Did Glenn Beck just post a new ratings low for 2010?
April 15, 2010 12:20 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
It sure looks that way, as Beck's ratings continue to sag.
Bottom line: Over the last nine months, Beck gained and then lost nearly one million viewers. Trust me, in the world of cable news, that's not small feat.
Based on the numbers I've been surveying, it looks like Beck hit his (non-vacation) 2010 low last week, on April 9, when Nielsen tagged his audience at 1.96 million. By way of comparison, during late January, Beck was averaging more than 3 million viewers each night. And since September of last year, Beck had been averaging approximately 2.5 million-plus viewers each night. But recently, in the wake of the health care reform passage, those numbers have been heading south. Fast.
Based on the Nielsen numbers, here's a look at Beck's average daily rating over the last month.

You'll note that aside from a temporary spike that came on March 22, the Monday after the historic health care vote, Glenn Beck has spent the last four weeks with between 2.5 million and 2.0 million viewers, which represents a downward trend. (You'll also note a low of 1.76 million viewers on March 31, but Beck was off on vacation that night.)
In terms of the longer trend, Jed Lewison at Daily Kos recently produced this chart, which tracked Beck's weekly ratings since he signed on to Fox News in January, 2009. Note how the show, for weeks on end, often flirted with the 3 million viewer mark. But no more.

And do you see how Glenn Beck consistently posted its weakest numbers during the summer months last year? With the show's ratings heading south this spring, will the summer of 2010 set even more ratings lows for the star talker?


















Like I said, Fox may be able to absorb his loss of advertisers, but they aren't going to put up with a loss of ratings for very long.
Oh, wait . . .
This should be very interesting.
Nope. His crap is running out on him, and people are seeing what kind of a fake and fraud he really is.
----------------------------
IMHO
Olbermann and Beck don't compete for viewers, so Olbermann has no place in this discussion. Beck's numbers have been falling as more and more people are waking up to the fact that he is a charlatan . . . he's even admitted it, Mag.
Debunking what someone said, mocking someone and telling others to ignore them is NOT "feeding" a troll, you doofus.
Doing what YOU did? Feeding the troll. Once their point has been effectively shot down by someone else, ALL additional comments are feeding the troll.
Trolls want negative attention to continue. Stopping that, or attempting to stop that, from happening, is NOT a bad thing, nor is it 'feeding' them.
Now, this has been explained to you at least 5 times now - how is it that you still don't understand it? Or is it that your personal animus towards me is so powerful that you DO know that you are wrong with your assertion that I was feeding a troll but you just couldn't stop yourself from making a personal attack? Because it's got to be one or the other. You need to examine your behavior here.
The best way to stop a troll in their tracks and to stop repeated replies to a troll post is to identify that troll post for what it is.
Because we can't get every single person to ignore troll posts without a warning, the warning is necessary. I wish it weren't. But the warning isn't feeding them.
But, Olberman isn't even remotely as crazy as Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, et all.
I think Olbermann's program is good, but it's useless unless you are someone who doesn't read very much and only gets their information from the TV.
Fox viewers watch Fox exclusively because they have been indoctrinated by their favorite hosts to distrust any other news outlet.
BTW, Olbermann's ratings with regard to Beck's are specious. They don't directly compete for viewers. Different time slots.
Keep on topic, Mag. This thread is about Glenn "Harold Hill" Beck, the entertainer who doesn't give a flying crap about the crap he spews on his programs.
Nice try, though, Mag. I thought you were finally beginning to understand what a JOKE Beck was and how he has been using you and others like you to fatten his wallet. I guess I was wrong.
Mag, he has ADMITTED that he doesn't really give a crap about the stuff he says and he has ADMITTED that he is a con man. WAKE UP . . . other people are, based upon his ratings slide.
Hopefully, this dishonest, uneducated con man will lose his platform for his lies soon. He is destroying our country.
Just argue with yourself, Mag.
2- Are everybody's ratings down 43% in 3 months? If not, you have no point whatsoever. As usual.
Keep defending this lying jerk all you want. Hopefully, his ratings will continue to slide and he will no longer be a topic of discussion anywhere. His 15 minutes were up MONTHS and MONTHS ago.
He is destructive and divisive and he doesn't care as long as he gets his money. That's what it's all been about, Mag . . . money and attention.
Well, the thing you aren't taking into account is that during the time period in question, it was much more likely to be "Countdown with Lawrence O'Donnell" since Keith was off a lot of that time caring for his father.
Biggest taxer in modern history - Reagan/ Bush 1
Biggest increases in national debt - Republicans
Biggest increases in gov't jobs - Republicans
Most convictions of administration officials - Reagan w/ 32
That's why right wing media lies because without it a republican would never get elected.
1) The economy is humming along so well that a lot of those 5, 4, 3, 2 PM couch potatoes are back at work, no longer watching afternoon TV.
2) The little thing called Daylight Savings time, along with sunshine in the afternoons, evenings are tearing people away from their TVs to enjoy the outdoors.
3) The lot of viewers have decided they don't need to watch Beck live, they can visit MMFA a couple hours later and get the highlights complete with a list of advertisers.
Don't know for sure, just saying perhaps................
-------------------------
The Midnight Review
-------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Unfortunately for them, Glenn trashed that opportunity with his poorly-considered "racist" rant. But he still gets plenty of eyeballs, and Fox has the prestige of having a star (of its own making) on its network. Besides, Fox can -and does- trot him out on other shows.
But if people get tired of Beck's schtick, then what does Fox have? A $2M a year host taking up an hour of airtime every day, and bringing not enough to the table.
You are only showing the ratings for Beck's first show. Out here in the western part of the country, the weather is nice, people are outside and no one is watching TV. When you add his two shows together, the ratings are the same as they have been. More people out west are just watching his second show. Those ratings have nearly doubled since daylight savings time took effect. Also, when you look at the ratings east of the Mississippi, the ratings are the same.
How do I know? I sell advertising for a living...... My income depends on knowing what is happening.