Digby's Hullabaloo
2801 Ocean Park Blvd.
Box 157
Santa Monica, Ca 90405

Facebook: Digby Parton

@BloggersRUs (Tom Sullivan)

thedigbyblog at gmail
satniteflix at gmail
publius.gaius at gmail
tpostsully at gmail
Spockosbrain at gmail
Richardein at me.com


Mother Jones
Raw Story
Huffington Post
Crooks and Liars
American Prospect
New Republic

Denofcinema.com: Saturday Night at the Movies by Dennis Hartley review archive

January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 September 2014 October 2014 November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018 July 2018


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?


Saturday, October 08, 2016

Glenn Beck's Blaze is Flaming Out, And We Helped! 

by Spocko

From the Huffington Post:

Glenn Beck’s The Blaze Is Falling Apart, Staff Says Once the envy of other right-leaning sites. Not anymore. -Huffington Post

Dragon's Breath at Firefighter School,
by Lance Cheung
Creative Commons Licence 
It's a nice story about Glenn Beck's The Blaze falling apart. The other day Digby wrote about what this might mean for conservative media and what it might mean for the Talking Yam after his electoral failure.

What the Huffington Post story doesn't cover is why Beck had to create his own media "empire" instead of staying in the protected bubble of Fox News and News Corp. He was fired, canned, pushed out, let go, contract not renewed, left to spend more time crying with his family or whatever euphemism is used these days. News Corp gave all sorts of lame reasons, but the documented fact that he stopped bringing in ad revenue for News Corp is a huge part of why he is off Fox.

And the reason ad revenue disappeared is because of the incredible work of my friends at Color of Change, Angelo Carusone of @stopbeck (now at Media Matters) and all of their supporters. They convinced advertisers to not associate their brand with Beck's race baiting and craziness.

This decoupling of consumer goods advertisers from conservative media is a really big deal. It's something that I and a legion of people have been working on for over a decade. The success of my friends in the #stoprush group alone is absolutely phenomenal.

We've found that in general advertisers don't like to support racist, sexist bigots. There are some exceptions, especially those whose audience sees being called a sexist bigot a compliment.

The reason I developed the Spocko Method to defund right-wing media was because while I knew there are plenty of people who will happily consume racist, sexist claptrap, I also knew that the women and men running consumer businesses do not want to be publicly associated with it. Using these people's desire to protect their brand has led to a massive loss of revenue to right-wing media distributors.

Right-wing radio and TV hosts like Limbaugh and Beck have gone from cash generating assets, to consumer brand damaging liabilities.

If Trump decides to start a media company he will be competing with Fox News and other networks for advertisers, many of whom pressured those media companies to not associate their brand with Trump.
  • Are the thousands of advertisers who left Limbaugh because of his sexist comments about women going to want to be associated with Trump News?

  • Will the hundreds of advertisers who said, "Take us off race-baiter Beck's show!" flock to the network of Donald "Mexicans are rapists and women are pigs" Trump? 

This does not mean that a "Trump News" wouldn't have tremendous traffic like Glenn Beck did. In the beginning Trump will be able to generate huge traffic, but not necessarily ad revenue. And traffic alone might be enough for Trump, especially if it is the only metric that he reveals. But the idea pushed by conservatives to the mainstream media and the liberal media is that if you don't generate revenue it's not really a success. Of course the same metric doesn't exist for right-wing media.

The possibility of a popular, but money losing, Trump network should concern us and remind us of another media model that is glossed over. It currently exists and it shapes "conventional wisdom." It's the "purposely lose millions in your news divisions to push an agenda" model. As an example, did you know that the New York Post LOSES around $110 MILLION dollars a year, every year?

This is the Murdoch model. He uses his money-losing properties, often newspapers, to punish his enemies and threaten the people who disagree with him and his views. He uses all his properties to push the "no-taxes on the rich, no trust busting, no regulation" views.

And he's not the only rich right winger who throws bad money after bad to push extreme conservative views in the media, often times by being the media. Were you aware that the Washington Times lost a billion dollars over 33 years? I'm sure you know about how Pete Peterson is spending one billion dollars
"..to underwrite numerous organizations and PR campaigns to generate public support for slashing Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, citing concerns over "unsustainable" federal budget deficits.
 --SourceWatch, the Center for Media and Democracy

How do you think that conservative framed question on social security got into the VP debate?

Getting advertisers to agree that the ideas of the right-wing hosts and leaders are so toxic they won't let their brand within earshot or eyeshot of them is an important development--and a very positive one.

I'm extremely proud of the radical shift in attitude among advertisers who have stopped publicly supporting RW radio and TV pundits. But I'm not stupid, I know that getting consumer advertisers to stop paying for right-wing propaganda is only a temporary set back for the right-wing noise machine. They have moved to other methods to fund right-wing media. Thanks Citizens United!

Also by working the refs, the media companies have become so huge they don't have to break out revenue streams, it's hard to see all the ways secret money pushes an agenda.
One of the things that I did after Beck stopped generating revenue for News Corp was to let the institutional investors and financial media know about it. The idea I pushed to the investors was, 'If Murdoch wants to lose money on a show, let him do it with his own money, not ours."
But here's the thing, Trump doesn't need a profit making media empire to push his ideas, just a Twitter account and a phone. Why would he spend money on programming or infrastructure when the media will include his Tweets for free?

I think that Trump will continue to use the media to promote himself after he loses. It will be very hard for the media to wean themselves of the tiny-fingered walking orange hairball they have enjoyed pimping 24/7 for over a year. What will stop them from continuing to run his tweets alongside every single story about every single Clinton action during her term?
I'm actually kind of hoping that Cheeto head does try to start a media empire, because it would cut into his visibility on the rest of the "news" shows.
One of the reasons that media will keep running with Trump's comments on Hillary after the election is because it keeps the conflict going. Expect continued, "He said she said, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, we have to leave it there." from the media.

Sometimes watching the media use their constitutionally granted power to enrich their investors, rather than inform people, leads me to despair. We talk a lot about the need to get money out of politics. We know it's bad because of how it corrupts our elected officials. But it also twists the people who get that money.

The media aren't going to voluntarily walk away from an Orange Goose who lays golden eggs. We need to change things so that the media doesn't have to depend on covering the tweets of an Orange Goose to feed their families.