So who's still advertising on Beck? September 14 edition ...
September 14, 2009 7:01 pm ET by Media Matters staff
More than 60 advertisers have reportedly dropped their ads from Glenn Beck's Fox News program since he called President Obama a "racist" who has a "deep-seated hatred of white people." Here are his September 14 sponsors, in the order they appeared:
Lear Capital
Liberty Medical
ExtenZe
News Corp. (The Wall Street Journal)
Rosland Capital
LifeLock
Conservatives for Patient's Rights
Clarity Media Group (The Weekly Standard)
Roche Diagnostics (Accu-Chek Aviva)
Citrix (GoToMeeting)
Merit Financial
Goldline International, Inc
Carbonite
National Review
FRI., SEPT 11, 2009
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,212,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,644,000
FOXNEWS BECK 2,544,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 1,968,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,705,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,067,000
MSNBC MADDOW 948,000
CNN BLITZER 889,000
CNN KING 875,000
Fail.
In the cable TV world subscriber fees are the cash cow. Advertising is nice...but it comes second to subscriber fees.
Subscriber fees are based on the number of viewers.
The Big Beck Boycott is failure. Beck is drawing bigger numbers and still has plenty of advertisers.
But sure, stay in your delusional fantasy land that Glenn Beck put you in if you want to.
Want more proof, lets take some from News Corp's 2008 10K annual financial statement (available for free - search Edgar database on google then search companies and News Corp).
On page 43 in reference to its US TV networks including Fox Broadcasting Network and Fox News among many others...
"The U.S. television operations derive revenues primarily from the sale of advertising. Adverse changes in general market conditions for advertising may affect revenues. The U.S. television broadcast environment is highly competitive and the primary methods of competition are the development and acquisition of popular programming. Program success is measured by ratings, which are an indication of market acceptance, with the top rated programs commanding the highest advertising prices. FOX and MyNetworkTV compete for audience, advertising revenues and programming with other broadcast networks, such as CBS, ABC, NBC and The CW, independent television stations, cable program services, as well as other media, including DVDs, video games, print and the Internet. In addition, FOX and MyNetworkTV compete with the other broadcast networks to secure affiliations with independently owned television stations in markets across the country. "
I mean seriously you conservatives live in a delusional fairy land. The way TV stations primarily make money is through advertising. The more viewers for a particular show, the higher the rate they can charge for that show. When advertisers boycott a program and refuse to air ads on the show despite the viewership then naturally advertising rates fall for that show until they can fill all the spots. Extenze cannot pay as much for advertising as a Fortune 500 company can. It's a basic law of finance. Fox News is losing money on this boycott, the facts cannot be disputed.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1308161/000119312509172310/d10k.htm#tx87147_1
For how long? Beck has thrust himself into the spotlight, hawking his TV show from his radio show, and generally creating mischief. I watch him from time to time just to see if he'll have a nervous breakdown on live TV...but I won't be watching much longer. The Beck phenomenon will die down...
Perhaps progressives don't spend as much time watching television blowhards (on either side) because they either are uninterested in TV altogether or because they prefer getting their news from more diverse sources? I like books, magazines, and newspapers for my news. But I guess I'm an intellectual elistist to be mocked. (I also like Dijon mustard, which is another tell-tale sign).
Or even a better explanation: These people that are inclined to watch purely partisan individuals feed them information <i>which they already are inclined agree with</i> are much more likely to be conservatives. Some people find lots of reassurance from having someone feed them "information" which tends to conform to their preconceived notions and beliefs. Like people that go to churches every week to hear the preacher/priest give a homily explaining how some topical event can be successfully analyzed using only information provided in the New Testament (because that Old Testament stuff is a little wacky -- GOD HATES SHRIMP! and all).
So the right wing has more partisan hacks and attracts more people on its extremist fringes than the left. I guess its good if you think it helps your party, but its one reason a number of fiscal conservatives have left the Republicans, leaving them with ~23% of the populace willing to associate themselve with the party.
Memo to self: MOCK my neighbor who works for LifeLock.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/14/782041/-Glenn-Beck-ShowSPONSORS-LISTMon-Sep-14-Show
it's got links and phone numbers you can use to contact these sponsors
No matter what your race is, if you know someone who has diabetes and s/he is not a racist, please let them know about Color of Change's Glenn Beck boycott!
To get Beck off the air? : YES
Is this what happens when someone calls somebody else a racist? : YES
and before you even try to say it, he also never once called Bush a "racist" either. He did call Bush a blubbering idiot, but that was a fair assessment of the President considering what he did to this country.
Do you actually watch his show? Are you talking about the Blackboard of Truth?
His lessons in art history and building design?
His claims that FEMA is building concentration camps?
That President Obama hates white culture?
And there is nothing "un-American" about not financially supporting a television show that spews lies, racism, and stupid stories the host just makes up.
I recently started a liberal blog.
In the blog are banner ads, from Google's AdSense. And who's is the first ad that I see, and which has come up the most often?
ANN-FREAKIN'-COULTER!!!
I pull up my page, and her ugly mug has consistently been the first ad to come up!
I've considered taking [the ad] down, but I figure: what the heck. I think there's a delicious irony in the fact that my LIBERAL BLOG is being sponsored by ANN COULTER.
In the same vein, I considered doing the Blog on Murdoch-owned MySpace. I thought it would humourous that he'd invested in a network that was being used to distribute a liberal message. But then why should I generate content and ad-revenue for him, and not get my cut? :)
(No conservtaive would ever be that generous!) ;)