So who's still advertising on Beck? October 2 edition...
October 02, 2009 6:26 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 October 2 sponsors, in the order they appeared:
- Goldline International, Inc.
- National Review
- FX
- News Corp. (The Wall Street Journal)
- Roche Diagnostics (Accu-Chek Aviva)
- Dish Network
- Nutramax Laboratories, Inc. (Cosamin)
- Rosland Capital
- Consumer Debt Advocate
- Fox TV (MLB Playoffs)
- Lear Capital
- City of Hope
- Maravu Plantation Beach Resort & Spa
- The Foundation for a Better Life
- Brother International Corporation
- Sandals
- The Scooter Store
- Hydrolyze
- Americans Against Food Taxes
- Fox Movie Channel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Idiot
It's just a genetic flaw in their brain.
60 of Glenn "Obama hates white people" Beck's *former* sponsors cared. They're gone.
One thing the boycott achieved is prove to any remaining doubters that there is no such thing as "real conservatism". Real conservatives would have responded to this boycott by insisting on replacing Beck with an intelligent conservative interested in advancing the debate.
Conservatism as an ideology is permanently dead and in its ruins is nothing but a carnival sideshow. If you're conservative, you're a stupid nutcase just like every single one of your leaders.
Really did becks show get canceled I must of missed that. Becks show has helped get a few people fired. You have a strange definition of victory.
Whenever you start seeing a network having to buy it's own ad time, you've got big, big problems.
It's like hearing ads on the radio that tell us why it's such a good idea to advertise on this station. It's a cry for help.
If you ever want to hear the all-time record for ad-space bought by a station because they can't sell real ads, just listen to the Hugh Hewitt Show on WIND in Chicago. Five nights a week and every other ad is one of those "Advertising on WIND is Good Bizness" ads. Pure wingnut welfare and it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
Seems to me that boycotts have rarely been very effective through history. But the THREAT of a boycott can be very effective.
In this case, it seems the threat is what has caused advertisers to bail, rather than an organized boycott of advertisers' products.
There hasn't really been time enough for a boycott to get started and have an impact.
Perfect. Becky's legion of doughy people can finally give up walking for good.
"It hurts my head doing all that thinkin' of which leg to move."
Stations run those so they can keep their license.
However, they usually run PSA's late at night or on weekends because they have PAYING customers for the prime-time shows. The fact that they're running PSAs during Beck's show is nothing less than a sign that they're having serious trouble selling ads, even to the "work-at-home" scams and penis enlargement pill companies.
I had no idea that Fox is reduced to running public-service spots on Beck's show. That's a win.
I don't believe I've ever read one of your posts where you weren't calling someone an idiot, hypocrite, maggot or something else.
So the answer is no. The president's is not a paid ad.
We'll wait for you to admit your mistake.
You know, fishergirl, maybe you'd feel better if you listened to the VA ad, turned off the TV and went out and helped other Americans. That's what the Marines around here do . . . and guys from our local Air Force base. They work side by side with the citizens of our community to help those less fortunate than they are . . . those darned LIBERALS!
Nice try, though.
According to this its the liberals who need to step up and help out more. Libs only seem to be charitable with other people’s time and money!
Truth hurts, highliter, doesn't it?
CoC can accurately claim they are responsible for Beck losing 60+ advertisers. But until they can substantiate that their efforts have caused a financial burden the victory is pretty hollow.
Neither CoC or FoxNews has provided any documentation about the financial impact...just he said/he said:
- CoC's claim of a huge financial loss suffered by Beck...with "data analyzed from industry sources"...is unsubstantiated.
- FoxNews claim that "the data is wildly inaccurate" is also undocumented.
The safety net will remain securely in place as long as Beck continues to crush the 5PM competition...as well as dominating the liberal big 3 of Big Ed, KO, and Maddow by routinely pulling as many viewers as the three of them combined.
Let me repeat for the record...I'm not a fan of Beck...nor do I watch his show. I just see little evidence that the CoC boycott has produced any tangible results.
Assuming that you're not a fan for the right reasons (Beck lies every sixth word and makes a mockery of our national discourse), this puts a ton of pressure on the popularity=excellence meme.
It's right in front of your face that circus clowns fill more seats than economics professors. So any future defense of Fox News will be based on the content of its programming, and any future denigration of liberal news shows will be based on the content of their programming. Good to know.
If the goal of the boycott was to remove Beck, it was a hopeless cause as the entire Fox News channel was subsidized for three years while they struggled to find out which lies work the best. Fox can easily afford to subsidize one show. Such a goal would be dependent on Fox doing the right thing, which was never going to happen.
The tangible results of the boycott were to make Beck's advertiser list as loony as he is, cause slumbering pundits on other channels to occasionally speak negatively of a Fox News personality (a historic achievement), eliminate the fiction of "real conservatism", and expose all of Beck's enablers (such as conservatives unwilling to confront the tarnishing of their brand) as warts on democracy.
steeve...that's a banal analysis...one that is usually hauled out by the liberals here when discussing the fact that they get clobbered in the ratings.
I did not make any claim that ratings popularity equals excellence...making your deflection attempt banal as well.
My list of conservative media pundits...that I don't like or support...is pretty long. Flipping that page over finds a pretty long list of liberals in the same category.
CoC's stated objective was to harm Beck and FoxNews financially...one they haven't been able to substantiate.
The winner of this catfight is yet to be determined...but presently Beck has a really large safety net under his highwire act...one that has little to do with excellence or accuracy...and a lot to do with ratings and popularity.
And I also didn't lash out with a banality charge after making the most banal point of all -- that Beck is popular, and being popular helps you stay on the air.
As for your CONSTANT references to ratings, when the Fox programing can bring in higher ratings than say reruns of Smallville on the CW, I'll take your posit regarding ratings seriously. Right now, they just make me laugh. Very few people in this country are watching Fox.
So far, Beck's "safety net" has 62 big holes in it. But at least you nailed the essence of Beck's show by using a circus metaphor.
Says the guy who misspells "Hussein".