HAS GLENN BECK PEAKED?

[Holland Cooke]

http://hollandcookemedia.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/has-glenn-beck-peaked/

 

[del_griffith]

Ok, this may be skewed. Horribly skewed. I was scanning some of the articles and responses on Free Republic yesterday. There was a thread about Beck.

Among many Freepers, he has peaked. But not for the reasons you would think. The major reason is because he's be dissing and not being supportive of Birthers. The other frequently repeated comments seemed to center around his gloom and doom presentation, his full of finding the problems but being short on real solutions and finally his equating the republicans to the democrats.

The last one seems more along the lines of don't diss my tribe.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

From the article:

“I wish Glenn Beck’s radio show was a polished as his TV show. I completely agree with you that he is often ‘overrun’ by the other players on his radio show. He needs to shut them up.”

I have noticed that his producer talks a LOT more than he used to. He's turned into a male Robin Quivers. Could it be that he's being groomed for a spin-off?

 

[satech]

Keep in mind that Beck is a repurposed FM "morning zoo" DJ. And two things haven't changed since then: 1.) His show is based on shtick, not substance, and 2.) he always needs a sidekick to play off of. You will very rarely hear Beck go it alone on his radio show for any significant length of time, and when he does, the show becomes boring as hell.

And furthermore, schtick can only get you so far. I'll admit that calling the President a racist Marxist Communist Maoist etc. etc. does make for good shtick, but not for a year straight. Beck needs to change his tune, or else listeners will continue to tune him out.

 

[star100]

In the key 25-54 demo all of this past week, Beck's 5pm TV show has beat all of the FNC primetime shows. Look at the numbers. I can't find this ratings dip you all talk about. Maybe there is some jealousy going on.

That said, I enjoy it better when he is talking about current issues rather than some of the recent author interviews about founding fathers. Not that I don't share those values.

 

[Holland Cooke]

More detail?

In the key 25-54 demo all of this past week, Beck's 5pm TV show has beat all of the FNC primetime shows. Look at the numbers. I can't find this ratings dip you all talk about.

This is instructive.
I'm hip-deep in radio ratings but don't see TV numbers.

Can you provide more detail?
Specifically:

1. I'm hearing that, year-to-year (April-to-April?), his TV ratings are down some 30%?
Has that been distorted in-the-re-telling?

2. RE 25-54 (a favored radio rating demographic):
That's TV's benchmark too? I keep hearing that TV is obsessed with 18-49.

Any such detail would help we-in-radio to understand better.
Please also post to http://hollandcookemedia.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/has-glenn-beck-peaked/

I'm not surprised that he beats OTHER FOX NEWS shows.
What you-can-help-us-get-a-handle-on is how he's doing COMPETITIVELY.

THANKS
HC
www.HollandCooke.com

 

[MikefromDelaware]

I posted a more detailed reply to the You Tube clip of Lomesome Rhodes on the How Angry is too Angry thread on page 7. It fits both topics, but you generally aren't allowed to post in two threads. One has to wonder if Glenn Beck is a 2010 version of that 1957 character played by Andy Griffith. Thanks Holland. I ended up going to You Tube to watch the entire movie.

 

[Holland Cooke]

Thanks for the comment...AND the YouTube tip!

After seeing that clip, I too want to see the whole movie now.
Thanks for the tip that it's on YouTube.

Thanks too for your post in that other thread.

HC
http://hollandcookemedia.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/has-glenn-beck-peaked/

 

[satech]

Coincidentally or not, Fox News just put out a full-page newspaper ad featuring everyone in their lineup... except Beck. They even left a conspicuous gap in the group photo where he could've appeared. Might Beck's days on TV be numbered?

Fox News’ Triumphant Ad Touting ‘The Most Powerful Name In News’ Leaves Out Glenn Beck
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/29/fox-ad-beck/

 

[cklw800]

I absolutely loved Glenn Beck in the early 2000s. I remember one show around 2004 he bragged about how he didn't go to college and yet became a success. In the entertainment industry especially it is perfectly normal and OK because natural talent has a place. Just like our non-degreed millionaire singers, on-air talents, athletes, actors and musicians we spend our money on and travel to go and see. I thought that was very cool. But his natural talent for entertainment on the big stage gave him passage into an area where his college-trained co-workers/competitors live, and I think that's where we see the breakdown. He's having a hard time bridging entertainment and academia with respect to credibility talking about the issues of the day. Some college-educated viewers and listeners can tell. If he takes himself too seriously, what he lacks will show itself. If he made it more of a parody of sorts while still getting his opinons through, he may not come off as clownish. Where he fails is taking himself way too seriously, so what he lacks in intellect with respect to the forum he has to explain his views, shows itself and has been harmful. Maybe when he slams the current administration he could be a little less serious and actually strive to take it in a more entertaining vein (which he seems to do sometimes by accident) and it wouldn't be as embarassing to watch. When he talks about race in particular he comes off like Archie Bunker did in the episode where he went on TV to talk about gun control. Beck is a great entertainer, and if he were doing something other than politics on the air he'd blow all of his detractors/competitors out of the water. I know we have many examples of great and knowlegeable newspersons who got into journalism in the back door, but they didn't have as big a stage as Beck, given the current political environment, and they certainly didn't have as much freedom to express their political views. They spent much of their time reading the scripts and asking for everyone else's opinions, while giving of themselves straight, honestly and intelligently from the heart.

 

[quadraphonic]

Beck could've done a good job on sports radio [maybe he still will one day], but then there's not one team or sport that half of America would identify with and agree with him about.
Also, the model for sports talk when he got into it didn't have as big a $ upside as political talk radio did, so that probably affected his decision to get into it.

 

[Holland Cooke]

Here's the problem with this reverse snobbery...

he bragged about how he didn't go to college

Hey, Sarah Palin doesn't brag about GOING to college.
Curious, since she attended so many of 'em.

Here's the problem with this reverse snobbery.
It's a dangerous gimmick.
Beck's "I'm just a guy with kids...who cares" shtick seeks-to-relate-to just-folks, and excuse a blank resume.
Ditto Palin's folksy caricature, and Limbaugh's disdain for the-better-educated.

Memes like "DRILL, BABY, DRILL" whip-up a rally, alrighty.
Then comes spill-baby-spill, the-ecological-impact-of-which may be exceeded-only-by its economic impact.
Read: jobs.

Those of us who snoozed-through that Western Civ' course required of college freshmen applaud high school graduate Beck for just-now-discovering History. But, clearly, he's more fascinated than possessed-of-the-facts.

Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhz6b8uCWbE

The difference between that "Lonesome Rhodes" character and Beck is that Rhodes' puppet master was willful.
Beck's affiliate stations aren't even listening. Like Limbaugh, it's plug-N-play...hours the local station doesn't have to deal with.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

Which is worse, reverse snobbery or normal snobbery? Instead of nitpicking about someone's academic credentials, I think we'd be better off having different sides of an argument discuss the actual merits of the issues. This whole "so-and-so" is better educated than "the other guy" stuff is childish and doesn't help anything. Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity didn't get where they are by being dumb.

 

[Holland Cooke]

RE "Here's the problem with this reverse snobbery."

Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity didn't get where they are by being dumb.

Tell that to fishermen in the Gulf.

Listen to how-quickly El Rushbo figures-out-a-way to blame "liberals" for the BP spill.

 

[del_griffith]

Not to derail the thread, but should the government be "bailing out" BP by assisting with the oil spill containment and clean up? I mean, why does the government even have the resources in place to assist?

Even if BP pays for all the assistance it will be getting from the US, shouldn't BP be totally responsible for keeping and mobilizing all resources instead of relying on and requesting assistance of the government? I've not heard that discussed.

Isn't this assistance similar to the assistance that was given to several companies in the last almost 2 years?

 

[Holland Cooke]

RE "shouldn't BP be totally responsible?"

Not to derail the thread, but should the government be "bailing out" BP by assisting with the oil spill containment and clean up?

TRY...just-TRY getting-past Limbaugh's screeners with THAT one!

 

[Seltzer]

I guarantee the government will not bail out a "BIG EVIL OIL COMPANY". Not this bunch of kooks. I hear some quarters are trying to blame this spill on Chaney, who last I checked was back at his ranch in Wyoming.

BTW---Like the other bailouts, this one shouldn't happen either.

 

[quadraphonic]

Well if The Gubment waits a while, until the spill is "really bad"
THEN they start doing some emergency help work, when it's an officially-sanctioned "crisis" [unlike now, I guess],
THEN they can charge back BP for the cleanup costs [at "federal emergency" rates],
which maybe just maybe would allow them to claim a majority stake in BP [ooh what did that stand for again?] like they did for GM.
BAM! Gubment Hands across the water, even if only metaphorically. Foot in car and gas industries [plus the previous others].

 

[del_griffith]

I guarantee the government will not bail out a "BIG EVIL OIL COMPANY". Not this bunch of kooks. I hear some quarters are trying to blame this spill on Chaney, who last I checked was back at his ranch in Wyoming.

BTW---Like the other bailouts, this one shouldn't happen either.

It's in my opinion stupid linkage, but I saw something the other day that Halliburton was involved in some shape or form. I've not done much to check out and read up that angle.

 

[del_griffith]

Re: RE "shouldn't BP be totally responsible?"

Not to derail the thread, but should the government be "bailing out" BP by assisting with the oil spill containment and clean up?

TRY...just-TRY getting-past Limbaugh's screeners with THAT one!

Do I look like Don Quixote? But it would be a fun conversation.

And even if I got through, I'd have to wait in line past the caller that somehow materializes 30 seconds after Rush shifts topics ready to discuss that topic with him. I always wondered how that happened.