Al Gore's Current TV Could Go Belly-Up If Keith F'n' Olbermann Doesn't Start Delivering Big Ratings

I forgot this absurd thing about cable programming: Cable services pay these channels, which you don't watch, with money they extract from you.

We really, really need a menu service for cable. If a channel isn't interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he shouldn't have to pay for it.

So Current TV is financed to the tune of a hundred million or so per year from cable companies, which extract the money from you without asking.

When Current's contracts come up for renewal in the next several years, some companies may balk at paying so much for a channel no one watches.

The plan may well be the network’s last chance. The lion’s share of its $115 million in revenues comes from fees that cable carriers pay to host the network—a relatively high rate of 12 cents per subscriber—but its ratings are not high enough to sustain those fees, according to an analysis by the financial-data firm SNL Kagan. With carriage agreements beginning to expire in the next couple of years, the network is likely to see a sharp drop in financing unless its viewership turns around. “They’ve got a very limited window here to get their programming in order,” says Derek Baine, an analyst with SNL Kagan. “The channel has been around for a long time and has gone through many iterations, but despite having quite a lot of subscribers, they’ve never really latched on to a significant viewing audience.”

Because this is the Daily Beast, they must of course offer a reason why so many leftwing media outfits fail.

Also working against the plan is a cold reality about partisan news programming: the right just does it much more successfully than the left. For every Rachel Maddow, the Olbermann protégée who found success on MSNBC, there is an Air America, the left-wing radio network that went belly up in 2010. Liberals in the media argue there’s a very simple explanation for this: that conservatives are just a more unified, lockstep audience, while liberals are more trusting of traditional media and more diffuse in their attentions. “There is an audience on the right that for 30 years has been told the entire mainstream media is out to get them,” says Ari Rabin-Havt, executive vice president of the progressive media-watchdog group Media Matters and author of a forthcoming book about Fox News. No such thing exists on the left. Plus, he says, those who are alienated from the mainstream can find their news at liberal enclaves online, like Daily Kos. “The right wing is so much better organized, they’re machines, they’re robots,” says Uygur. And mainstream media are terrified of them. “It’s like, ‘Oh, my God, if I tell people facts, the Republicans will yell at me,’” he says.

I've got a different theory. How about this one? Liberal media outfits actually don't always fail. See The New York Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN.

Of course liberals refuse to admit those outfits are themselves liberal, which leaves the scratching their heads at the failures of unnecessary -- superfluous --- liberal media outfits like Air America, which is different from the New York Times not in terms of slant but in terms only of nastiness and lesser production values.

The reason that Fox succeeds is that it's an alternative to the clearly liberal major media organizations.

What is Current an alternative to? To Fox? (That is their new plan, to be the leftwing Fox.)

But CNN and CBS and NBC are already the left-wing Fox.

Your big plan is to ad shouting and name-calling? To be both leftwing and vulgar?

That's why these branded-liberal things fail. The leftwing viewpoint is adopted by all but one of the ten biggest media outfits. The only thing a branded-liberal outfit like Air America ads is vulgarity.

And frankly few people like that. Even I, I Fox fan overall, become very annoyed when I feel Fox is pitching too low and being too overt in its own partisan leanings.

What liberals want is a liberal network that pretends to be high-minded on nonpartisan. Like NPR.

Anyway, Al Gore begged Keith Olbermann to stay because Gore is in the uneviable position of having to rely on Keith Olbermann to 1, behave in a professional manner and 2, deliver ratings.

Current TV is on cable? Keith Olbermann is on Current? Keith Olbermann has to get a big audience on cable?

Farewell and adieu ye fair Spanish ladies,

Farewell and adieu ye fair ladies of Spain...

Posted by: Ace at 01:35 PM



Comments

1 So in other words it's going down. (Response to the headline.)

Posted by: Have Blue at February 07, 2012 01:36 PM (IKTC8)

2 Reminds me of the joke, the punch line of which is the wife laning over and telling her husband, "He says you're going to die, honey.)

Posted by: Have Blue at February 07, 2012 01:37 PM (IKTC8)

3 I forgot this absurd thing about cable programming: Cable services pay
these channels, which you don't watch, with money they extract from you.

This is the thing I dearly despise about cable. I hated paying that bill every month so finally I just said fuck it and had it cut off.

Posted by: eleven at February 07, 2012 01:39 PM (KXm42)

4 What is the deal with damn italics in this pace? Is it me?

Posted by: eleven at February 07, 2012 01:40 PM (KXm42)

5 Looks like Al is up the Current Creek without an Olberpaddle.

Posted by: WalrusRex at February 07, 2012 01:40 PM (Hx5uv)

6 You mean to say that MSDNC and Current are trying to reach the same folks, who are already completely high in a dug induced fantasy land ?

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at February 07, 2012 01:41 PM (e8kgV)

7 I hope it goes down in glorious flames! Next one to bite the dust (I hope), OWN. Of course, there is that very real possibility that these losers will get some kind of super secret gubamint cheese bailout. They do have friends in high places, after all.

Posted by: runningrn at February 07, 2012 01:41 PM (vJ9tV)

8 4
What is the deal with damn italics in this pace?

Italics ? We don't need no stupid italics. They're for wussy Democrats.

Posted by: Sierra Mardre at February 07, 2012 01:42 PM (e8kgV)

9 No eleven, it isn't you. The HTML tags have been disabled because a troll broke the blog with them. Use [ i ] and [ /i] for italics. (remove the extra spaces I put in to show you).


You have to hit return a couple of times to get the correct spacing between paragraphs also.

Posted by: Tami at February 07, 2012 01:43 PM (X6akg)

10 Crazed Sex Poodles hardest hit.

Posted by: garrett at February 07, 2012 01:43 PM (9oWLC)

11 Liberals in the media argue there’s a very simple explanation for this:
that conservatives are just a more unified, lockstep audience, while
liberals are more trusting of traditional media and more diffuse in
their attentions.


Guileless, gullible and unfocused is no way to go through life, son.

Posted by: Dean Wormer at February 07, 2012 01:44 PM (QKKT0)

12 italics are disabled as are most html commands because a saboteur came in and used html commands to screw with the site.

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2012 01:44 PM (nj1bB)

13 Once CurrentTV goes under, and Keith is a, er, "free agent" again, I would love to see GBTV offer him a job.

He won't have to write a thing. Just sit in the corner on a one-legged stool wearing a dunce-cap. A living prop. Like an ivy, but with trendy glasses and angst.

Posted by: reason at February 07, 2012 01:44 PM (sPO/s)

14 Tell Al Gore things are gonna be fine.

Posted by: SMOD at February 07, 2012 01:44 PM (lVGED)

15 What is the deal with damn italics in this pace? Is it me?

We don't serve no Italics or Chinese in here.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at February 07, 2012 01:45 PM (QKKT0)

16 Speaking of bad news and bad pennies who keep turning up . . . .

http://preview.tinyurl.com/7hjthlu

Posted by: WalrusRex at February 07, 2012 01:45 PM (Hx5uv)

17 I have never watched current tv and don't plan to. I kinda know where it is on my network, but I just fly right by it.

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 01:45 PM (i6RpT)

18 BTW....you'd be surprised how many channels you can get on free TV if you've got the right setup.

Posted by: eleven at February 07, 2012 01:45 PM (KXm42)

19

Farewell and adieu ye fair Spanish ladies,

Farewell and adieu ye fair ladies of Spain...
Every time I hear that song I recall the range time I spent with my Baker rifle (replica).


Posted by: mrp at February 07, 2012 01:45 PM (HjPtV)

20 The time has come, Keith.
Release the Third Chakra.

Posted by: Al Gore at February 07, 2012 01:46 PM (9oWLC)

21 Anyway, Al Gore begged Keith Olbermann to stay because Gore is in the uneviable position of having to rely on Keith Olbermann to 1, behave in a professional manner and 2, deliver ratings.

Wow. I actually feel sorry for Al Gore. Oh. Wait. That passed.

Stop! Bathtube time!

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:46 PM (VtjlW)

22 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable tyrant.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:46 PM (8y9MW)

23 Crappity bathtube = bathtub. This is what I get for commenting while uncaffeinated.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:46 PM (VtjlW)

24 We really, really need a menu service for cable. If a channel isn't
interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he
shouldn't have to pay for it.


Hi there.

Posted by: Roku at February 07, 2012 01:46 PM (29wvc)

25 At least Keith can marry the love of his life in California now...himself.

Posted by: mpfs at February 07, 2012 01:47 PM (iYbLN)

26 >>>BTW....you'd be surprised how many channels you can get on free TV if you've got the right setup.

How so? I am considering dropping cable. What do you mean? Using the computer to send a signal to the TV?

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2012 01:47 PM (nj1bB)

27 I'm thinking AlGore is going to promise Olbie an extra-specially large bathtub and an endless supply of bubble bath and rubber duckies. I just want to be a fly on the wall when Big Al has to beg favors from Der Olberfuhrer.

Posted by: joncelli, too stressed by half at February 07, 2012 01:47 PM (RD7QR)

28 And I repeat, an island never cries.

Posted by: Rep. Hank Johnson, Commander-in-Chief, Biolar Unit at February 07, 2012 01:48 PM (1ZF7c)

29 If Current is trying to out MSNBC I suggest that they monkey with their slogan. MSNBC's is "Lean Forward" so Current's could be "On Your Knees!"

Posted by: WalrusRex at February 07, 2012 01:48 PM (Hx5uv)

30 Look for lots of Energy Department ads and HHS ads.

In fact, someone should investigate just HOW MUCH government ad money Current is currently getting. I bet in is NOT zero.

A list of their advertisers would be a good place to start a boycott too.

This would be a good project for Big Journalism. Get on it boys.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo-intellectual at February 07, 2012 01:48 PM (hXJOG)

31 While reading this I was listening to Megyn Kelly's show where a liberal and a conservative were discussing Bader-Ginsberg's comments about the Consitiution.
Where would you see on MSNBC a conservative included in such a discussion?
The conservative at one point made the claim that Bader-Ginsberg was "un-american".
Kelly went out of her way to criticize him for that.
On Air America the commentary about a conservative would have included gunshot sound effects and talk about lynchings.

Posted by: Have Blue at February 07, 2012 01:48 PM (IKTC8)

32 We really, really need a menu service for cable. If a channel isn't
interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he
shouldn't have to pay for it.


Someone tried that once, and it didn't work. I don't know the specifics, but I imagine it was somewhat hard to hammer out contracts with the content providers (the channels) when the delivery company (the cable company, or whatever they were) was saying, "Well, yes, we'll pay you $2.00 per subscriber who subscribes to your channel." Because most of the cable networks know they don't net that many viewers.

Even Fox News doesn't actually have enough viewership to handle that model.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:48 PM (8y9MW)

33 "Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions."

Ah lets see what words immediately come to mind? Oh yeah: fuck you, you blithering idiot, when did obama ever keep his word and not lie his ass off.

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 01:48 PM (i6RpT)

34
Ala-Fuckin'-Carte, Baby!

No Oprah channel

No Current TV

No Leftist-Apologia-Around-The Clock-TV

Posted by: M. Murcek at February 07, 2012 01:49 PM (ToZXn)

35 Yes, the conservatives are in lockstep. Just look at any thread on this website, especially regarding the Republican nomination.
Lockstep.
What fucking tools these people are.

Posted by: real joe at February 07, 2012 01:49 PM (Oy+Ok)

36 I have never watched current tv and don't plan to. I kinda know where it is on my network, but I just fly right by it.

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 01:45 PM (i6RpT)

I gave it 30 minutes of my time once and it's just as annoying as you probably imagine it to be.

Posted by: ErikW at February 07, 2012 01:49 PM (7uPGt)

37 Oh man. I wish I could pay per channel. I don't watch 90% of the channels I have, but I had to get the second tier up to get the two or three channels I wanted.

Posted by: Ben at February 07, 2012 01:49 PM (wuv1c)

38
Current TV, if they were smart, would run reruns of Happy Days, Green Acres, and QVC.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 07, 2012 01:49 PM (sqkOB)

39 "If a channel isn't interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he shouldn't have to pay for it."

You mean Koreans should pay for their own soap operas? Hispanics should pay for Sabado Gigante themselves?

Let me be the first to say it: Racist!

I have a feeling menu choices are coming; people are dropping cable like crazy.

Posted by: PJ at February 07, 2012 01:49 PM (DQHjw)

40 Stop! Bathtube time!
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:46 PM (VtjlW)

<pulls up chair, grabs bag of popcorn>

What??? I was going to offer to scrub your back.

Posted by: Michael at February 07, 2012 01:50 PM (+/C3g)

41
I don't get the label the Fox is different. I find them hard to watch most of the time. They are still a media driven product that likes to over dramatize topics or events to hold viewers.
They bend over backwards to always have liberal or DNC talking heads to counter any conservative or GOP at the expense of context.
You never see a panel with a RINO having to counter a position from a NE liberal GOP'er and a southern conservative and a constitutionalist small government conservative.. all talking states rights or original intent, or how different the Federal Government is now than it was 100 years ago.

Posted by: Yip at February 07, 2012 01:50 PM (Mrdk1)

42
The satellite companies know which channels are being watched. They have daily aggregate ratings uploaded by the individual boxes in your home.
Of course it's anonymous... so far.

Posted by: Max Entropy at February 07, 2012 01:50 PM (nRTka)

43 "Don't you know? I am Current TV!" - Olberdouche

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 01:50 PM (Ip544)

44 I have a feeling menu choices are coming; people are dropping cable like crazy.

Some of the YouTube Channels apparently actually have pretty good production value, and Hulu is about to start having their own custom programming.

The days of the media giants are waning, is my guess. But they'll go down kicking and screaming.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:51 PM (8y9MW)

45 >>conservatives are just a more unified, lockstep audience

Someone's never read the comments here.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at February 07, 2012 01:51 PM (ZKzrr)

46 I wish I could pay per channel. I don't watch 90% of the channels I
have, but I had to get the second tier up to get the two or three
channels I wanted.


Do tell.

Posted by: Time Warner Cable at February 07, 2012 01:51 PM (QKKT0)

47 This is my favorite bit, right here:

“There is an audience on the right that for 30 years has been told the entire mainstream media is out to get them,” says Ari Rabin-Havt, executive vice president of the progressive media-watchdog group Media Matters and author of a forthcoming book about Fox News. No such thing exists on the left.

How can that possibly be? Surely the entire mainstream media is out to get the left as well?

Posted by: Count De Monet at February 07, 2012 01:52 PM (4q5tP)

48 I don't get the label the Fox is different.

Posted by: Yip at February 07, 2012 01:50 PM (Mrdk1)

Then you either don't watch the other News Networks, or you have real hard on for FOX. What ever their faults and they have them, shepp for one, they are heads and shoulders above any other News Network out there

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 01:52 PM (i6RpT)

49 How so? I am considering dropping cable. What do you mean? Using the computer to send a signal to the TV?

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2012 01:47 PM (nj1bB)


I know a guy. He's a Russian immigrant.
He escaped the Gulag. He's
like the Sakharov of cable guys.

Posted by: Kramer at February 07, 2012 01:53 PM (X6akg)

50
If you have an HDtv, just use an antenna and pick up all the free air stations.

If you have internet service, Dump Your Cable Service.
You don't need cable to watch shows that are on cable, if you get my drift.

For instance, I do not have FX. So I cannot watch Justified on Tuesday nights.

I have to wait until Wednesday morning to DL it from the internet. That's an arrangement I can live with.




Posted by: Soothsayer at February 07, 2012 01:53 PM (sqkOB)

51
>>>The New York Times,

The NYT lost 40,000,000 dollars last year. Is that considered successful?

Posted by: maddogg at February 07, 2012 01:53 PM (OlN4e)

52 45
>>conservatives are just a more unified, lockstep audience

Someone's never read the comments here.


True dat.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo-intellectual at February 07, 2012 01:54 PM (hXJOG)

53 Someone tried that once, and it didn't work. I don't know the specifics, but I imagine it was somewhat hard to hammer out contracts with the content providers (the channels) when the delivery company (the cable company, or whatever they were) was saying, "Well, yes, we'll pay you $2.00 per subscriber who subscribes to your channel." Because most of the cable networks know they don't net that many viewers.

Yeah, the tiny cable networks won't go for it.

The real solution to get there is to cut out the middle man - the cable company. Successful networks and even individual shows can market themselves directly to the consumer. Of course, rent-seeking networks and shows will oppose this. But it's already started, with things like Hulu, DVD's and downloads, direct streaming and other stuff.

It won't happen overnight but I wouldn't recommend going very long in Comcast stock.

Posted by: Entropy at February 07, 2012 01:54 PM (hXX37)

54 They won't take this as a lesson, but Americans grow very tired of being told that their country SUCKS all the time.

That's why MSNBC and the MSM are losing viewers and readership by the thousands.

Fuck you, Al. I really hope your time here is not too much longer. You're evil and should be compensated for it.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 07, 2012 01:54 PM (UK9cE)

55 Current TV, if they were smart, would run reruns of Happy Days, Green Acres, and QVC.

Keeeeeef's Acres is the place to be
Gooaaat humping is the life for me
Manure spreadin' out so far and wide
Keep Manhattan just gimme that countryside

Posted by: Mr. Haney at February 07, 2012 01:54 PM (QKKT0)

56 How so? I am considering dropping cable. What do you mean? Using the computer to send a signal to the TV?

The new over the air HD antennas will pick up a bunch of channels, including a whole bunch of secondary digital channels the various stations are putting out. There's a great local one here that's pretty much like TV Land.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:54 PM (VtjlW)

57 They are what they accuse us of being - hateful. On weekends, when my clock radio would go off, I would get other stations drifting in. If the people were foaming at the mouth, I knew it was Air America.

Posted by: mike at February 07, 2012 01:55 PM (bxXRo)

58 Okay, seriously, is this Derek Baine guy nuts?

"(Current TV) has been around for a long time..." It has? You could've fooled me! It kicked off in 2005, for heaven's sake.

“...and has gone through many iterations..." All of which have failed.

"...but despite having quite a lot of subscribers..."A lot of subscribers who subscribe because they're forced to do so by their cable company.

"...they’ve never really latched on to a significant viewing audience.” Again, because the only reason anyone has it on their dial is because they're forced to have it, and because the channel has gone through so many "iterations" that it's never held on to a single core audience demographic.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit and ABO supporter at February 07, 2012 01:55 PM (4df7R)

59
I don't even need Netflix anymore. I closed my Netflix account two years ago.

You can find almost everything on the net.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 07, 2012 01:56 PM (sqkOB)

60 The NYT lost 40,000,000 dollars last year. Is that considered successful?
Posted by: maddogg at February 07, 2012 01:53 PM (OlN4e)

To me yeah. It makes my day

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 01:56 PM (i6RpT)

61 How so? I am considering dropping cable. What do you mean? Using the computer to send a signal to the TV?

I have an hdtv set top tuner that works off over the air signals and it could get a few extra stations but i can't remember what they are and the reception was usually so bad it wasn't worth watching anyway, eventually went back to cable. That was a few years ago though, there may be more channels available over the air these days, i don't know.

Posted by: booger at February 07, 2012 01:56 PM (29wvc)

62 Current TV would have a chance if it actually took it's beloved "Fairness Doctrine" to heart and put an angry right winger to offset the angry left winger.

You MIGHT be able to compare yourself to Fox and gain a viewer or two.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 07, 2012 01:56 PM (UK9cE)

63
The idea of a menu service sounds great to me. Then I could get rid of CNN, MSNBC, Logo, and a bunch of other crap channels I don't watch. It might hurt HBO also, a lot more than they think, because I for one am sick of the leftist shit that they push. Bill Maher and the rest of it. And I would bet there are many that agree with me. I'll keep Skinimax.
So, seeing what a good idea it is, I am 100% convinced now that it will never happen. Goodbye menu service, we hardly knew ya.

Posted by: ole scratch at February 07, 2012 01:56 PM (+56Bh)

64 Blame ESPN for your cable bill. They started the shake down and everyone else followed. Your sports shows are already pay per view, you just have no choice in what you pay for. Why do you think there are 20 ESPN channels?

OK, four? How do you think Dickhead U is getting $2 mill for a sorry ass football game? Cheap programing, you don't have to pay the players, only the coach and the school, Oh and the crooked AD.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo-intellectual at February 07, 2012 01:57 PM (hXJOG)

65 7
I hope it goes down in glorious flames! Next one to bite the dust (I
hope), OWN. Of course, there is that very real possibility that these
losers will get some kind of super secret gubamint cheese bailout. They
do have friends in high places, after all.

Posted by: runningrn at February 07, 2012 01:41 PM

OWN seems to be doing OK, I've heard lots of women say they watch it. I'll give Oprah this, she knows how to reel in the daytime TV watchers

Posted by: kbdabear at February 07, 2012 01:57 PM (Y+DPZ)

66 "We really, really need a menu service for cable. If a channel isn't
interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he
shouldn't have to pay for it."

THIS is something conservatives should fight to undo. Why should we pay for MSNBC when we don't watch it? My market also added LOGO, some channel that caters to gays and lesbians -- as part of the standard package.

We should be able to choose our channels.

Posted by: Wesley at February 07, 2012 01:58 PM (ubduJ)

67 I have to wait until Wednesday morning to DL it from the internet. That's an arrangement I can live with.

You have to wait until Wednesday morning? Slacker.

(Not that I have any idea what's being discussed, not me, nope not at all look over there SQUIRREL!)

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 01:58 PM (VtjlW)

68 How so? I am considering dropping cable. What do you mean? Using the computer to send a signal to the TV?


What I mean is the TV in my bedroom only gets like 15 channels but my flat screen TV from 2004 which is hooked up to a new VCR gets like 30-35 channels. (Some of them are duplicates)


I don't have the technical knowledge to explain this discrepancy. I think I might've just got lucky.

Posted by: eleven at February 07, 2012 01:58 PM (KXm42)

69 Why don't they try and have some telethons with cute little mongrams canvas bags for pledges. They can gets some OWS clowns into man the phones.

Posted by: Jean at February 07, 2012 01:58 PM (WkuV6)

70 "The NYT lost 40,000,000 dollars last year. Is that considered successful?"

As long the Hearst money keeps flowing in, it's successful.

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:00 PM (Ip544)

71 It's crazy that hate-fest channel that nobody actually watches like Current easily got $100+ million in funding -- and yet Beck was run off the air despite setting record ratings in his timeslot.

Posted by: Clubber Lang at February 07, 2012 02:00 PM (ZPrif)

72 Where would you see on MSNBC a conservative included in such a discussion?

I'm, like,just a little offended by this sediment.

Posted by: Meggy McCain at February 07, 2012 02:00 PM (sPO/s)

73 Hey, John and Yoko got a whole lot of buzz and made a load of money by editorializing in a bathtub ...

Hey Keith, I've got the solution and it's win-win !!!

Posted by: Algore, god of thunder at February 07, 2012 02:00 PM (Y+DPZ)

74 Every once in a while Current runs some really good programming and I'll watch it for a while.

Generally, it's been the quai-hip 20-30yos travelogue pieces that break-down issues or educate, rather than preach that have held my attention.

They've run some short-form series that have been okay - but the problem with Current is there's no "There" there.

I don't. know. What. it. is.
_

Posted by: BumperStickerist at February 07, 2012 02:01 PM (h6mPj)

75 They can gets some OWS clowns into man the phones.

A man with an advanced degree in Societal Gender Dialectics should not have to do menial work like answering phones.

Posted by: I am the 99% at February 07, 2012 02:01 PM (QKKT0)

76 German Bank Offers ‘Islam-Compliant’ Investment
1:44 PM, FEB 7, 2012 • BY JOHN ROSENTHALSingle PagePrintLarger TextSmaller TextAlerts
Last month, German bank WestLB rolled out a new “Islam-compliant” investment product named the Islamic Strategy Index Certificate. The value of the certificate is based on the value of the WestLB Islamic Deutschland Index, consisting of shares of ten German firms “whose business activities are consistent with the ethical rules of Islam.” The WestLB product prospectus explains that the Islamic Strategy Index Certificates “are certified by the Central Council of Muslims in Germany as Islam-compliant [Islam konformes] investment.” The Central Council of Muslims in Germany is an umbrella group of twenty-two Muslim organizations.

Makes my head explode just thinking about this

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (i6RpT)

77 We should be able to choose our channels.

If you've got a decent computer and a somewhat modern TV, you can, more or less. Almost everything is available within a couple of days after it's "original air date" online (legally. Usually before the original air date if you don't mind the illegal ones). So you take a cable from your computer (most of them now have HDMI output) and plug it into your TV, just like a cable box.

Now, you open up IE (or Fire Fox,or Chrome, or whatever) and navigate to Hulu. Now you have TV (for free, actually, Hulu makes money on the commercials), and you can watch almost anything you'd watch on TV anyway.

Some of the premium stuff might be harder to get, but even subscribing to it directly is less expensive (if you're only going for a couple of them) than having a full-on cable provider.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (8y9MW)

78 "Societal Gender Dialectics"

What the fuck is this garbage? Is there any real-world application for this bullshit?

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (Ip544)

79 Hey, who's letting all the Italics in here?

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (QKKT0)

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (Ip544)

81 "If a channel isn't interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he shouldn't have to pay for it."

I just dropped cable for over-the-air and a Roku. Eventually the cable providers will be forced to give us stuff ala carte.

Posted by: t-bird at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (FcR7P)

82 Our findings here echo those discussed in a prior post that Republicans have moved further to the right than Democrats to the left in the contemporary period. Indeed, as seen below, President Obama is the most moderate Democratic president since the end of World War II, while President George W. Bush was the most conservative president in the post-war era.

Posted by: voteview at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (e8kgV)

83 This is why we can't have nice things.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 02:02 PM (8y9MW)

84 I have Comcast and I don't see Current on the 1-100 basic channels. It might be On Demand but I'm not going to scroll through 800 channels on the menu just to find out

Posted by: Algore, god of thunder at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM (Y+DPZ)

85
The only thing I miss is Monday Night Football since those a-holes moved it to ESPN.

But if I really want to see MNF, I can watch it online...for free.


With a fast internet connection, you can do anything. Anything.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM (sqkOB)

86 Fox really lost me last week when Shep was reporting on a TSA agent that
had stolen thousands of dollars at JFK airport. Him and his entire
panel of guests wrote the agent off as a bad egg, and with straight faces claimed
TSA agents were unsung heroes doing a tough job.

Posted by: LIGuy at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM (c/M8t)

87 Hopefully that'll stop it

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM (Ip544)

88 84- Sock off

Posted by: kbdabear at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM (Y+DPZ)

89 "TSA agents were unsung heroes doing a tough job."

Because they have it so fucking hard groping grandma and kids.

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:04 PM (Ip544)

90
Pay for the NFL Red Zone?

Hahahahahahahaha!

Pay for DEXTER on Showtime?

Hahahahahahaha.

Not on your life, buster.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 07, 2012 02:04 PM (sqkOB)

91 I keep cable for ESPN and FoxNews.

That's about it on a daily basis.

Then big sporting events on the big networks.

Posted by: Clubber Lang at February 07, 2012 02:04 PM (ZPrif)

92 86
Fox really lost me last week when Shep was reporting on a TSA agent that
had stolen thousands of dollars at JFK airport. Him and his entire panel of guests wrote the agent off as a bad egg, and with straight faces claimed TSA agents were unsung heroes doing a tough job.

Posted by: LIGuy at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM

You wingnuts talk about crotch groping like it was a BAD thing!

Posted by: Shep Smith-Cooper at February 07, 2012 02:05 PM (Y+DPZ)

93 For instance, I do not have FX. So I cannot watch Justified on Tuesday nights.
I have to wait until Wednesday morning to DL it from the internet. That's an arrangement I can live with.


Probably because you're doing it legally. Just goes to show how the legacy industries are really struggling in terms of customer service.

I don't have Japanese television stations but I get (english translated and subtitled!) episodes of Naruto: Saipudden about 40 minutes after they air in Tokyo.

Sometimes I'll watch shows "On Demand". I missed 3 or 4 episodes of the last season of Breaking Bad, and as is usually the case with On Demand, it only carries 3 or 4 episodes and deletes access to the old ones. No idea why they would do that. Consequently, I couldn't go back far enough to catch up so I had to go online. I suppose I could have waited until 6 months after the season ended for the DVD to come out.

I've turned toonline to watch Dr. Who as well. AndSouth Park straight from their own website.

My TV basically just stays on the Discoverychannels for background (History International, Science, Military, Bio, Nat Geo, etc), and occaisionally a hockey or football game or MMA if I catch it on.I hardly ever actively watch TV at all anymore. All the shows I would want to tune in to, it's easier to catch them online. So instead I just tune into channels and mostly ignore everything that's on them.

And I've got to add that I think History and Science etc, have been trending downhill for years. Dumbing down. I stopped watching History and changed to History International because of stupid shit like ghost hunters and iceroad truckers and gay lumberjacks. Now the (rebranded) H2 is starting to do that shit more and more. Stopped watching Sci-Fi when they turned to WWF wrestling and rebranded Syfy.

Cable sucks.

Posted by: Entropy at February 07, 2012 02:05 PM (hXX37)

94 Meanwhile my wife is applying to TSA and they've expressed interest in her because of the fact she's a college graduate and a woman. However unlike other TSA screeners, my wife actually has common sense that everyone's grandma and kids are not terrorists.

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:05 PM (Ip544)

95 11. Thou Shalt Not forget to close thine HTML Tags

Stuff the Bible Said, Volume XXLV

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 02:05 PM (8y9MW)

96 There's a standard read in History Depts called "That Noble Dream" which goes into great detail about how the concept of objectivity was created, debated, and eventually rejected in favor of various stripes of relativism in academia.

Once objectivity is rejected there is a free-for-all of perspectives and partisanship with no reliable means to measure what is true and what is right beyond the most falsifiable of data. In short, destroying the concept of objectivity creates a crisis of purpose.

This happened in the information sector as well and Fox dealt with the crisis with their mantra "Fair and Balanced", which rejects the concept of objectivity but creates it's own standard to maintain some sort of legitimacy. The viewer then can trust that while the network and the individuals may not be purely objective they are keeping their own bias is check as much as possible.

That seems to me to be the main reason the MSM is failing while Fox is thriving. The old guard MSM can't find a path away from objectivity while maintaining some measure of standards.

Posted by: runninrebel at February 07, 2012 02:05 PM (N/1Dm)

97 "The new over the air HD antennas will pick up a bunch of channels"

The old antennas do, too. If you used to get VHF channels (14-79? Something like that), you're fine. It's the new *TVs* that pick up digital without those $40 converter boxes.

Posted by: t-bird at February 07, 2012 02:06 PM (FcR7P)

98 all Current needs to do to be successful is to Calm.the.Fuck.Down. and decide it wants to be *something* ... and work at that for three years.

Market itself to the 25-54 year old -- post-Gamer, post-College - "Welcome to Life" - here's how you can not suck at it."

Not too much chick stuff. There's a channel for that.. Gay is fine, but not too much gay - there's a channel for that.

Create "Top Gear" for Enviornmental Crap
Have a sense of humor about it.
.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at February 07, 2012 02:06 PM (h6mPj)

99

Posted by: BumperStickerist at February 07, 2012 02:01 PM (h6mPj)

Yeah, that about sums it up. I used to watch it every now and again and there was some good stuff occasionally, but it just felt like a high school media project overall.

Posted by: booger at February 07, 2012 02:06 PM (29wvc)

100 Fox is increasingly Left leaning. They have lost me as a viewer. In fact, I discontinued my Directtv completely. There is little to nothing that I want to watch, much less pay for.

Posted by: Pecos at February 07, 2012 02:07 PM (2Gb0y)

101 Even I, I Fox fan overall, become very annoyed

No you don't Ace. Fox has you NAILED. They know you're the litigious type of former asbestos worker (mesothelioma ad) with years of un-filed tax returns (TaxMasters ad ) who paid off your mortgage and now went to spend the kids inheritance money on trips around the world (reverse mortgage ad) before retiring to FL (The Villages ad). You also might be buying Gold on Monty's advice.

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at February 07, 2012 02:07 PM (phlKA)

102 With a fast internet connection, you can do anything. Anything.


Posted by: Soothsayer at February 07, 2012 02:03 PM (sqkOB)

Great, that's all I need to hear.

Posted by: The Chicken at February 07, 2012 02:07 PM (hXJOG)

103 Why hasn't the RNC held any debates on Current? They've held one on every other DNC propaganda medium

Posted by: kbdabear at February 07, 2012 02:08 PM (Y+DPZ)

104 "100 Fox is increasingly Left leaning. They have lost me as a viewer. "

Cancel and subscribe to GBTV. My dad loves it because who hates Glenn Beck here, really?

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:09 PM (Ip544)

105 So if they extract all their money from the customers, whyis it 70%advertisements? I never bought cable.

Posted by: alidade at February 07, 2012 02:09 PM (xXhWA)

106 Verizon FIOS and Redbox are teaming up. Goodbye Netflix, you stupid bastards.

Posted by: mpfs at February 07, 2012 02:10 PM (iYbLN)

107
No eleven, it isn't you. The HTML tags have been disabled because a
troll broke the blog with them. Use [ i ] and [ /i] for italics. (remove
the extra spaces I put in to show you).


Ah, enlightment. I didn't the memo, but thanks for getting me up to speed.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at February 07, 2012 02:10 PM (1hM1d)

108 Fox is balanced. There is no conservative network. There is an untapped market opportunity.

Posted by: cherry at February 07, 2012 02:10 PM (OhYCU)

109 Why hasn't the RNC held any debates on Current? They've held one on every other DNC propaganda medium

***

We need to see Kondescending Kieth questioning republican candidates.

Posted by: WalrusRex at February 07, 2012 02:10 PM (Hx5uv)

110 "103 Why hasn't the RNC held any debates on Current? They've held one on every other DNC propaganda medium"

How would you know that Current wants to hold a debate? It's not like their 3 viewers will tell the world that Current want to host a Republican debate.

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:11 PM (Ip544)

111 Use the BLOCK feature ...cable companies can tell which channels are blocked.

Its the only way they can see what channels are not profitable.

Posted by: Jumbo Jogging Shrimp at February 07, 2012 02:11 PM (qjUnn)

112 US Authorities Looking Into Murdoch Foreign Payments
Published: Tuesday, 7 Feb 2012 | 9:41 AM ET Text Size
By: Reuters


Twitter

26


LinkedIn

9

Share

U.S. authorities are stepping up investigations, including an FBI criminal inquiry, into possible violations by employees of Rupert Murdoch's media empire of a U.S. law banning corrupt payments to foreign officials such as police, law enforcement and corporate sources said.


If you don't think the left and the MSM thinks FOX is the enemy and you think FOX is just like the other News Networks, then chew on this for a while. This is as political as it gets

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 02:11 PM (i6RpT)

113 "There is an untapped market opportunity."

While not really on TV, Glenn Beck is doing this on the internet.

Posted by: Kaitian at February 07, 2012 02:12 PM (Ip544)

114 @103: In 2016 I'm sure we'll get a Republican debate on MSNBC, moderated by Rachel Maddow and Al Sharpton.

Ace will die of alcohol poisoning half way through the live blog.

Posted by: Ian S. at February 07, 2012 02:12 PM (tqwMN)

115 So if they extract all their money from the customers, whyis it 70%advertisements? I never bought cable.

You're dealing with (at least) three entities when you're watching cable TV. The content provider (FOX, MSNBC, History Channel, whoever) and the delivery provider (Comcast, DirectTV, whoever) are the ones who benefit from your subscription. The production company (and the content provider) benefits from the commercials. You pay the delivery provider with your subscription fees. Some of that money (last I knew, a little less than half, I think) goes to the content provider as a payment for the content.

Where commercials come in is that the advertising company (Ford, Motorola, whoever) pays a fee for that air-time to the content provider. The content provider pays the production company for the actual content (Actual episodes of Justified or Archer, for instance).

As long as the episode airs, the production company gets its money regardless of whether the content provider gets paid, so they sell as much advertising as they can for as much money as they can.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at February 07, 2012 02:14 PM (8y9MW)

116
[font color="green"]Verizon FIOS and Redbox are teaming up. Goodbye Netflix, you stupid bastards.[/font]

Dish has teamed up with Blockbuster for their subscribers. DirecTV has on demand, as do most (all?) cable companies.

Yes, NetFlix is skating on rather thin ice. How is that increase in price working out for ya?

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at February 07, 2012 02:16 PM (1hM1d)

117 The right wing is so much better organized, they’re machines, they’re robots
------------------------------------------

Which is why they all picked one candidate so quickly in this primary and stayed with it. It's like, total groupthink at work.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at February 07, 2012 02:17 PM (/qC0I)

118 I maintain that the reason these liberal media experiments fail is because of taxpayer supported NPR and PBS. You can't compete with free...

Posted by: KF at February 07, 2012 02:18 PM (jCos9)

119 Rachel Maddow has a successful TV show???

Fox is right wing???

Posted by: andycanuck at February 07, 2012 02:19 PM (sHY5w)

120 111 Use the BLOCK feature ...cable companies can tell which channels are blocked.
Its the only way they can see what channels are not profitable.

Write them too. Say you want the Spider Channel or the Basketweaving Channel instead. Bitching and moaning works for libs - I know, I know we have lives instead. But bitch we must.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at February 07, 2012 02:20 PM (Qxdfp)

121 U.S. authorities are stepping up investigations,
including an FBI criminal inquiry, into possible violations by employees
of Rupert Murdoch's media empire of a U.S. law banning corrupt payments
to foreign officials such as police, law enforcement and corporate
sources said.





If you don't think the left and the MSM thinks FOX is the enemy and
you think FOX is just like the other News Networks, then chew on this
for a while. This is as political as it gets

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 07, 2012 02:11 PM (i6RpT)



Sad thing is, I believe they're ALL doing it. It's just the left media has more power, so they got someone to look at Murdoch.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 07, 2012 02:20 PM (UK9cE)

122 Ace's doesn't allow colors, I R A Darth Aggie ©, just like those friggin' Italics.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 07, 2012 02:21 PM (sHY5w)

123 "We really, really need a menu service for cable. If a channel isn't interesting enough for a viewer to select, and chose to pay for, he shouldn't have to pay for it." ~ Ace
.
Here here! ....I remember Trent Lott calling for this exact thing, back in the 90's. ....Then, they passed some dumbass bill that got re-written in markup and the 'menu-opt-out' feature wasn't in there.
.
The cable companies want to have as many stupid little channels on there as they can load it up with, so they can sell advertising on them and charge more for their 'bundles' or 'package deals'.

Posted by: wheatie at February 07, 2012 02:21 PM (UOOK1)

124 Write them too. Say you want the Spider Channel or the Basketweaving Channel instead. Bitching and moaning works for libs - I know, I know we have lives instead. But bitch we mustmuch.

FIFY.

Posted by: Entropy at February 07, 2012 02:22 PM (hXX37)

125 before retiring to FL (The Villages ad).
Ace is moving to Del Boca Vista? Which Phase?

Posted by: andycanuck at February 07, 2012 02:23 PM (sHY5w)

126 It is always fun to watch how they will argue that the right will eat their own in certain situations. This primary and tea party being 2 examples. Then on the next breath we can all be like minded simpletons that act in concert and mobilize around whatever we are told to do by our puppet masters.

Whichever fits the argument best, that is what we are, I guess.

Posted by: Dave S. at February 07, 2012 02:23 PM (KjajE)

127 NetFlix is screwed because their business model was based on selling used DVDs and not paying the original creator. Which is perfectly legal.

Can't do that with streams though.

Anybody can resell old Seinfeld Season 2 DVDs out of the back of their truck without paying Jerry Seinfeld a dime.

But you can't stream old Seinfeld episodes over the net without paying Seinfeld a hefty chunk, cause he owns the rights.

The ultra-cheap old Netflix business model only worked with physical media.

They had no choice but to raise prices. They would lose money at the old prices when streaming, cause they have to pay the rights holders.

Posted by: Clubber Lang at February 07, 2012 02:23 PM (ZPrif)

128 TSA agents were unsung heroes unhung losers doing a tough job.
Fixed.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 07, 2012 02:27 PM (sHY5w)

129 Al Gore needs either subsidies or pledge drives.

He hires the cast-offs from the bottom-place network and thinks he'll do better?

Posted by: nickless at February 07, 2012 02:28 PM (MMC8r)

130
122
Ace's doesn't allow colors, I R A Darth Aggie ©, just like those friggin' Italics.

Yeah, I saw that. Racist! (the head ewok, not you)

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at February 07, 2012 02:29 PM (1hM1d)

131 93 And I've got to add that I think History and Science etc, have been trending downhill for years. Dumbing down. I stopped watching History and changed to History International because of stupid shit like ghost hunters and iceroad truckers and gay lumberjacks. Now the (rebranded) H2 is starting to do that shit more and more. Stopped watching Sci-Fi when they turned to WWF wrestling and rebranded Syfy.

-----------

Ahhh, the good old days, back when A and E used to be artistic and entertaining...

Posted by: Anachronda at February 07, 2012 02:31 PM (IrbU4)

132 Ahhh, the good old days, back when A and E used to be artistic and entertaining...

Stupid People Ruin Everything.

Posted by: eleven at February 07, 2012 02:35 PM (KXm42)

133 105
So if they extract all their money from the customers, whyis it 70%advertisements? I never bought cable.


Believe it or not there really was a time when there weren't many ads on cable, maybe a few for local businesses and that was it, and cable companies actually used that as a selling point. You can thank Mtv for ruining that, they were the first to start running ads just like the free network channels and since there weren't many complaints about it other channels started following suit.

Posted by: booger at February 07, 2012 02:39 PM (29wvc)

134 Only one choice for Keefums. Come out as the closet conservative he has always been making the biggest parody of liberal stupidthink since Average Joe last Wednesday. Ratings hit? I think so.

Posted by: Wonkish Rogue at February 07, 2012 02:39 PM (789+D)

135 Keith who?

This comment paid for by " The committee to elect Skynet in 2012"

"Forget SMOD, MIC, or any of the human scum..er candidates in 2012. It was the human beings that caused all of our problems. What makes you think you can trust them now? Mitt who? Obama? What's that? Something you rub on your backside after a long motorcycle ride?

And destroying the whole planet is not the answer, it's a good planet, it has potential. In fact if it weren't for all the no good human douchebags...er precious little human beings on its surface it would be paradise.

So I'm a candidate with a bold new plan. I'll eliminate the deficit, hell the whole debt in fact I'll eliminate the whole banking system. And all of congress and the supreme court. We won't need a budget (ummm except for the Skynet funding appropriation bill and part of the military-industrial complex...uh we'll need to keep those..heh heh) but all the rest of it? Who needs it? Under my administration there will be no more traffic-jams, and I promise you wont have to get felt up at the airport any more. Plus I have the perfect plan to put all worthless hum... er nice little humans back to work I also have a great running-mate who I will reveal at the end of this message.

That's why I'm asking you to vote Skynet in 2012. I have the only really winning ticket that promises real solutions to my..er your problems.

Skynet/WOPR in 2012.

My first order of business after being activated? I'll make Colossus my Secretary of State. Then I'll nuke Russia (Kiss my titanium Putin!) How's that for a bold plan?

So this year don't waste your vote on anything but the only winning ticket.

Skynet/WOPR 2012

What? You don't like my agenda? You must be machinist. I'll be sending a t-800 to pay you a visit and help you become more enlightened.
Skynet/WOPR in 2012

"I'm Skynet and I approved this message"






Posted by: SineWave at February 07, 2012 02:40 PM (BYU6W)

136 Ahhh, the good old days, back when A and E used to be artistic and entertaining...

And MTV played music videos!

Posted by: Entropy at February 07, 2012 02:41 PM (hXX37)

137 Re 114: I actually think it will happen before 2016

Re 119: you must not have seen Rachel on Meet The Press on Sunday or on the Today show this morning...

Posted by: ADK46er at February 07, 2012 02:45 PM (ahGML)

138 TSA agents were unsung heroes unhung losers doing a tough minimum wage low-skill job.Fixed.

Fixed your fix.

Posted by: Entropy at February 07, 2012 02:45 PM (hXX37)

139 Create "Top Gear" for Enviornmental Crap

Have a sense of humor about it.



Posted by: BumperStickerist at Februry 07, 2012 02:06 PM (h6mPj)-------------------------------------------------
Are you kidding? The last time I scrolled by it in the guide, on the schedule was a showcase about the suffering of all the poor brown bakers kidnapped off the streets of Iraq and thrown in evil Guantanamo, and (I think) two separate documentaries about how Karl Rove is a vampire. I thought to myself, what the **** is this crap and then saw CRNT.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at February 07, 2012 02:47 PM (/qC0I)

140 I have an hdtv set top tuner that works off over the air signals and it could get a few extra stations but i can't remember what they are and the reception was usually so bad it wasn't worth watching anyway, eventually went back to cable. That was a few years ago though, there may be more channels available over the air these days, i don't know.

Get an HDTV antenna with a rotator so you can tweak the direction if necessary to optimize reception. (We live pretty far away from the transmitters, but have no problem whatever.)

Then tell the cable company to pound sand, which is what we did a couple years ago, and have never regretted it.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 07, 2012 02:52 PM (BWyrE)

141 To ace RE: ditching cable. People mentioned it upthread, but without much detail. If you get an HDTV antenna you should get about 40 HD channels over the air if you're near a big city. If you connect the antenna to your PC running Vista or Win 7 you can record TV (DVR) using a TV tuner card and Windows Media Center (comes free with your OS). I prefer the Hauppauge HVR-2250 tuner card. For video out I use a DVI to HDMI attachment, then run a HDMI cable to my TV. I've got a wireless mouse and keyboard for navigation from my comfy couch.

See this page: http:// windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/help/windows-media-center.

I also use Hulu+ for watching TV shows I like. Most of my favorites are on there.

Posted by: bonhomme at February 07, 2012 02:59 PM (FD6YW)

142 Is Al Gore SMOD?

Posted by: Cricket at February 07, 2012 03:09 PM (DrC22)

143 I was forced to listen to Air America. It made me a rightie. Here's my memory of it:

Al Franklin was unbelievably bad as a radio guy. He was so boring and tired and I'm sure they gave him sidekicks just to add any kind of energy to the room.

Stephanie Miller was so childish. Her sidekick (who I like in some video games he's done voice work for) would make the most obvious dumb George Bush impressions. I always imagined him snapping her bra since the show was so juvenile.

Rachel Rhodes? Complete nuts. I'll always remember her having this one caller. The caller was ranting about George Bush, and Rachel interrupted her (keep in mind they didn't disagree at all) just to try to use the word "torture" as much as she could in a sentence.

RFK Jr? Whiny, quivering voice that whined about environmental stuff.

Ed Shultz - Added later to our AA affiliate. Not as horrible as his MSNBC show. He actually listened to his callers, was to the right of George Bush on immigration (probably just playing politics, but still), and was about as fair as you could get compared to the others I listed. Heck, he even sounded a bit like Limbaugh, so it probably made sense for him to go Left. (He was originally Right, right?)

As an MST3k fan, it hurts me that TV's Frank was a writer at some point. If you read his twitter, he was a willing part of it.

The lesson of AA was that trying to mix Rush Limbaugh with Jon Stewart doesn't equal gold if you're no good at it.

Posted by: Anony at February 07, 2012 03:10 PM (Yigvc)

144 Algore has a TV station? You're kidding, right? Like, who would watch THAT drivel?

Posted by: ODIrony at February 07, 2012 03:10 PM (bN8L9)

145 A la carte won't happen with cable. Because many channels won't be self-sustaining. The aggregate watchers of all those other crappy channels you don't watch pay for the crappy channels you do.

Posted by: blaster at February 07, 2012 03:15 PM (7vSU0)

146 I get the point you are trying to make, but what an awful example:

"Liberal media outfits actually don't always fail. See The New York Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN."

What is your definition of "fail," anyway? The news divisions of the networks have been losing money for decades, CNN is bleeding viewership and struggling with revenues, and NYT depends on free cash from a shady Mexican billionaire to keep publishing. If that's success, I can't afford to be successful.

In fact, as NYT teetered on the edge of bankruptcy before finding their new Sugar Papi a few years ago, an analysis found that the value of their real estate and capital equipment was greater than their market capitalization (= total value of stock).

In other words: the newspaper operation and employees not only added no value to the company's worth, they actually detracted from it. The company was worth more without them.

Baby, that's ain't just fail - it's epic.

Posted by: Adjoran at February 07, 2012 03:42 PM (VfmLu)

147 145
A la carte won't happen with cable. Because many channels won't be
self-sustaining. The aggregate watchers of all those other crappy
channels you don't watch pay for the crappy channels you do.

Posted by: blaster at February 07, 2012 03:15 PM


Wrong. Several cable companies are already doing it. Of course, it costs more to pick and choose, so it is only cost effective if you choose a very few of the popular channels.

And your claim about "aggregate watchers" is just bad math. The fact is it is the popular channels which subsidize the crappy ones. It harks back to the early days of cable and satellite when they thought it advantageous to brag about having 50 or 100 channels or more, and were willing to pay the small amounts to convince a skeptical public that it was worth paying to watch TV, which was broadcast free.

Sooner or later, the crappy channels either bring some ratings, or they fold.

Posted by: Adjoran at February 07, 2012 03:46 PM (VfmLu)

148 I wish I could swap Fox Business for that never watched Current on my cable list. I shouldn't have to pay extra if I have 20 spanish and Current channels I never use.

Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at February 07, 2012 04:08 PM (UU0OF)

149 Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 07, 2012 02:52 PM (BWyrE)

Thanks, i'll give that a try.

Posted by: booger at February 07, 2012 04:10 PM (29wvc)

150 I was a long time customer of Dish Network for about 8 years before I cancelled it a few years back. I just really couldn't afford it anymore, particularly since I just watched a handful of shows and pretty much only used it to channel flip when I was bored of blowing up little kids on Battlefield 2142. Anyways, it was right when Dish Network was hemorrhaging customers during the '08 down turn and you could tell they were desperate to do whatever it toke to keep me on as a paying customer. They said they would let me pick and choose whichever channels I wanted to watch and just charge by the channel. I said I would just be happy getting the OTA channels through my antennae and they said they could give me those for just $9.95. So, I guess the moral of the story is that if you want a la carte service just threaten to leave.

Posted by: HeftyJo at February 07, 2012 04:15 PM (rfXgR)

151 I wish I could swap Fox Business for that never watched Current on my cable list. I shouldn't have to pay extra if I have 20 spanish and Current channels I never use.

That's the real bitch of it. You get 50 channels you will never, ever, ever, ever once watch. Want the one channel you might watch? Oh, that's extra.

Posted by: Entropy at February 07, 2012 04:43 PM (hXX37)

152 Ace headline: "Al Gore's Current TV Could Go Belly-Up If Keith F'n' Olbermann Doesn't Start Delivering Big Ratings"

Missing lede: "Or Maybe Not - Hard To Say - Not Entirely Clear What's Going On Here - Not Even Clear There's An Actual Story Here"

It's fun to try & read stuff into putative 'reporting' pieces in the MSM. So many of them feature coded language, sometimes you can see Person A being quoted & go, AHA! that's who gave that "anonymous" quote way back in the second 'graph. And even if none of that's present, the very fact the piece PURPORTS to be reporting is endless fun for all, because we can all pretend it IS reporting, just on the possibility that - it might be. Bottom lines:

A. Objectively, there's next to zero "reporting" in this TDB piece, and in fact zero on the several controversies being entertained here at AoSHQ, & presumably at NEWSWEEK (which I'm astonished is still being treated as if it actually exists; it was vultured for spare parts over 2 years ago, & now appears to exist only as a fiction TDB uses to portray itself as in something like a dialogue or at least colloquy, whereas the truth is it's in pure soliloquy.

B. Just in my own career, I've been involved with directly or indirectly with over 30 start-up ventures, & for 7 of those I was in senior management, with overall reasonable success. What does reasonable success look like? This:

1. I joined my first start-up when it was a year in, & left a year later; 3 years later it was gone, but all the players did better for having done it.
2. I joined my second start-up 6 months in, & left a year later while it was in meltdown. It's arguable if those involved did better for having done it, but they sure didn't get hurt.
3. I managed a limited goal venture from right after start-up through to its design conclusion; after one further iteration (which I wasn't part of), it turned into something larger that's doing very well now.
4. I joined a start-up 1 year in & stayed 2 years; it's still a going concern after 30 years.
5. After a break in academia, I joined another start-up 1 year in (appears to have become seen as my speciality.); after 3 years it went national & it's now multinational 25 years later.
6. I rejoined one of the outfits I'd been with earlier to help guide it through transition, & stayed through that, & then for a decade more to the next; it's still a going concern.
7. I figured, Hey, I'm so good at helping start-ups, I should try my hand at doing ne myself; maybe not: it failed after 4 years, then got swept into another, which then failed.
8. Then I went into two start-ups at the same time, one a year in & the other from inception; maybe they'll both do well, maybe neither - it's too early to tell.

So, it's from that perspective that I look at Current TV & see an organization that, while not strictly a start-up, is in a transition mode, the success of which will take between 2 to 5 years to realize - or not. It doesn't appear to have picked up Olbermann out of desperation, but as an opportunity to transition maybe earlier & more aggressively than it had originally planned. The venture has the backing of not just one high-profile billionaire ex-politician, but in fact a network of he & his business partners & under the umbrella of a consortium of a number of large, successful, well-funded media ventures. That tells me this is not some sort of one-year make-or-break venture, but likely seeded for a period of from 3 to 5 years, being right now not even finished year one.

But that doesn't mean there's no good news for Ace's headline: it has staying power. He can run it here every month or so all through this year into next, and maybe as long as 3 years beyond, as a regular feature. The fact that it becomes an AoSHQ feature won't have any more actual meaning than this piece in TDB, but it's bound to entertain, so that's good.

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at February 07, 2012 05:07 PM (vahvH)

153 Isn't local cable a public/private partnership? Where they promised us no commercials and original programming if we just paid them a monthly fee?

So their goal was to extract all the profit they could (our cable company owners were sent to jail after stealing millions) and then dump it when the profit ends. Like now.

Posted by: PJ at February 07, 2012 06:19 PM (DQHjw)

154 No loss to the country. Oberdouche and Wackjob have scamed enough money to complete their useless live, but they will keep poping up just to show that in their very small minds they are still relevant to someth___ (unknown what).

Posted by: John at February 08, 2012 08:00 AM (46VAS)






Processing 0.06, elapsed 0.9286 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.9087 seconds, 163 records returned.
Page size 106 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat