Tucker

[Jay Bee]

Who goes left in a circle jerk?

82 wants to be last, so they does

[cheebs09]

I have a hard time believing he gets 6x more views from Twitter than he did on Fox News. I understand that views are much different than viewers, but I feel like Fox News is reaching more people in the target demographic than Twitter.

[Jay Bee]

I have a hard time believing he gets 6x more views from Twitter than he did on Fox News. I understand that views are much different than viewers, but I feel like Fox News is reaching more people in the target demographic than Twitter.

Sounds like you do believe

[Heisenberg]

I have a hard time believing he gets 6x more views from Twitter than he did on Fox News. I understand that views are much different than viewers, but I feel like Fox News is reaching more people in the target demographic than Twitter.

@bennyjohnson 3h
Tucker broke the corporate media monopoly matrix tonight & it's never coming back.

Tucker uploaded a 10 min monologue.
No ads or interruptions.
No pricy subscriptions.
Watch on demand.

The result?

- 17M views
- 90K RTs
- 25K comments

In under 180 mins

[rocket surgeon]

1) jockitch
1a) rico
2) 82
3) pakuni
3a) rico
4) Rico

In that order.

  that circle is much bigger than that...a lot of hurt feelings from those you left out of the fun

  5) smythe
  6) 1 testicle
  7) jesmu
  8)sully but not sure if the others will play nice with him 

[Hards Alumni]

Boy who could have predicted this... and on the first page even.

[Uncle Rico]

Tucker being gone means nothing.  He has a huge following and will likely parlay this into his own brand where he reaps even more money with even less oversight.

As with most things GOP related these days, it's a cult of personality.  His viewers will follow him, and especially when he uses the tried and true, "They tried to silence the truth" line that all of his rubes routinely fall for.

For them there is a boogey man around every corner coming for their, 'way of life'.  He is the PERFECT man to give the hogs their daily feeding of slop.

If you didn't watch him before, great, but get those you know away from people like him.  They're too stupid to know how dangerous a man with low moral character and a megaphone can be.

I'd say good riddance, but this isn't even close to the last anyone has heard of him.

Circle jerker

[Uncle Rico]

  that circle is much bigger than that...a lot of hurt feelings from those you left out of the fun

  5) smythe
  6) 1 testicle
  7) jesmu
  8)sully but not sure if the others will play nice with him

There is definitely a market for conspiracy theorists who peddle anti-Semitism, homophobia and racism.  All hail the king

[Pakuni]

Someone very smart doesn't understand the difference between how twitter views and TV ratings are calculated.
I'm shocked.

[Hards Alumni]

Someone very smart doesn't understand the difference between how twitter views and TV ratings are calculated.
I'm shocked.

I do.  And I realize that twitter views can be juiced. 

But as I said, this isn't the end of Tucker and his cult.

[MU82]

I'm too busy making money on AAPL to bother with this silliness.

[Heisenberg]

Someone very smart doesn't understand the difference between how twitter views and TV ratings are calculated.
I'm shocked.

So you think his influence and reach have declined?

[Heisenberg]

I'm too busy making money on AAPL to bother with this silliness.

Did you wipe the ky off both hands before this (now 8 1/2-year-old) personal attack?

[The Sultan]

Did you wipe the ky off both hands before this (now 8 1/2-year-old) personal attack?

Pointing out that your predictions are almost always wrong, oftentimes laughably so, is not a "personal attack."  It's an objectively accurate statement.

[Pakuni]

Did you wipe the ky off both hands before this (now 8 1/2-year-old) personal attack?

What's it say about your future-seeing prowess when a reminder of your prediction = a personal attack?

[Pakuni]

So you think his influence and reach have declined?

Let's revisit that question in a few years.
Do you agree that TV ratings vs Twitter views is a terrible comparison?

[forgetful]

@bennyjohnson 3h
Tucker broke the corporate media monopoly matrix tonight & it's never coming back.

Tucker uploaded a 10 min monologue.
No ads or interruptions.
No pricy subscriptions.
Watch on demand.

The result?

- 17M views
- 90K RTs
- 25K comments

In under 180 mins

I may be wrong, as I don't follow social media at all. But I thought the only way to monetize a twitter handle was either through ad-tweets and subscriptions. So if he is to monetize this, he needs to do both of the bolded.

[Heisenberg]

Let's revisit that question in a few years.
Do you agree that TV ratings vs Twitter views is a terrible comparison?

He is getting multiple times the views of his Twitter videos than his show ever did on Fox.

It means something now. Why do we have to wait?

I'll answer it, the only reason you want to wait is you know Tucker won by getting fired, and his influence and power have vastly increased. You're hoping in the far-off, undetermined future, these numbers go down.

[The Lens]

The main Twitter video view metric is triggered when a user watches a video for at least 2 seconds and sees at least 50% of the video player in-view.

A viewer on Fox News is someone who watched for a quarter hour / 15 minutes. 

And as you can imagine they are compensated far differently as well.  Hards, Jockey & Sultan all could be considered viewers if even half of Tuck's video showed up on their screen.  A far cry from the millions who turned on the tv to watch Fox each night.  Tucker's views are predictable (also bc he may have been able to buy a lot of them).  What is also predictable is the next one up in that chair will eventually have a big name + big ratings.  Location, location, location.

[The Sultan]

He is getting multiple times the views of his Twitter videos than his show ever did on Fox.

It means something now. Why do we have to wait?

I'll answer it, the only reason you want to wait is you know Tucker won by getting fired, and his influence and power have vastly increased. You're hoping in the far-off, undetermined future, these numbers go down.

Again, you don't understand how Twitter views work.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tucker-carlson-twitter-launch-clocks-050051566.html

"But there's a huge gulf between engagement and 'views' numbers, and that discrepancy has a simple explanation: Twitter 'views' really tell us nothing whatsoever about how popular or sought-out a given tweet is.

That's not our assertion. According to Twitter's own FAQ regarding view counts, which you can read here, "Anyone who is logged into Twitter who views a Tweet counts as a view, regardless of where they see the Tweet (e.g. Home, Search, Profiles, etc.) or whether or not they follow the author. If you're the author, looking at your own Tweet also counts as a view."

In other words, a view is counted even if you didn't seek the Tweet out, but it crosses your screen while you're scrolling. And that is very likely to happen on the new algorithmic "For You" tab added to Twitter last January, especially, as has been widely reported since then, if a tweet features content Twitter owner Elon Musk has a vested interest in.

But there's more. According to Twitter, "multiple views may be counted if you view a Tweet more than once, but not all views are unique. For example, you could look at a Tweet on web and then on your phone, and that would count as two views."

Which is to say, again, it is impossible to draw any conclusion whatsoever from the "views" count about the popularity of "Tucker on Twitter." On the other hand, if the tracking of real engagement is any measure, the show is actually doing much, much worse than on Fox news,"

[Heisenberg]

I may be wrong, as I don't follow social media at all. But I thought the only way to monetize a twitter handle was either through ad-tweets and subscriptions. So if he is to monetize this, he needs to do both of the bolded.

His business model is unknown to the public. But we do know he was making taking $25m/year a year, and Newsmax offered him at least $100m/year, and he elected to go with Twitter. He has a plan.

-----

That brings up another point. Musk is trying to break the advertising model. He is doing it with Blue and subscriptions, and other ideas he teases are coming. So, when the media is gloating that Twitter advertising revenues are down 60%, and he is losing money (he can handle it), remember, the plan is to drive advertising down 100%, so he is no longer reliant on it.

This is a huge concern in traditional media and even over at Google. If this works, and he manages to break the hold of advertising on content, it changes many things, from content delivery to marketing strategies of companies trying to build brand awareness.

TBD if successful. But if it is, it will be an earthquake for all businesses.

[MUBurrow]

His business model is unknown to the public. But we do know he was making taking $25m/year a year, and Newsmax offered him at least $100m/year, and he elected to go with Twitter. He has a plan.

Honest question - does Newsmax have the bread to dole out $100M/year as they sit today? Because if not, and would depend on increased revenue from increased (Tucker-generated) viewership to pay Tucker, then there's no reason for Tucker to take that. It would be like a sports league signing a massive money deal with Diamond Sports Group.

[Pakuni]

He is getting multiple times the views of his Twitter videos than his show ever did on Fox.

It means something now. Why do we have to wait?

I'll answer it, the only reason you want to wait is you know Tucker won by getting fired, and his influence and power have vastly increased. You're hoping in the far-off, undetermined future, these numbers go down.

Yeah ... as already has been pointed out several times now, you don't understand the difference between TV ratings and Twitter views. Or, maybe you do know and you're conflating them disingenuously.
Either way, you're wrong.

[Heisenberg]

Again, you don't understand how Twitter views work.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tucker-carlson-twitter-launch-clocks-050051566.html

"But there's a huge gulf between engagement and 'views' numbers, and that discrepancy has a simple explanation: Twitter 'views' really tell us nothing whatsoever about how popular or sought-out a given tweet is.

That's not our assertion. According to Twitter's own FAQ regarding view counts, which you can read here, "Anyone who is logged into Twitter who views a Tweet counts as a view, regardless of where they see the Tweet (e.g. Home, Search, Profiles, etc.) or whether or not they follow the author. If you're the author, looking at your own Tweet also counts as a view."

In other words, a view is counted even if you didn't seek the Tweet out, but it crosses your screen while you're scrolling. And that is very likely to happen on the new algorithmic "For You" tab added to Twitter last January, especially, as has been widely reported since then, if a tweet features content Twitter owner Elon Musk has a vested interest in.

But there's more. According to Twitter, "multiple views may be counted if you view a Tweet more than once, but not all views are unique. For example, you could look at a Tweet on web and then on your phone, and that would count as two views."

Which is to say, again, it is impossible to draw any conclusion whatsoever from the "views" count about the popularity of "Tucker on Twitter." On the other hand, if the tracking of real engagement is any measure, the show is actually doing much, much worse than on Fox news,"

https://wsau.com/2023/06/05/documentary-what-is-a-woman-dominates-twitter-reaches-170-million-views/

Since being posted by The Daily Wire's Twitter account on Thursday, the first day of Pride Month, the controversial 90-minute documentary, which stars Daily Wire host Matt Walsh has received more than 172 million views, making it one of the most popular documentaries of all time.

In contrast, the series finale of M.A.S.H received 50.1 million views and the final episode of HBO's "Game of Thrones" debuted in 2019 with an estimated 19.3 million viewers.

[MUBurrow]

https://wsau.com/2023/06/05/documentary-what-is-a-woman-dominates-twitter-reaches-170-million-views/

Since being posted by The Daily Wire's Twitter account on Thursday, the first day of Pride Month, the controversial 90-minute documentary, which stars Daily Wire host Matt Walsh has received more than 172 million views, making it one of the most popular documentaries of all time.

In contrast, the series finale of M.A.S.H received 50.1 million views and the final episode of HBO's "Game of Thrones" debuted in 2019 with an estimated 19.3 million viewers.

Are you quoting a conservative Wausau radio station not understanding the difference between TV viewers and Twitter views as evidence that you don't also not understand the difference between TV viewers and Twitter views?