Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Keith Olbermann is meeting with MSNBC about return to air (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter squistion
- Start date
squistion
Footballguy
For progressives and liberals it is. He had the highest rated show on MSNBC and the network has seen a steady ratings decline since his departure. Olbermann enjoyed doing his show on ESPN but he is at his best discussing politics and a return to MSNBC is just what he and network needs heading into the 2016 election year. It makes too much sense for both sides not to happen.
squistion
Footballguy
Countdown was the highest rated show on MSNBC and raised the ratings of the shows following it. It was not a failure, it was the flagship show of the network, and did better against the completion on Fox and CNN than anything they have had subseuently. That is why they are in discussions and will probably bring him back.
Last edited by a moderator:
GoFishTN
Footballguy
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
That's not saying much. Being the highest rated show on MSNBC is like being the tallest midget.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
He usually had better numbers than CNN (another midget?) and no one in that time slot since then has even been close to doing as well against O'Reilly.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Well, when Chris Hayes has been your best bet the last few years, that's not saying much.
Eephus
Footballguy
Ratings aren't all important in cable news. Like the late night talk shows, pageviews, retweets and other asynchronous buzzword measurements are just as important nowadays for news (or "news") commentator shows, Olbermann, like him or not, stirs up this kind of interest about as well as anyone in the industry.
dschuler
Footballguy
Ratings aren't important? Please elaborate. Also, his numbers sucked by the way. They were not good. They were bad. That's why he's not on the air anymore. He had a small loyal following but the majority of people couldn't stand him.
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
It's been at least six months since I watched a cable news show, probably longer. I don't understand why people make this sort of thing a part of their regular diet.
squistion
Footballguy
Not true, his ratings were great at MSNBC, he regularly beat CNN and was competitive against O'Reilly - that is why they will pay him big bucks to return. If he was the ratings failure you claim, MSNBC wouldn't consider rehiring him.
Hot Diggity Dog
Footballguy
I have 3 guys on tv I would like to smack witha bat, Hannity , O'Reiley, and this ###. All three are pretenious asses.
dschuler
Footballguy
You're a complete moron, 110%! How do you even tie your shoes in the morning? O'Reilly consistently more than doubled Overbites ratings. And they were a countdown to zero. Nobody watched anymore. Except for trolls like you.
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/01/31/oreilly-vs-olbermann-vs-brown-vs-grace-cable-news-ratings-3/40622/
squistion
Footballguy
I said he was competitive against O'Reilly and he was, CNN didn't really do much better and no one on MSNBC has been even in the same ballpark since then. He was doing well at the time he left and was a cash cow for MSNBC as far as advertisers are concerned, that is why they will bring him back and he will be competitive against Fox once again.
Edited to add: I remember now, he did really well in the 18-34 age demographic that advertisers covet. That was where he was considered really competitive. With that age group, he actually did better than O'Reilly (whose average age of viewer was like 68 and that crowd has little discretionary income, unlike the 18-34 year olds).
Last edited by a moderator:
Koya
Footballguy
Lotta stupid here. Oof.
I like Keith in small doses. He can drone on, and get too soap boxy obviously, though sometimes with great amusement, intentional and otherwise, but it's not bad while flipping through or looking to watch one of his rants now and then. Love seeing how this guy gets folks' panties all in a bunch. Seriously, don't tell me how he sucks, is awful, has no pull and no audience with an impassioned plea, albeit with questionable grammar and quetionableer logic. That's just silly.
Ok, its not silly, but it is creating a contradiction of the very terms you hail so vehemently as utter truth. Which does make the poster look pretty damned silly, I'll admit.
Carry on children.
I like Keith in small doses. He can drone on, and get too soap boxy obviously, though sometimes with great amusement, intentional and otherwise, but it's not bad while flipping through or looking to watch one of his rants now and then. Love seeing how this guy gets folks' panties all in a bunch. Seriously, don't tell me how he sucks, is awful, has no pull and no audience with an impassioned plea, albeit with questionable grammar and quetionableer logic. That's just silly.
Ok, its not silly, but it is creating a contradiction of the very terms you hail so vehemently as utter truth. Which does make the poster look pretty damned silly, I'll admit.
Carry on children.
Hot Diggity Dog
Footballguy
Thanks for straightening me out , father figure. I see why you like him.Lotta stupid here. Oof.
I like Keith in small doses. He can drone on, and get too soap boxy obviously, though sometimes with great amusement, intentional and otherwise, but it's not bad while flipping through or looking to watch one of his rants now and then. Love seeing how this guy gets folks' panties all in a bunch. Seriously, don't tell me how he sucks, is awful, has no pull and no audience with an impassioned plea, albeit with questionable grammar and quetionableer logic. That's just silly.
Ok, its not silly, but it is creating a contradiction of the very terms you hail so vehemently as utter truth. Which does make the poster look pretty damned silly, I'll admit.
Carry on children.
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
How progressive of you.Lotta stupid here. Oof.
I like Keith in small doses. He can drone on, and get too soap boxy obviously, though sometimes with great amusement, intentional and otherwise, but it's not bad while flipping through or looking to watch one of his rants now and then. Love seeing how this guy gets folks' panties all in a bunch. Seriously, don't tell me how he sucks, is awful, has no pull and no audience with an impassioned plea, albeit with questionable grammar and quetionableer logic. That's just silly.
Ok, its not silly, but it is creating a contradiction of the very terms you hail so vehemently as utter truth. Which does make the poster look pretty damned silly, I'll admit.
Carry on children.
Mister CIA
Footballguy
Koya
Footballguy
That, at it's core, is actually rather sad (and perhaps troubling). This is a message board, no need to go there, but hey, whatever makes you tingle inside. :shurg:Thanks for straightening me out , father figure. I see why you like him.Lotta stupid here. Oof.
I like Keith in small doses. He can drone on, and get too soap boxy obviously, though sometimes with great amusement, intentional and otherwise, but it's not bad while flipping through or looking to watch one of his rants now and then. Love seeing how this guy gets folks' panties all in a bunch. Seriously, don't tell me how he sucks, is awful, has no pull and no audience with an impassioned plea, albeit with questionable grammar and quetionableer logic. That's just silly.
Ok, its not silly, but it is creating a contradiction of the very terms you hail so vehemently as utter truth. Which does make the poster look pretty damned silly, I'll admit.
Carry on children.
He's a talking head. Big head, mind you. :achem:How progressive of you.Lotta stupid here. Oof.
I like Keith in small doses. He can drone on, and get too soap boxy obviously, though sometimes with great amusement, intentional and otherwise, but it's not bad while flipping through or looking to watch one of his rants now and then. Love seeing how this guy gets folks' panties all in a bunch. Seriously, don't tell me how he sucks, is awful, has no pull and no audience with an impassioned plea, albeit with questionable grammar and quetionableer logic. That's just silly.
Ok, its not silly, but it is creating a contradiction of the very terms you hail so vehemently as utter truth. Which does make the poster look pretty damned silly, I'll admit.
Carry on children.
It's entertainment. Myself, can't watch too much or I go a little nuts. But people really can't put politics aside in anyway and just, well, be a little ####### normal and convivial or something.
squistion
Footballguy
He is a diva and notoriously difficult to get along with, but MSNBC probably regrets they didn't cater to him as it has been pretty much all downhill for the network after his departure. He donated some money (a few thousand) to a couple of Democratic candidates (in violation of station policy) and technically, that was the reason for his leaving, although IIRC, MSNBC did not actually fire him and it was mutual decision on both their parts.
Last edited by a moderator:
Eephus
Footballguy
I didn't say ratings weren't important, I said they weren't "all important". Face it, ratings for all cable news stations are low. Fox' viewer numbers are less small but all the outlets struggle for viewers on slow news days. Only the zealots and terminally bored tune in for the prime time commentary programs. The audiences are relatively affluent but skew very old, which aren't attractive demographics for advertisers.
New media is less dependent on live viewers. Olbermann has a well establish brand, a reputation for controversy and enough of a (small) core audience to ensure that clips from his shows will make it to the aggregator websites and people's timelines the next morning. None of MSNBC's current personalities, except for Maddow can bring that. I have no idea how the network monetizes this--it's a lot less straightforward than selling spots to home refinancing companies and A Place for Mom, but MSNBC would be crazy not to at least talk with Olbermann. He's an ### and impossible to work with for very long but there's a reason he's managed to have a long career. ESPN thought it was worthwhile to bring him back for a while and I'm sure MSNBC is thinking the same.
timschochet
Footballguy
Is it just me or is this sort of thing happening a lot more around here lately? Whatever happened to "be excellent to each other"?
avoiding injuries
Footballguy
And when you start to point it out when someone on the progressive side does it, your concern will be taken seriously. On any issue that i side with a position of the "left", I'm usually completely turned off by the people supporting that position and how they talk to the other side. It's amazing what you'll see when you take your own bias out of the way.timschochet said:dschuler said:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
AbsolutelyIvanKaramazov said:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I am not a fan of his politics but I am even more so not a fan of him. I don't follow him or his career but have noticed that he has popped up here and there and then goes away. There is likely a reason why he goes away so much. Either he does not bring value/ratings and/or no one wants to work for with him. Judging from what I have seen from his on air persona, I would not be surprised if the later is the reason.Snoopy said:
squistion
Footballguy
Actually I don't understand why people bother to post in a thread in which they have absolutely no interest in the subject matter.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I was waiting for this.My interest was why would anyone would care enough to start a thread about it. I was wondering if there was more to it other than him coming back to MSNBC. Nope, didn't seem to be.
squistion
Footballguy
Yes, there are so many more worthwhile threads, like the guy pooping his pants or favorite nicknames for Hillary.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Doctor Detroit
Please remove your headgear
IvanKaramazov said:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Sounds like MSNBC is pretty desperate. Sounds like the ship is sinking so it makes sense to go to a guy that actually got people to watch in the past.
