<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wednesday&#8217;s Numbers&#8230;</title>
	<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/</link>
	<description>Unvarnished news &#038; opinion on cable news</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 17:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: myview</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29381</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29381</guid>
					<description>Although I usually don't watch  MSNBC I did watch this special and it was excellent in my opinion. Sadly ratings don't always reflect the quality of a program.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Although I usually don&#8217;t watch  MSNBC I did watch this special and it was excellent in my opinion. Sadly ratings don&#8217;t always reflect the quality of a program.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Clak</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29380</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:25:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29380</guid>
					<description>A good special is on??
Mr Engal had what I would call a very well crafted interesting special on the war in Iraq....
This special was hyped by tucker chris keith and joe....
This heavely promoted special managed to earn a near average of all four shows ratings at 439,000
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>A good special is on??<br />
Mr Engal had what I would call a very well crafted interesting special on the war in Iraq&#8230;.<br />
This special was hyped by tucker chris keith and joe&#8230;.<br />
This heavely promoted special managed to earn a near average of all four shows ratings at 439,000
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: ImNotBlue</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29379</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29379</guid>
					<description>Chris... I believe you mean, &quot;MSNBC, when you want to see if your neighbor is a pedophile.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Chris&#8230; I believe you mean, &#8220;MSNBC, when you want to see if your neighbor is a pedophile.&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Chris</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29374</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:11:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29374</guid>
					<description>Oh god, you people are amazing. In all respects, if the same program was on every network, the ratings wouldn't be great for everyone. Diversity exists and each see their good days, FNC during tabloid stories which the other networks choose not the cover, CNN when actual breaking news happens, MSNBC ..... when a good special is on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Oh god, you people are amazing. In all respects, if the same program was on every network, the ratings wouldn&#8217;t be great for everyone. Diversity exists and each see their good days, FNC during tabloid stories which the other networks choose not the cover, CNN when actual breaking news happens, MSNBC &#8230;.. when a good special is on.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Edward Schatz</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29371</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 16:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29371</guid>
					<description>Factchecker isn't checking his facts. &quot;Other sites&quot; (aka TVnewser, where any OlbyLoon goes to) use DVR numbers which Spud does not. No advertiser cares about DVR numbers. They are irrelevant. KO came in 4th. Deal with it. Time for another bottle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Factchecker isn&#8217;t checking his facts. &#8220;Other sites&#8221; (aka TVnewser, where any OlbyLoon goes to) use DVR numbers which Spud does not. No advertiser cares about DVR numbers. They are irrelevant. KO came in 4th. Deal with it. Time for another bottle.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Clak</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29368</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:52:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29368</guid>
					<description>Yeah I gave him to much potential as though he had not gotten those air america faithful.. He allready has the 600 to 700 thousand air america listeners....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Yeah I gave him to much potential as though he had not gotten those air america faithful.. He allready has the 600 to 700 thousand air america listeners&#8230;.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Aunt Mary</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29361</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:25:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29361</guid>
					<description>Clak -- Those are the &quot;SAME&quot; left wing nuts that are &quot;ALREADY&quot; his audience!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Clak &#8212; Those are the &#8220;SAME&#8221; left wing nuts that are &#8220;ALREADY&#8221; his audience!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Clak</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29354</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:49:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29354</guid>
					<description>Is there a higher population of conservatives watching cable news compared to liberals??
I think that the vast conservative radio audience which is mullti millions tune into fox's programs. 
If Keetho could just tap into air americas audience he might pull another 100 thou viewership??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Is there a higher population of conservatives watching cable news compared to liberals??<br />
I think that the vast conservative radio audience which is mullti millions tune into fox&#8217;s programs.<br />
If Keetho could just tap into air americas audience he might pull another 100 thou viewership??
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Alison</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29349</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 10:44:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29349</guid>
					<description>Actually, &quot;Dirty Laundry&quot; was a Don Henley song, not an Eagles song. 

But I guess that line DOES explain why all the tv writers just LOVE Olbermann even though viewers clearly don't!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Actually, &#8220;Dirty Laundry&#8221; was a Don Henley song, not an Eagles song. </p>
	<p>But I guess that line DOES explain why all the tv writers just LOVE Olbermann even though viewers clearly don&#8217;t!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Grampa D</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29347</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:36:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29347</guid>
					<description>&quot;We all know that crap is king...&quot;
 -- The Eagles, &lt;i&gt;Dirty Laundry&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>&#8220;We all know that crap is king&#8230;&#8221;<br />
 &#8212; The Eagles, <i>Dirty Laundry</i>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: bigred</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29336</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:56:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29336</guid>
					<description>El, you're the expert.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>El, you&#8217;re the expert.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: elmonica</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29335</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29335</guid>
					<description>Marty,
Figuring out how to quench that thirst for &quot;crap&quot; is what has made Fox News #1 in the cable news ratings. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Marty,<br />
Figuring out how to quench that thirst for &#8220;crap&#8221; is what has made Fox News #1 in the cable news ratings.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Marty</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29334</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29334</guid>
					<description>Looks like my comment got eaten, but I can't believe that people are flocking to watch more ANS crap on Greta's show.  This completely insignificant &quot;celebrity&quot; appears to be more important dead than when she was alive.  Thank goodness for Anderson Cooper's Planet in Peril series which has been excellent and informative.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Looks like my comment got eaten, but I can&#8217;t believe that people are flocking to watch more ANS crap on Greta&#8217;s show.  This completely insignificant &#8220;celebrity&#8221; appears to be more important dead than when she was alive.  Thank goodness for Anderson Cooper&#8217;s Planet in Peril series which has been excellent and informative.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Marty</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29333</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:22:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29333</guid>
					<description>&amp;gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;Anderson Cooper’s Planet in Peril series can’t hold a candle to Greta’s Anna Nicole saga.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;Anderson Cooper’s Planet in Peril series can’t hold a candle to Greta’s Anna Nicole saga.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tom</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29332</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29332</guid>
					<description>Didn't some idiot named David Dudley in the Cornell Alumni Magazine recently allege (with no evidence, of course) that Keith Olbermann &quot;has tightened his grip on second place, especially among younger viewers&quot;?  When those with functioning brain cells rely on actual evidence, however, Keith Olbermann remains in his routine FOURTH place out of FIVE, not only in total viewers but also in the critical, key, all-important, much-loved demo.  How long will it take for some fool in some American publication to humor us with the latest fawning tribute (#10,001?) to Olbermann, making the same fatuous, unsupported claims about Olbermann's &quot;impressive&quot; ratings, &quot;expecially among younger viewers&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Didn&#8217;t some idiot named David Dudley in the Cornell Alumni Magazine recently allege (with no evidence, of course) that Keith Olbermann &#8220;has tightened his grip on second place, especially among younger viewers&#8221;?  When those with functioning brain cells rely on actual evidence, however, Keith Olbermann remains in his routine FOURTH place out of FIVE, not only in total viewers but also in the critical, key, all-important, much-loved demo.  How long will it take for some fool in some American publication to humor us with the latest fawning tribute (#10,001?) to Olbermann, making the same fatuous, unsupported claims about Olbermann&#8217;s &#8220;impressive&#8221; ratings, &#8220;expecially among younger viewers&#8221;?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Chet</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29330</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:40:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29330</guid>
					<description>Where's Noelle? She's one of my favorites...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Where&#8217;s Noelle? She&#8217;s one of my favorites&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Factchecker</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29329</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:38:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29329</guid>
					<description>You're most welcome haha ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>You&#8217;re most welcome haha ?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Chet</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29327</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29327</guid>
					<description>Thanks Factchecker.. we can always count on you to give us the facts haha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thanks Factchecker.. we can always count on you to give us the facts haha
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Factchecker</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29326</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29326</guid>
					<description>Very bad night for Olbermann.  (Hey, wasn't someone saying that Mondays and Wednesdays were his best nights?)
Acc. to other sites, he beat both Paula and Nancy in both the demo &amp;amp; overall on Tuesday, which this site seems to be missing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Very bad night for Olbermann.  (Hey, wasn&#8217;t someone saying that Mondays and Wednesdays were his best nights?)<br />
Acc. to other sites, he beat both Paula and Nancy in both the demo &amp; overall on Tuesday, which this site seems to be missing.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Chet</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29325</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29325</guid>
					<description>Bill's back to 2.5million... I love it was PZ beats KO!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Bill&#8217;s back to 2.5million&#8230; I love it was PZ beats KO!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: bigred</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29320</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:35:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29320</guid>
					<description>I thought O'Reilly was &quot;losing viewers on a daily basis&quot;.. according to the Olby fans.  What's their excuse today?  His DEMO numbers almost beat Olbermann's overall.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I thought O&#8217;Reilly was &#8220;losing viewers on a daily basis&#8221;.. according to the Olby fans.  What&#8217;s their excuse today?  His DEMO numbers almost beat Olbermann&#8217;s overall.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Clak</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29317</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29317</guid>
					<description>When was the last time CNN shook up there line up??
Anderson has been around for way over a year and paula used to beet keetho every night.....
 
Will anything change this year??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>When was the last time CNN shook up there line up??<br />
Anderson has been around for way over a year and paula used to beet keetho every night&#8230;..</p>
	<p>Will anything change this year??
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Booyah</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29314</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29314</guid>
					<description>Anderson Cooper's Planet in Peril series can't hold a candle to Greta's Anna Nicole saga.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Anderson Cooper&#8217;s Planet in Peril series can&#8217;t hold a candle to Greta&#8217;s Anna Nicole saga.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Aunt Mary</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29313</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:56:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29313</guid>
					<description>Schatz I like your style.

Come on Puck, give &quot;Murrow&quot; a break, after all he did in fact beat &quot;Fast Money&quot;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Schatz I like your style.</p>
	<p>Come on Puck, give &#8220;Murrow&#8221; a break, after all he did in fact beat &#8220;Fast Money&#8221;!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jim</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29311</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:28:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29311</guid>
					<description>That really was beyond bias for ole Brian to actually promote an MSNBC show. Can't remember him ever doing that. Just amazing!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>That really was beyond bias for ole Brian to actually promote an MSNBC show. Can&#8217;t remember him ever doing that. Just amazing!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Clak</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29308</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:57:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29308</guid>
					<description>Well Keetho had over 700 on monday.  Somone said at that time mondays are his best day. Tuesday it fell to 644 and yesterday 634.... 
What happens when every show from tucker to scarborough is promoting at 10pm special??  439,000 viewers (222,000) an average of all there shows put together......  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Well Keetho had over 700 on monday.  Somone said at that time mondays are his best day. Tuesday it fell to 644 and yesterday 634&#8230;.<br />
What happens when every show from tucker to scarborough is promoting at 10pm special??  439,000 viewers (222,000) an average of all there shows put together&#8230;&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Edward Schatz</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29305</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:48:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29305</guid>
					<description>4th in both categories for Ted Baxter. This may call for champagne again.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>4th in both categories for Ted Baxter. This may call for champagne again&#8230;..
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: puck</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29302</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:42:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/03/22/wednesdays-numbers-47/#comment-29302</guid>
					<description>'Olbermann has tightened his grip on 2nd place.'

OOOOOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhh! Really Now!

'O'Reilly has lost over 200,000...'

Well let's put this in context. O'Reilly dipping 200,000 is like Olby dipping 10,000.

Again! When I see Olby doing over a million a night for a month straight, then I might start to listen.

It's like pissing in the wind with the wind blowing in your face.

Plus, didn't MSNBC run that 'Must see' war special last? I was watching something else. Well the special that TVNEWSER shamelessly promoted on his site didn't pull any great numbers. Kudos to Spud for just reporting things and not selling out, or sucking up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>&#8216;Olbermann has tightened his grip on 2nd place.&#8217;</p>
	<p>OOOOOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhh! Really Now!</p>
	<p>&#8216;O&#8217;Reilly has lost over 200,000&#8230;&#8217;</p>
	<p>Well let&#8217;s put this in context. O&#8217;Reilly dipping 200,000 is like Olby dipping 10,000.</p>
	<p>Again! When I see Olby doing over a million a night for a month straight, then I might start to listen.</p>
	<p>It&#8217;s like pissing in the wind with the wind blowing in your face.</p>
	<p>Plus, didn&#8217;t MSNBC run that &#8216;Must see&#8217; war special last? I was watching something else. Well the special that TVNEWSER shamelessly promoted on his site didn&#8217;t pull any great numbers. Kudos to Spud for just reporting things and not selling out, or sucking up.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
