Pravda or Isvestia Never Cared About Ratings (Larry Schweikart Twitter Thread)

Twitter ^ | Oct 10, 2020 | By Larry Schweikart

[Lazamataz]

1. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/cnn_insists_we_are_emneverem_going_back_to_normal.html
   
   

   CNN "We're never going back to normal." Well, no, of course not.
   
   NO "news" orgs are. Once they "lost their virginity" by going full Hoax News on "muh Russia," it was forever over for all of them as real "news" organizations.
   
   

2. Once that trust was broken, it was not a case of a staged exploding truck as one of the networks did; or even @DanRather flat out using fabricated documents on a major story about W.
   
   
3. This time it was a constant, full buy-in to the Russia Hoax for four years and counting.
   
   
4. It's like when MTV quit playing music videos and began 24/7 reality shows. The product was gone.
   
   
5. The real question remains, why?
   
   
6. There are a few theories for the "news" media's complete collapse.
   
   
7. One usually begins with some of you asking, "Don't they realize they are losing viewers?"
   
   Of course they do. It doesn't matter.
   
   But, you say, "How can they survive if viewers/readers aren't paying the bills?"
   
   
8. This is where I've tried to educate over the years.
   
   They do not NEED viewers or readers. In the 1830s, according to two different historians of news at the time, 85% of the newspapers were "Partisan," meaning they didn't report news. They reported ONLY party propaganda.
   
   
9. Same today. NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes, WaCompost---their customers are NOT their viewers or readers.
   
   Their customer is the DemoKKKrat Party and they are paid via subsidies of various sorts through the liberal megacompanies that own them.
   
   
10. Remember, the marketing departments run the big companies now, NOT the CEOs (who only think they run them). Marketing snowflakes and Karens jiggle the marketing surveys the same way the Hoax Pollsters manipulate the polling.
    
    This is why they ALL jumped on the BLM bandwagon.
    
    
11. While most CEOs are probably generically liberal, they were given a hard shove leftward by the Karen Marketers. That's why literally ALL of them complied with the mask mandates.
    
    "I won't shop where they require masks." Good luck in AZ. It's a county law UT the only way ANY of the mask mandates stood was with the full complicity of the big companies (Wal-Mart, Target, Panera, Fry's, Kroger's, Penny's, Macy's etc). If MOST of those companies had strongly resisted, paid fines, etc., there would be no mask mandate.
    
    
12. Yes, I realize they also would have had to fight it on the lawsuit side. But the point is, they didn't WANT to fight it because they are simpatico with the liberal agenda.
    
    Hence transgender bathrooms in Target, NFL kneelers, etc.
    
    
13. So back to the news: the companies that advertise on these shows or in these "News"papers are being driven by the Snowflake Karens and are told that even with falling readership/viewership this is the "hip" place to be to get market share.
    
    
14. They are also reminded they are on the "right" side of history, social justice, blah, blah.
    
    
15. So outfits like GE pour billions into advertising over the years on platforms that are stone cold losers. Cuz they think even if they lose today they will change tomorrow.
    
    
16. Thus, once Donald Trump came along, it merely accelerated a trend they had already been on for years.
    
    
17. No, none of the "news" (including I'm afraid to tell you, Faux) will ever go back. Faux will get worse. Hannity, the Tuckster, Laura may stick for a while, but they will eventually be forced out on some sexual harassment charges. (It's never ideology. Nooooo.)
    
    
18. Don't ever think that these companies are affected by falling ratings, viewership, or readership.
    
    Their "market" is the Snowflake CEOs and Marketing Karens.

[Lazamataz]

Appreciate it, but I’m not on par with Larry. I’m not bad, but not as good as LS.

My biggest claim to fame is probably making large and complicated arguments into single sentences.

[reformedliberal]

Grant that money does not equal survival. That does make sense in the present climate.

What about the portfolio carried by the media to inculcate, supress, manage and otherwise control ALL information?

If people do not watch (click;buy), then they are not being influenced.

If there are choices (and there are, even if they devolve down to the samizdat level), people will gravitate to those choices.

If the MSM cannot fulfill its revolutionary purpose and is still subsidized by the power-mongers, then why?

To play hog-in-the-trough and crowd out the dissenters? That _could_ happen if/when commies take total control. Hence, the samizdat option.

How long can any institution remain smugly confident they are the only source of whatever they produce and so, everyone must partake and agree?

This is how counter-revolutions arise.

America has been rotted from within. Result: at least 1/2 the populace disbelieves any institution and that number keeps growing.

But, humans have been re-hardwired to create institutions over the past 200 years. Don’t they then create alternatives with the result of institutional civil war, dueling authorities, and at some point, outright kinetic war?

The Soviet experiment last 70 years. For at least the last 25, the populace was cynical, sullen, resentful and just needed organizing to rebel. If they had been armed, would it have happened sooner?

Today, with information technology, everything is sped up. Information technology favors individualism: anyone can write a book, set up a web site, promote their views (I realize this is becoming more and more difficult)

Even with the enlistment of violent youth and professional street cadres, ala the Asian Communist model, there is still not a uniformly compliant populace.

Isn’t this particular approach of a controlling news media already failing and sowing the seeds of a new, more distributed model?

[Nifster]

A good claim to fame

[mmanager]

Excellent

[BeauBo]

“Pravda and Isvestia never worried about their ratings.”

Well said.

[dfwgator]

Yep, Vremya was always the most watched show in the Soviet Union.

[BeauBo]

“Communists are very patient. They see the battle in terms of generations and not months or even years.”

“I don’t know when they started working in earnest”

The Bolsheviks came to power in October of 1917. In 1918, their “Diplomatic staff” in New York City were organizing the teachers union. Since then.

[freddy005]

“I used to say, all the way back in the early 2000’s:

“We defeated the Soviet Union. Then we became them.”

How prescient I was.“
____________________________________________________________

I’ve been Saying the same thing for the past 20 years! When the USSR fell in the early 90’s we (in the West) thought that we had won over communism. But the reality is that they infiltrated ALL our institutions (gov’t, academia, media, Hollywood, Sports, Corporate America, etc). When our leaders sold us out to China by allowing them into the WTO among other things (like shifting almost all manufacturing overseas)....that was the death nail! How we comeback from this- especially if Trump doesn’t win next month- I don’t know!

[sauropod]

Re: “brevity”. Me as well.

We recognize the enemedia for what it is.

‘Pod.

[Prince of Space]

“The most insidious power that the news media has is the power to ignore.“ Chris Plante, WMAL.