Tuesday, June 13, 2023

MEDIA: No, Mother Tucker did not have 60 million people watch his video

Sewer rat Tucker Carlson returned to 'broadcasting' via Twitter.   As Samantha Benitz (RADAR) noted, FOX "NEWS" immediately notified Tucker Carlson's legal representatives that he was in violation of the terms of his contract.  Despite the idiots like Marjorie Taylor Greene acting as though this was unheard of, most TV contracts contain a clause that should you leave (quit or be fired).  It's called a non-complete agreement.  When THE TONIGHT SHOW had its drama, we would have thought everyone learned about the clause.

Recap, NBC was looking for a way to make even cheaper programming -- something they're always eager to do -- and thought the answer to that would be THE JAY LENO SHOW (2009).  So they took Jay out of THE TONIGHT SHOW and forced him to do five hours a week in prime time.  Having no real plan for this -- other than to occupy airtime -- NBC's idea bombed.  THE JAY LENO SHOW bombed and THE TONIGHT SHOW WITH CONAN O'BRIEN had lost millions of viewers from when Jay was behind the desk.  NBC needed Jay to return to their cash cow.  Cancelling THE JAY LENO SHOW was not difficult.  But now what to do with Conan? Various things were proposed -- including letting Conan keep THE TONIGHT SHOW -- but it airing in a later time slot (the slot he had vacated).  Being jerked around, Conan wanted to leave -- and who could blame him.

This then started the nonsense that Conan would be doing a new program elsewhere.

Not that easy.  Conan had a non-compete clause.  He taped his final NBC show on January 22, 2010.  

People felt sorry for him.  As they should have.  And that sympathy was really good because it allowed him to get out of the non-compete clause.  It would be dropped nearly two months later by NBC.  Nearly two months later.

Mother Tucker's firing was announced April 23rd.  And he doesn't have public sympathy.  Some rabid trash like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Megyn Kelly and Glenn Greenwald have sympathies for the conspiracy theorist who attacks the left, attacks immigrants, attacks LGBTQ+ people, attacks feminists, attacks . . . Well, everyone.

And since being fired, Mother Tucker has not come off sympathetic.  FOX "NEWS" can hold him to the non-compete clause -- the way NBC held Jay Leno to his.

Non-compete clause.  We have to repeat that because Glenneth Greenwald -- supposedly a one-time successful lawyer (maybe he considered success to be merely a practicing laywer) -- has yet again made clear that he doesn't understand contract law.  

Tucker decided his future was in the gig economy and with TWITTER -- where Matt Taibbi goes to play dungeon sub.  And Glenneth had a lot to say on TWITTER including this "This is pathetic of Fox. They fired Carlson, and now their position is: he's not allowed to speak. He didn't go to a competing network. He has no contract with Twitter. He's just speaking on social media."  He's not being silenced, he just can't host a program.  Don't sign the contract if you don't like what's in it.  That's what negotiations are all about.  That's why you need to read them yourselves before you sign them.

But more to the point, this: "CNN's collapse continues. Tucker returns with a Twitter show watched by millions" and  "Meanwhile, the only part of media that is growing is independent. The public sees what corporate media has become." and "The sad, pathetic, decaying corporate media's reaction to Tucker's explosive Twitter debut was everything you'd expect and more."

So which is it?  Tucker's triumphing in new media -- that's supposedly kicking "corporate media" in the butt -- or is he isn't?

Glenneth you're the one pretending to be his mouthpiece -- shouldn't you be able to make a coherent legal argument?

As we've said for years now (nearly two decades) for an alleged lawyer Glenneth has always struggled with the most basic legal concepts (such as breach of contract).

We should love stupid people.  They give us so much to write about.

No advertising and no subscriptions?  Tucker will be rolling in . . . no money.  

Equally true, he did not get 17 million views.  

The Great Glenneth Greenwald has been lying about the numbers as well.  But can we pause that for a moment.  Glenneth's jazz hands have been a problem since he debuted his new talk show -- while his husband lay dying in a hospital -- so very William Faulkner meets Grace Metalious.  But there's a new problem.  Does he have lice or bed bugs?  What's with his inability to stop scratching his upper arms of late?  

We'd warn people not to embrace him but, honestly, we can't imagine anyone ever wanting a hug from Glenneth.

At any rate, Glenneth was tossing around Tweets praising Mother Tucker for his "explosive Twitter debut" -- yes, it was like diarrhea -- "CNN's collapse continues. Tucker returns with a Twitter show watched by millions."

Oh, Glenneth, if you couldn't lie you'd have to sit there silently.

60 million people did not watch Tucker.  10 million people did not watch Tucker despite Glenneth's claim:

Tucker Carlson is the most successful host in the history of cable news. Even in his "stripped-down" Twitter form, he attracted an audience almost no corporate media employee could get close to. Is it possible this partially motivates the universal disdain they have for him?

Tucker's got 60 million viewers!  

That's what some are lying.

No, he doesn't.  Max Blumethal's wife is both ugly and hippy and that's enough reason not to note her stupidity.  But that transphobic Tweet she pinned to her feed in February?

People aren't watching it.  The numbers increase but people aren't watching.  You click on her TWITTER feed and start scrolling and doing that will start her video streaming.  It doesn't mean you're watching it.  In fact, you have to make a point to stop if you want to turn on the audio.  Even if you don't turn on the video, even if you scroll past it quickly, it still counts as a stream.  And it does that each time you visit her Twitter feed.

John Stauber posted Mother Tucker's 'big' show four times last Tuesday to his TWITTER feed.

He really is a car crash and so he attracts rubber neckers.  Let's say 20,000 people visited his feed and scrolled.  That means Tucker's video streamed 80,00 times.

Megyn Kelly, Glenneth, all the usual trash, reposted Tucker's video.  

He did not get 60 million viewers.  It was -- automatically streamed -- many, many times.  

People are not watching Tucker.  
At YOUTUBE, they've put in some measures to try to prevent that sort of miscount.  But if you have a YOUTUBE page and put a video on the home page and it starts streaming when you go to the home page?  That counts as you streaming it.  You might go to another page at that YOUTUBE account in two seconds, say the "about" page, but the video started streaming the minute you hit the home page and they're counting that stream.


Twitter doesn't do that and doesn't care to.  

Repeating, Tucker is not a Twitter star.  He was reposted on hundreds of accounts.  The number actually taking the time to watch the video is very small.  And you can argue it's probably around the number of users leaving comments -- which Glenneth said was 29,000.

At the end of Carlson’s first show, a 10-minute monologue in a barn, with a wide shot showing he was operating his own teleprompter, the host said he would bypass the mainstream media to tell viewers the truth, as Russians under communism once found ways to hear broadcasts from other countries.

He said: “We’ve come to Twitter which we hope will be the shortwave radio under the blankets. We’re told there are no gatekeepers here. If that turns out to be false, we’ll leave … We’ll be back with much more very soon.”

It was one of those rare moments where Tucker told the truth.  Shot-wave radio?  Yes, some Russians used them to listen to VOICE OF AMERICA -- the US propaganda outlet around the world.  So just a VOA lied intentionally to people around the world for years and years, Mother Tucker plans to do the same.  We honestly couldn't have thought of a more apt comparison for his new show.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Poll1 { display:none; }