Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Because it irritates paT...

I keep reminding paT that nobody watches MSNBC, which is a frequent source of his ramblings. Here are the hard numbers. Yes kids, it's true. Nobody is watching MSNBC, not even liberals, not even a little, not even at all...

lifted from Drudgereport.com

ONLY 231,000 VIEWERS WATCH NEW MSNBC PRIMETIME OFFERING**...

CABLE NEWS RACE
TUES NITE 6/14/05
[VIEWERS]

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 2,722,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY/COLMES 2,016,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,864,000
FOXNEWS SHEP SMITH 1,563,000
CNN LARRY KING 1,277,000
CNN AARON BROWN 751,000
CNN ZAHN 718,000
CNN COOPER 618,000
CNNHN NANCY GRACE 583,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 459,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 330,000
MSNBC SCARBOROUGH 325,000
MSNBC TUCKER CARLSON** 231,000

3 comments:

Patrick Armstrong said...

Man, the next time I trust numbers from the Drudge Report will be the first. You're just mad because every time you send me a link to new news that you think gets ignored by the MSM, I send you a three day old MSNBC report that says the same thing ;)

But you're right, few liberals watch MSNBC (that's how Tucker Carlson has a job), most of them base their information only on what other liberals tell them in coffee shops or trendy townies bars ;) This is opposed to righty tighties, who apparently trust every uncited survey tha Matt Drudge posts on his website ;)

But keep this in mind, I rarely watch MSNBC. But I check the headlines every hour and a half on MSNBC Online which has much higher numbers.

Lastly, some statistics and commentary you may find interesting concerning just this topic, from back in March. The data is in the middle of the column, so scroll down. It also verifies Drudge's O'Reilly numbers, so the only thing that we can really extrapolate from all this is that Bill O'Reilly has over 2 million viewers as a static number.

S.A.W.B. said...

I would wager that Drudge has better things to do with his time than to make up Nielsen numbers for cable news shows.

MSNBC has shown no real sense in their choices for hosts for their shows,(see: Miller, Dennis, and McEnroe, John.) which is why they have tended to bomb in terms of viewership.

Do they have a pretty decent news/research department? It would appear so. Granted, it's not all that hard to check facts(re: Newsweek) and verify that the stories that are being printed are the work of the journalist who is claiming them(re: New York Times), but they seem to be doing a good job on that end...

Patrick Armstrong said...

1. Apparently not.

2. I agree completely with the exception of Olbermann.

3. But with the state of the MSM today, that's what I'm all about.
;)