now and the final debate, a few Predator drones are going to be fired in Libya!

I wonder if you can get a point spread for the VP debate? If so, I'll pick Biden to "beat the spread." He's sort of the Democrat version of Gerald Ford (for those who remember the old Chevy Chase routines on SNL). Ford was an accomplished person, thoughtful and intelligent, who slipped on camera twice, and picked up a stereotype he couldn't shake. I see the same thing in Biden. He stumbles a few times when he ad libs, but when he prepares and focuses his mind he can come across quite well.

So even if Ryan "wins" that debate, Biden will so far exceed expectations that he'll come off as the "winner", just like if a 10-point favorite wins a football game 19 - 17. The losing team beat the spread and that's all the bettors care about; so Biden outperforming expectations will be all the pundits care about.

Agreed completely. I can't speculate as to Obama's strategy, or rust, or whatever, but I think you're spot on in that Republicans are giddy like a man getting a death row pardon, only he's yet to realize he's still looking at life in prison. That Alex Constalanos (sp?) guy was amusing jousting with Carville when he said "just let us enjoy this a little". I'm not sure how the race dynamics change any, but you've got people saying this is a tie race. I think we need some actual polling over time to figure that out (Mondale may have ever so briefly moved ahead of Reagan after their first debate but I'm not sure anybody actually thought he'd win). I've seen Romney debate a few times since he's run for office and I've never seen him lay an egg, but he did lose the critical first debate with Kennedy in '94 when everybody expected Teddy to show up drunk, but instead he executed his strategy perfectly to show Romney had no idea how the Senate worked. To that extend Romney benefited greatly from the public's expectation by a 2-1 margin that Obama would win this last debate.

Regarding Biden, he needs to do what Obama didn't which is stick Ryan's actual votes to him. Partnering with Akin absolutely has to come up repeatedly. So does "the Ryan budget". I'm guessing as an old pro with little expectations as you say once again correctly he's going to look better than people thought going in while Ryan has been portrayed as some sort of right wing Socrates by the press which will be tough to live up to.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I wasn't whining about it at all. Get over it yourself. Every time Fox News or Rush is brought up no conservatives watch it. So, I wonder who does? I don't think that's b*tching at all. I think that's a standard run of the mill observation.

I admit to watching Fox News. Although I used to watch it a lot more. Now I turn it on for five minutes at a time so I can get a laugh. Same with Rush.

I didn't know every conservative posts on here.

I seriously do not watch or listen to either, although I have in the past.

 

[geezer]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

You know what would be cool? If Obama lost the popular vote but was still reelected. I suspect each side of the "let's only/not count the nation's popular vote" from the non-election of Albert "Hi-Fever" Gore Jr. would suddenly have a more empathetic understanding of the opposite point of view.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I wasn't whining about it at all. Get over it yourself. Every time Fox News or Rush is brought up no conservatives watch it. So, I wonder who does? I don't think that's b*tching at all. I think that's a standard run of the mill observation.

I admit to watching Fox News. Although I used to watch it a lot more. Now I turn it on for five minutes at a time so I can get a laugh. Same with Rush.

Maybe it's because we don't anymore. Sorry we don't fit your perception. Get over it.