Michael Wolff on MSNBC's "Hardball" Says Fox News "Extreme Presence in US" and "Not Very Popular" - Video 10/26/09
Here is video of Michael Wolff talking with Chris Matthews about Fox News.
Michael Wolff said "the truth is Fox is not very popular in this country, it may have great ratings but still we're talking under two million people, it's a really marginal somewhat extreme presence in the United States."
15 comments:
LOL! Well, I used to be a huge fan of Hardball, until I was cured of the liberal deranged syndrome....
now? Hardball... what an effing joke! do people even watch MSNBS??
The other cable shows can only wish they had the kind of ratings that Fox pulls in everyday from every demographic.
Not very popular?? Hell...Fox Rocks!
If fox news has high rating it means it is very popular.
Faux News is highly rated for a cable news network. That's a very limited audience... 2 million viewers, tops. Given that the U.S. population is over 300 million, that's a small percentage of America.
It's comparable to the Romans flocking to the Coliseum for the gladiator games, or the lions lunching on Christians. They sure packed the Coliseum, so in that sense it was very popular. But when you compare the capacity of the Coliseum to the total population of the Roman Empire, was it really that popular?
Nice try on trying to explain away their popularity. You fail.
All these guys can hear are themselves moaning in an echo chamber. It's blather. "Fox is this, fox is that... Blah, blah, blah." They're on a network that has the White Houses "good house keeping seal of approval" but less ratings than Fox. So what makes them think their views are so frigging important? How relevant are they? One of the lefties look like Mike Myers in a Dr. No. movie. Is this Dr. Tingle? Are we suppose to be impressed?
Ok, so let me get this straight. Fox News has far higher ratings than all the other news networks combined, yet we're supposed to believe that the other networks are more "popular"? Really? What kind of crazy logic is that?
So if far more people are watching FN, and they're not very popular, what exactly does that say about the "popularity" of the other networks? I guess it takes a conservative, who "only does what they're told" to see see the gaping holes in that argument.
I think it will be ranked high in the popularity charts.
Nobody has or would claim the other networks are more "popular". But the only ratings that matter happened last November. Almost 70 million people voted for Obama. End of story. So enjoy your mindless entertainment of Glenn beck, etc. It means nothing in the long run.
It can mean everything in 3 years!
I think Olbermann & Matthews are competing to be Obama's Monica Lewinski.
Actually, Faux's rating won't mean anything, even in three years. Obama won by 10 million votes last year, and I'll guarantee just about every one of Faux's 2 million viewers voted against Obama in the 2008 election. So, if the same 2 million people keep watching Faux and vote against Obama in 2012, it will mean.... nothing.
More people are against Obama now, because they realized this is who they didn't vote for.
5 million people? Think again. Or, maybe, think for the first time.
Olbermann is the "Norman Bates" of MSNBC & the democratic party. He has that creepy look that makes you want to check on your children. Note to cameraman: ZOOM-OUT!!! Time to cancel the HD>
Post a Comment