Reply
Wed 28 Jul, 2004 02:32 am
http://www.wvec.com/sharedcontent/washington/convention/topstories/072804ccdrDembackcol.1c9b9a25.html
Quote:
"At one time they were kind of like the Super Bowl in a presidential campaign year," he said. "They're now like a preseason NFL game. ... You have to take a speed-yawning course to get through some of this stuff, even when you're in the convention hall. I could see people nodding off, and I couldn't blame them. In this almost catatonic state, conventions will disappear unless somebody in one party at least decides to rethink them and bring them back in a form where they matter. If we were on for three hours a night, in a lot of places a test pattern would get better ratings."
Two of the most riveting speeches in convention history occurred over the past two nights. People were crying and going bonkers. I see the lying liars are still at it.
Reserving qualitative evaluation of the matter covered, the fact remains the ratings show the convention isn't very high on America's Must-Watch List; even granting that the cable outlets showed viewership increases compared to their convention coverage totals of 4 years ago, overall viewership, in terms of market share, is the lowest since TV began covering the events. In terms of overall numbers, viewership this year is significantly below that for any recent convention. The Cartoon Network had higher Prime Time ratings both Monday and Tuesday evenings than did any outlet offering convention coverage. Interestingly, the outlet showing the greatest covention viewership increase was FOX, and still FOX's ratings for both nights were well below those customary for that network's normally scheduled programming. The only excitement revolving about this cycle's convention coverage is in the minds of the activists; Joe and Sally Mainstream just aren't there. Of note along the same line, despite the fanfare and hoopla of the media and the stridencey of the activists, voter participation in this years primary contests reached historic lows nationally even given higher-than-normal turnouts in a couple of contests.
which speaks well for Bush's reelection efforts.
typical right wing bullshit to take the quote out of context...they're talking about conventions period Democrat AND republican conventions.....nice try sweetie.
timberlandko wrote:Reserving qualitative evaluation of the matter covered, the fact remains the ratings show the convention isn't very high on America's Must-Watch List; even granting that the cable outlets showed viewership increases compared to their convention coverage totals of 4 years ago, overall viewership, in terms of market share, is the lowest since TV began covering the events. In terms of overall numbers, viewership this year is significantly below that for any recent convention. The Cartoon Network had higher Prime Time ratings both Monday and Tuesday evenings than did any outlet offering convention coverage. Interestingly, the outlet showing the greatest covention viewership increase was FOX, and still FOX's ratings for both nights were well below those customary for that network's normally scheduled programming. The only excitement revolving about this cycle's convention coverage is in the minds of the activists; Joe and Sally Mainstream just aren't there. Of note along the same line, despite the fanfare and hoopla of the media and the stridencey of the activists, voter participation in this years primary contests reached historic lows nationally even given higher-than-normal turnouts in a couple of contests.
Yes bushs' voter base expands....half literate dicks who are too lazy to form any political opinion other that what's spoon fed to them in the 5 minutes a day they devote to keeping up with the counrty they live in and how it's going......bush will surely be reelected at this rate......
dyslexia wrote:which speaks well for Bush's reelection efforts.
It very well may; inertia works. A thing at rest tends to remain at rest, and incumbency is difficult to overcome. While there's no reason to expect any higher viewer interest in the upcoming Republican convention, either, there is some cause to suspect the "Oust Bush" movement faces significant hurdles.
we once had the "silent majority" now we have the "comatose majority" it's qute possible Spiro Agnew could get elected in these strange times.
Yeah, well, we wouldn't want anyone to miss Fear Factor or any of the other moronic fare, would we?
odd that righties are talking so much about THIS convention, though.
I sure don't see a lack of interest
here.
It's a shocker, I say.
One would expect that with the huge percentage of Americans who vote, conventions would get big ratings!
Yah, right!
Harper wrote:Two of the most riveting speeches in convention history occurred over the past two nights. People were crying and going bonkers. I see the lying liars are still at it.
One possibility is that the country got its fill of demmunist "riveting speeches" at Paul Wellstone's memorial. Like the guy says, it isn't selling terribly well right now.
timberlandko wrote:dyslexia wrote:which speaks well for Bush's reelection efforts.
It very well may; inertia works. A thing at rest tends to remain at rest, and incumbency is difficult to overcome. While there's no reason to expect any higher viewer interest in the upcoming Republican convention, either, there is some cause to suspect the "Oust Bush" movement faces significant hurdles.
Selling fear, lies, and pure hate in America has never been easy...
The convention is mostly speeches, with media commentary, very poor visuals. I'm not watching it, I'm listing to it on the radio...so what are the radio rating?
The ratings on tv may not be very good, but the few times i watched it in passing it looked like a very big crowd in the audience.
Jon Stewart is the best coverage of the convention and likely getting more hits than the hi-def coverage on VOOM satellite. No interrupting pundits but I did switch to PBS and for their commentary. Obama got the most glowing reviews. Why even write about the ratings of political conventions? It's sad that not many do watch at least some of it especially the opposition to hear the other side. How do people decide who they're going to vote for? They're largely robotic, pre-programmed to vote exclusively their partyline. The programmers are too often the parents. HAL the computer has more free will. Who's going to pull the cord in this case?
So, can anyone pass us the actual ratings? I couldnt get into that link of swolfs, you have to register (I must be registered for some three dozen newspapers online now, I get so tired of it). So if anyone has the numbers, for example for Clinton's, Edwards' and Kerry's speeches, I'd be much obliged, thank you!
Mebbe not exactly what you're after, nimh, but take a look
Here
Pretty much yawnsville.
swolf wrote:Selling fear, lies, and pure hate in America has never been easy...
Then that just means you have to try harder,
swolf.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace