LAT: The Tucker Carlson mystery -- how does his show survive without major advertisers?

[DBoon]

Carlson is the undisputed star of Fox News Channel. In the April Nielsen ratings he trounced all other cable news programming, with an average audience of more than 3 million viewers. His Tucker Carlson Tonight also finished first in the sought-after 25-54 age segment, averaging 523,000 viewers.

Yet the advertising lineup of Carlson’s show displays virtually no class at all. Judging from my viewing of the program on a couple of recent evenings, it comprises one advertiser that has attracted a regulatory complaint, another dinged for alleged ineffectiveness, a few others selling products for geriatrics that one would more expect to see more on daytime TV or in predawn hours, and a few other minor consumer products.

...

He also could be a key to an effort by Fox News to retain its grip on a right-wing, low-information audience in the face of challenges by outfits such as OAN, even farther to the right.

Lachlan Murdoch, to be fair, says he doesn’t worry about those rivals on the right. America is a center-right country, he told Wall Street analysts in February. “We don’t need to go further right,” he said. “All our significant competitors are to the far left.” Yet does Carlson’s veer into the far-right fever swamp really fit that strategy?

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-04-30/tucker-carlson-major-advertisers

[Hugin]

1. The answer is his show is an investment in disinformation...

The Reich Wing is willing to make to push their message.

Exactly like AM talk radio.

Pure propaganda.

[crickets]

24. +1

[Midnight Writer]

28. Exactly. The AM Hate Radio stations in my area don't even run commercials.

The idea that conservatives dominate the AM airwave because of market forces is a lie.

Someone is paying these stations to run these programs, and they are not advertisers. I would love to see those someones exposed.

[Mysterian]

2. Fox News does not rely on advertising

It is funded by billionaire fascists who wish to install a dictatorship in the USA.

[Kid Berwyn]

3. Information

Last edited Fri Apr 30, 2021, 12:24 PM - Edit history (1)

[Effete Snob]

8. Good thing you cut off that screenshot before the Clinton and Qanon stuff in that article

Is there a rule at DU about posting Qanon stuff, or is it okay?

The screenshotted excerpt above intentionally does not provide a link to the source of the article, which you can find by googling long text strings in quotes.

The article comes from here:

https://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2019/08/13/was-rupert-murdoch-involved-in-the-jeffrey-epstein-paedophile-scandal-given-his-details-were-in-epsteins-black-book/

It continues:

"Jeffrey Epstein was a well-known paedophile who was friends with both US President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton. Both Trump and Clinton have a long list of women who have accused them of sexual assault and rape."

And then goes into the secret global worldwide pedophile ring of powerful people.

[Metatron]

15. FYI

You can click the Alert Abuse link at the bottom of a post, if you believe it violates a rule. Welcome to DU!

[Effete Snob]

17. The way the post is presented...

...is of an unsourced screenshot which cuts off the swerve into Qanon land.

I don't know if that is "abuse", but it seems intentionally designed to avoid identifying the source or where the rest of the article goes.

Qanon promoters tailor their approach to their audience.

[Kid Berwyn]

16. Did not see that. Thanks.

Don’t care much for those who were in Epstein’s orbit, no matter their party or nationality. And I’ve written about that for years.


Three Big Pols Who Won't Miss Jeffrey Epstein.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212387641


Let's add Rudy GIULIANI to the list of pols who won't miss Jeffrey Epstein.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=journals&uid=352446&year=2019&month=8


Let's add Kenneth STARR to list...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12388595


Jimmy Savile wasn't mentioned much by America's MSM

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12388660


His Honor may not be the worst on the Dixie Mafia bench. John D ''Roy'' Atchison is a name to know.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5397265

[Kid Berwyn]

21. It's not my screen. It's a Google image.

Anything to say about Maxwell and Murdoch?

[Effete Snob]

31. You swapped out the image in your post

The image that is there now is not the one you posted and to which I replied.

[Kid Berwyn]

32. Yes, it's the one I thought I originally pasted.

Here’s where I posted it in July 2020:

Amazing what belief can do.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=13826686

Here’s what Google turned up when I searched the other day, the one you now miss:



Don’t know why you made a big deal of it.

So, do you have anything to say about the subject of my post, the long-standing relationship of Rupert Murdoch and Ghislaine Maxwell?

[Kingofalldems]

22. So you posted it.

I wasn't in the original response.

[Effete Snob]

30. Okay so just to be clear

It's okay to use Qanon-promoting sources, as long as one only quotes the part that doesn't give it away. Do I have that right?

Edit: there was a different image there when I responded. The post was edited so the poster could deny what was there originally.

Edit Edit: Look at the "original version" in the edit history of the post. I'm guessing you are replying to the updated version of the thread, which is different than what I was replying to.

[Kid Berwyn]

33. Read reply 32 and look at the original picture again.

So you object to a picture.

I change the picture.

Now you object to my changing the picture.

[Effete Snob]

34. I'm interested in how you found the original picture

It’s from an Imgur account, so it’s not as if it ran in a news article that would be highly ranked in a search. It’s a picture of part of an article from a site about a global ring of pedophiles.

I’d like to re-create the search you used to find it. What search terms did you use in Google images?

Also, the original one had text from the article and your post was headed “information”.

So to make sure I understand you, the “information” was simply intended to be the picture of the two of them, because any time there is a picture of two people it means that they are deeply involved in something.

Do I understand you correctly?

[Kid Berwyn]

35. Google search.

Like I wrote above.

[Effete Snob]

36. Yes

What are the search terms that provide that picture as a result.

I’ve tried a bunch of different keyword combinations, and that original screencap doesn’t come up.

[Kid Berwyn]

37. Rupert Murdoch Ghislaine Maxwell works for me.

Anything to say about them?

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Fox news does not depend ln ads. Its cable biz is mainly supported by...

cable charges and sports. Fox news could almost be considered a loss leader.

[msfiddlestix]

26. Exactly, and that shit has to end.

[doc03]

5. I don't watch Faux I thought Hannity was the

king of the garbage heap.

[PatSeg]

10. I think he was,

but apparently even Hannity wasn't quite crazy enough. Tucker seems to get more extreme all the time. It would seem he would end up self-destructing eventually. Well, one would hope anyway.

[blm]

6. Same way RightWing propaganda generator Moonie Times does and

has since the early 80s....propped up by wealthy, antiAmerican fascists intent on destroying democracy in the US. Add that to the cable fees paid by consumers and you have one helluva propaganda machine.

The Korean cult leader and the Australian extortionist knew exactly what they intended in the 80s and 90s, and they succeeded in gaining control over an entire political party.

[hibbing]

7. "All our significant competitors are to the far left."

Hmmm... those must not be available in my cable line up because I certainly can't find any far left "news" channels.

Peace

[PatSeg]

11. I know

I've been looking for those "far left news channels" for years and still haven't found them.

[Golden Raisin]

9. Tucker won't be gone until the Murdochs (Pere & Fils)

have reached their breaking point.

[spanone]

12. Lachlan Murdoch is full of shite.

[SheltieLover]

13. Putin?

Someone needs to put him in his place.

[inwiththenew]

14. Tucker Carlson is hands down the biggest draw on that channel

If they lost him they would hemorrhage viewers to other right wing outlets. He's probably the only thing keeping a good chunk of Fox's viewers around. Fox know this so even if they can't get advertisers during his time slot they can make up it up during less controversial time slots.

[TheRealNorth]

20. Yup

Tucker is where the average RW'r is at. If he were gone, they would just seek out the kooks on OAN and Newsmax.

[EleanorR]

19. $1.9 billion from cable fees in the last six months of 2020

Cable fees and propaganda keep murdoch's coffers full.

Then there are the economics of Fox as a cable offering. The network earns far more in fees from cable operators carrying its content than from advertising — $1.9 billion from cable fees in the last six months of 2020, according to its financial disclosures, compared with $740 million from advertising.

[MurrayDelph]

23. I'm looking forward to a la carte pricing

No Fox news, no sports. I'd save a bunch right there.

[TreasonousBastard]

29. Never happen, as much as we all would like it. Local cable company looked at what sports...

channels were charging, and knew it sports fans were rabid, but not enough to pay the full freight.

It was charge the fans an extra 50 bucks a month or all of us 5 bucks a month. If you were a business, which would you choose?

(Numbers are not exact, since this was a long time ago, but close enough)

[edhopper]

38. This is it

right here.

[dsc]

25. It isn't a mystery

they get large fees from cable companies to carry them, and his ratings help them demand that. Carrier fees are more than advertising for them.

[librechik]

27. also, as a Swanson TV dinner heir, he could probably payroll the production himself

in an emergency.

[Takket]

39. thread on this...

he says to "cut the cord" but many streaming bundles ALSO include Faux news...

maybe some DUers know. I'm looking at sling TV as an alternate. sling blue has faux. sling orange does not. if i sign up for sling orange, does that mean i'm not subsidizing faux?

I'd like to have some kind of package without my money going to faux.

Link to tweet

?s=20

Link to tweet

?s=20

Link to tweet

?s=20

Link to tweet

?s=20