All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 19, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:44
February 19, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends, and welcome to Views Express by our host on this program documented to be almost always right 99.7% of the time.
You can count on it.
We're all about the truth on this program.
Daily, relentless, unstoppable pursuit of the truth.
You want to be on the program?
It's 800-282-2882, the email address, LRushboybnet.com.
Okay, I normally wouldn't talk about what I'm going to talk about next, but I'm going to talk about it because I have a giant C, I told you so here.
Just a huge C, I told you so.
It's nothing, it's a big C, I told you so, but it's nothing that I alone predicted or came up with.
Jimmy Fallon got the tonight show.
Jay Leno sent packing.
They put Jimmy Fallon in there.
Do you know on his inaugural night, he had four million...
I don't want to do it that way.
I don't want...
I'm not dumping on Jimmy Fallon.
That's not the point here.
I don't even want to talk about ratings because they don't matter right now.
Comparing Leno's last show to his first is not, even though they did promote the hell out of it.
There's a column by the head writer for Johnny Carson.
His name is Raymond Siller.
And it ran a couple of days ago in USA Today.
And I think it was, yeah, I think it was.
And he explains in this piece why late night comics just don't hit Obama, why they don't make jokes about Democrats.
Interestingly enough, in my spare time yesterday, I happened to read an interview with Lauren Michaels, who is producing the tonight show for Jimmy Fallon, Saturday Night Live, tapped Conan O'Brien.
He is Mr. NBC late night.
And the person interviewing him asked him why they don't hit Democrats and do much Obama humor.
And he said, this is what he said.
He said, because the Democrats take it personally.
You wouldn't believe the grief we get.
We just don't.
They take all these jokes personally.
Republicans, they just laugh at it.
The Democrats take it personally.
And then he said, besides, there isn't anything funny about healthcare.
There's maybe two jokes in healthcare.
Then what do you do?
He said, there really ain't anything funny about what the Democrats are doing.
He is one day.
He's a registered independent, but make no mistake.
Now, Raymond Siller was one of the head writers for a time for Johnny Carson.
And the headline of his piece is, late night comics protect Obama.
This week, the Tonight Show with new host Jimmy Fallon returned to its storied birthplace at 30 Rock in New York City.
Jimmy is talented.
He is likable and probably closest to my old boss, Johnny Carson, doing characters and sketches.
Once again, NBC ditched Jay Leno for a trophy comic.
This, despite Jay's consistent ratings dominance.
You know, I was talking about this last night in another point in my spare time.
I had an instant message flash going back and forth about ratings late night.
And I offered the following opinion to the person I was talking with.
I said, it's obvious that ratings don't matter anywhere near as much as they used to.
Otherwise, there wouldn't be a CNN.
There would not be an MSNBC.
If ratings mattered, they wouldn't exist.
Nobody's watching.
In the universe, they are competing.
Nobody's when you've got 75 to 100,000 people and you are a national cable news network.
Nobody's watching.
You barely get an asterisk, but there they are.
And MSNBC is even fewer.
And I proffered this opinion.
I think we've gotten to the point in not just media, but our culture.
I think television executives, management types, programmers are more influenced by what the media says about a talent or a show than what the ratings are.
I said, why'd they get rid of Leno?
His ratings are through the roof.
Why'd they get rid of the guy?
Really?
And Raymond Siller addresses it here.
Once again, NBC ditched Jay Leno for a trophy comic.
This, despite Jay's consistent ratings dominance, NBC hopes Fallon will hold Leno's audience and not become Conan O'Brien too.
The current late night landscape is populated by 19 comedy and talk shows.
Leno was the everyman.
He was the flyover fave.
He was middle of the road.
He was less ironic than Letterman and Kimmel, but Caesar sounded to their kale, and the only one willing to launch comedic drones over the current West Wing.
The only one, and he had the highest ratings.
So why did they get rid of him?
Well, what they would tell you is that they just dug deep, they drilled way down in those Nielsen numbers, and they began to see erosion in the 18 to 34.
And when they see that, the erosion in 2554 is next, and that means they want to be ahead of it.
So we're going to get rid of Leno before he loses the demo.
That's exactly what they did to Carson, by the way.
It's portrayed that Carson called his shot and got out, and there may have been some of that.
But I remember specifically, it's one of the things I always wanted to do before I wanted to be on the tonight show, and I never made it.
I never was invited, and I didn't try to get on.
But I was studying when they decided to get rid of him or when he decided to leave.
And that's what they said.
We are beginning to see the erosion of the young demos.
Now, okay, are 18 to 34-year-olds even watching television today?
They're watching Netflix.
They're watching their iPads, their iPhones, smartphones, or whatever, or on websites.
The actual number of people that plop themselves down in that demo and watch TV is a diminishing number.
Now, there are still some young kids that instead of going to school, do it.
But I mean, the active, the kind of demo that the advertisers want, they're not plopping themselves down.
They're on the go.
They're watching video on demand.
It's a changing.
And so to hold Leno prisoner to that, I thought was curious.
Now, there's some that there's another reason why they wanted to get rid of Leno.
It has nothing to do with ratings.
This is my point last night, the guy I was talking to.
So they're going to put Jimmy Fallon in there.
And my point was: as long as the New York entertainment media loves Fallon, he's safe, no matter what the numbers are.
And I think that's the difference.
I think, why is CNN still there?
Because the media, they are the Democrat Party.
I was just watching CNN, and there's some infobabe up there who used to be one of their reporters.
She was a domestic reporter, then she did lifestyle stuff, and then they sent her over to Moscow.
She was the Moscow bureau chief.
Jill Dougherty's her name.
Now she's at the Kennedy School.
It's an incestuous revolving door.
There aren't any journalists anymore.
They're just Democrats, and they're assigned. to various places.
Okay, we're going to send you over to CNN to send you over to NBC.
We're going to send you up to the Kennedy School.
You're going to quit.
You're going to go work for a Congress.
When you finish doing that, we're going to take you back to CBS.
This is how it works.
Then a couple of, Lauren Michaels said, this is Jimmy Fallon's last job.
There is no job after this.
This is the job that he retires from.
Well, that's Jimmy Fallon's, what, 38?
I mean, it's a long time to make this.
But I'm just, it's a different, and this may not even matter to you all.
I mean, this is inside baseball stuff to me because ratings used to be the only thing you, as a performer, talent, whatever host, you wanted ratings insurance wherever you could get it.
And now, yeah, if, well, I don't even want to bring that up, but there is a point in time where ratings will again matter.
But right now, they don't.
It's more important.
I find this fascinating because as a culture now, it seems more and more everybody's obsessed with what is said about them and what's thought about them.
You go to social media and everybody's vomiting everything about themselves.
That's why I laugh at people worried about the NSA.
What do you mean?
We don't even need the NSA.
You're telling us everything there is to know about you and then some.
You care more about us knowing who you are than the NSA cares about finding out about you.
Look at Meet the Press.
Look at Meet the Press used to be the only Sunday morning show.
When David Brinkley left ABC's this week, I mean, Russert owned it.
CBS did their show.
Now, those shows are done without any regard for ratings, really, because they've got their set roster of advertisers.
They're going to sponsor them no matter what, because of the serious nature of the shows, the newsmaker, newsmaking aspects.
But Meet the Depressed, folks, is nothing anymore what it was ratings-wise, but it's still there.
So you couple all this with, I really do think that, so you're going to see, as a result, in the media, you're going to see more PR campaigns and you're going to see more people hiring image-making PR firms to craft a public image, and somebody's longevity is going to be based more on what the media says about them and their show than what their ratings are.
Because if, for example, if you're Lauren Michaels, if the media loves Fallon, who cares who's watching, if the media loves him, that means you love Lauren Michaels because Lauren Michaels picked the guy.
It means Lauren Michaels' a brilliant guy, regardless what the numbers are.
As long as they've got enough advertisers, it'll still pay the freight based on whatever.
But with Leno, he had the numbers.
It didn't matter.
And I'll guarantee you that it was a combination of two things.
Their claim that his numbers were starting to erode when they drilled deep down, and the fact that he was getting older, and their assumption that there's just no way this guy can stay relevant to young demographics.
He's too old.
The chin is too heavy.
The chin has just got too much weight, dragging the whole host down.
That's the point, Johnny Carson, but they still forced him out, too, didn't they?
I still maintain that Carson, you know, the image, I'm not trying to disrupt the image.
I mean, the image is that Carson, you know, picked it and chose it and decided when to go.
And I don't doubt that he was ready to go.
But I don't, you know, these are very, very important franchises.
And now you've got Letterman, and he's the dean.
And there was a New York Daily News story today about all this.
And the reporter Letterman, yeah, Letterman 63, 64, and he looks it, it said.
Well, anyway, Mr. Siller then continues.
Jimmy Fallon's competitors, or Leno's competitors, haven't exactly hammered Obama, hardly a smidgen.
The paucity of Obama jokes is the dog that didn't bark.
Like their news anchor counterparts, our hosts go gentle into that late night despite their target-rich environment of this regime.
With his pen and phone, our selfie-absorbed president's one whacked uncle away from appointing himself supreme leader.
Remember, this is the head writer, former head writer for Johnny Carson, Raymond Siller.
It isn't that they've abstained from attacking Democrats.
Bill Clinton got savaged during his eight-year run.
We could expect torrential yucks if and when Hillary declares.
But they're tongue-tied when it comes to roughing up the current president.
The only plausible explanation for their fear is being labeled racist.
And that's unfortunate.
What rankles some Obama critics isn't the color of his skin, it's the thinness of his skin.
Fox News and Rush Limbaugh get under Obama's skin.
I'm honored to be mentioned in this piece, by the way, by Mr. Siller.
He lives in New York, and he still follows all this stuff.
Johnny Carson's former head writer.
You ought to read this.
It's at Breitbart now.
They've linked to it at Breitbart.
It might have been a piece for Bright.
I thought it was USA Today, but maybe it's Breitbart.
Anyway, it's there.
We'll link to it at rushlimbaugh.com.
Make it easy for you to find this.
Okay, Doug Elmendorf of the CBO is back and claiming that if we do what Obama wants on a minimum wage, it's going to have a bad, bad effect on employment.
And of course, the regime is out saying Elmendorf doesn't know what he's talking about.
We've got Soundbites Galore and, of course, what I think about it.
So don't go away.
Just so there's no misunderstanding here, I don't know Jimmy Fallon.
Haven't met him.
I wish him the best.
That is a great gig, the Tonight Show.
It's a big deal to them that they're moving it back to New York.
I don't think the audience is going to care, but they just want a good show.
And I hope it is.
But, you know, we live in such a great flux in our society, and the traditions are going by the wayside.
The Today Show, Tonight Show is one of them.
And there's some people thinking, there's no way it can survive.
It's just going to be evolved out.
And others think, oh, no, no, this thing is such a franchise.
That tonight's show, no matter, it's always going to people are always going to be wanting to watch comedy at 11:30 at night, at least the Eastern time zone.
But I hope it goes great for Fallon.
I hope he hope it's everything he wants it to be.
I don't know him, I've never met him, but I don't want to be any misunderstanding about any of this.
Wish him the best, like I do everybody that does this when they give it a shot.
Here's Joe in LaSalle, Illinois.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Yes, Rush.
Thanks very much for taking my call.
You bet, sir.
Anytime.
And I really have to apologize.
I was not your biggest fan 20 years ago, but now I see the lights.
And I'm really thankful.
Thankful for what you're doing.
Thank you.
I'm glad that you stuck with it long enough to see the light.
Well, the question I was asking is: they can give you, you know, he says you're going to get $8,000 back in gas amounts.
Well, that means you're paying $16,000 right now, the average American, right?
Now, this is fascinating.
This is fascinating.
Joe, you are providing me a learning opportunity for me in a teachable moment.
Because this is fascinating the way you heard this.
No right or wrong here.
The president says that by 2025, you'll be saving $8,000 a year on your fuel bill.
Now, Joe here heard that.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
You heard that somehow you're going to end up with $8,000 that you didn't have, right?
Right.
Or you're going to be spending $8,000 less than you are now.
So that means if Obama said that he's going to cut fuel bills in half, then the way you heard it, people must be paying $16,000 a year now, right?
That's right.
Well, they're not, obviously.
So what did he really mean when Obama said by 2025, you're going to be saving $8,000 on your fuel expenses?
What he meant by that was that whatever you're spending now, whatever it is, it's going to be $8,000 less in 11 years because we're going to get twice the mileage per gallon that we're getting now.
So you heard, you heard Obama say you're going to save $8,000 and you're thinking, where is this coming from?
And you're very wise to be looking at it that way.
Because how can anybody know what you're going to be saving on fuel costs 11 years and then to peg a figure to it of $8,000?
What's it based on?
Now, the reason I like, Joe, you actually stop to think about this, and you're trying to envision how the hell it's possible.
But most people, you know, the low-information crowds, people you used to hang with, they're sitting there thinking, oh, wow.
Wow.
I'm going to be spending $8,000 less in 11 years on gas than I'm spending now.
Or Obama's going to give me $8,000.
They heard it an entirely different way.
You're trying to figure out, wait a second, based on what?
Where's this number coming from?
He just threw it down there.
You're way ahead of the game, Joe, and I got to applaud you.
Yeah.
Well, and I can understand they already took out all the steel in a car pretty much in the last 30 years.
So You can't make it any bigger than a motorcycle, really.
For me to go from a 20-mile-an-hour car or 20-mile-per-gallon car to a 40-mile-an-hour motorcycle is about what you got to do.
Joe, let me tell you: if people start spending $8,000 less on gasoline, the states are going to be raising your fuel taxes to make up for it.
Nobody's going to be saving any money if Obama's involved in anything.
Okay, we're going to stick with the phones.
And this is Kevin in Cynthia.
Yeah, we're going to get to the minimum wage stuff.
We have lots of stuff left to go, actually.
But we've got some people on hold for a while with good stuff.
Kevin, Cincinnati, great to have you.
Hello, sir.
Hi, Rush.
How are you today?
Fine and dandy.
Thank you.
I have a dilemma that I want to run by you.
I have a actually, he's six years old, a six-year-old son.
He's going to turn seven next month, but he came home from school last week.
He's in first grade.
And, of course, as any parent does, what'd you learn today in school?
And he said, we went over biographies today.
So I said, well, tell me about it.
What'd you learn?
And so he went through, you know, well, George Washington.
And I said, what was he?
Well, he's the first president.
He mentioned Thomas Edison, invented the light bulb.
And interestingly enough, he said, the third one was Henry Ford.
And I said to him, well, what did he do?
And he said, we learned he invented the car.
And I said, no, he did not invent the car, son.
And he said, no, yes, he did.
Wait, wait, wait.
Just a second, Kevin.
Do you, I'm going to venture a guess here that a lot of people in this audience do think Henry Ford invented the car.
That is what's taught, that Henry Ford invented the auto, and it was the Model T or the Model A. Right.
A lot of people.
Your son's not the only one who's taught that.
I understand that, but it's ridiculous because what he really did is an amazing teaching moment.
And why would a teacher, I don't know if she's lazy or just dumbfounds me.
She doesn't know.
She also thinks Henry Ford invented a car.
She doesn't know that it was a guy named Wilhelm Maybach in Germany who founded Daimler-Benz way back when.
What Henry Ford did was invent the assembly line, the automation of the manufacture of automobiles, which made them cheaper so that everybody, theoretically, I mean, in a proportionate way, could afford one.
Because up until then, they were all handmade, and the only people could afford one with a king and queen.
And what a great lesson to teach a first grader.
It just dumbfounded me.
The other thing I thought about was your books.
And I have a feeling he's a little too young for your books, don't you think?
At seven, basically?
He's not too young for you to read it to him.
And he's not too young for the audio version of it.
He will grasp it, you think?
If your son is being taught biographies, he's in the first grade, and he's being taught biographies of people like George Washington and Edison and so forth, then yeah, I mean, the book is written for a reading proficiency of 10 to 13 or older.
We've tried to target it to an interest level of 10 to 13.
What we found is that a lot of adults are learning things in it that they didn't know.
But yeah, it's clearly a children's book, first stab at it for me.
But I don't, I think, I think it would be ideal if somebody was reading it.
Let me send you the audio.
I'll send you the audio version and you can see.
You can run a little experiment.
That would be amazing.
I'd appreciate it.
I held off buying it just because I thought maybe it was above him.
I have to do something to counter some of this stuff that he's learning.
Voila, it can be if you ask him to say, you're going to be doing this every night.
Sure.
Now, this Henry Ford stuff, I don't think that I just think the teacher doesn't know.
You'd be amazed the number of people who are shocked right here having heard for the first time Henry Ford did not make the car.
Right.
That's just sad.
Because, like I said, it's such a great teaching moment of what he really did do.
What he did do was brilliantly invent a way to make them cheaper and faster, which made them a mainstream product.
It was, I mean, Henry Ford really is the guy who said Sayonara to the horse and buggy.
And then Bill de Blasio in New York came along and finally dotted the T's and crossed the I's on that and wiped him out.
Henry Ford.
By the way, paid his employees amazingly, you know.
So that's not.
Well, you know, Henry Ford, he had another thing.
That's exactly right.
Henry Ford had an operating philosophy that everybody that worked for him was going to be able, based on what he paid them, to afford one.
He didn't want somebody on the assembly line not able to afford what they were making.
And that's why he invented this way of manufacturing.
He didn't subsidize it.
He found a way to reduce the cost so the people that worked for him could afford one.
Well, Rush, all I can say is you've stepped up and started writing these books to help kids, and you've got your work cut out for you.
I know.
But in addition, not only is his work cut out, it's a goldmine of a market because of what the vast amount of misinformation has been taught.
I mean, practically everything about American history is wide open to be taught truthfully.
And it's exciting.
You know, it really is fun.
We're going to get a second book in six months.
Two books in six months for the young crumb crunchers.
We just went to pre-order in the second book 10 days ago.
Well, it'll be two weeks on Friday.
Rush Revere and the First Patriots to complement and go along with the premier book, Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims.
They're great.
But you hang on here, Kevin, because I need Snerdley to get your address.
I can send you an audio version.
Yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, people loved Henry Ford.
He was a very popular guy.
No, no.
Right, they didn't begrudge him.
But the problem is, no, it's like the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Liberals have taken all those things over.
The original Ford Foundation was a conservative bunch, but the Libs have gone in and taken over every one of these, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller, their various foundations, and any number of them that started out as very conservative-oriented and designed and purposed in their missions, and the left just moved in and populated them.
And that's why some people have today kind of a confused opinion of Henry Ford.
Some people think he was a doctrineer liberal because of the Ford Foundation, and he's not.
wasn't um he was he was um i don't i don't think he was hated and reviled like traditional rich people were he brought He brought the automobile to the masses.
And precisely because it was not overcharged.
Anyway, I got to take a no, I've got time to squeeze one more.
And Ted in now, Kevin, don't hang up.
Snerdley's got to get the address so he can send you the audio version of the book, the first book.
Snerdley, make a note.
Let's an audio version of the second book when we get it for his son, who's going to be seven next month.
Here's Ted in Murraysville, Pennsylvania.
Great to have you on the program, Ted.
Hello.
Ditto's from Steeler Country, Russia.
Yes, sir.
I knew that was Western Pennsylvania.
Yes.
I'd just like to question your assertion.
I know you're the all-seeing and all-knowing, but your assertion that ratings don't mean anything anymore to the advertising industry.
I've been retired over 30 years in the publishing business, mostly newspapers.
And I, you know, got down on my hands and knees looking for good numbers.
We were fighting numbers all the time with radio and TV people.
The newspaper industry even went out and did their own surveys to quantify their readership.
And I, every time I, if I ever open up MSNBC or take a look at CNN, I'm just amazed at who's advertising on there.
Why?
I don't understand.
Maybe you can help me with that.
Why was an advertiser?
I can totally tell you.
I can totally tell you.
Okay.
Fox News needs to be included in this answer.
Fox News has any given moment three to four times the audience of MSNBC and CNBC, of MSNS CNN.
I agree.
And that's been the case for years.
But it's only recently that the same advertisers you see on CNN started showing up on Fox.
Fox, for the longest time, had to rely on all this weird per-inquiry stuff, the Ronco Vegematics and stuff.
The reason is because the media buyers, predominantly female, in the basements of these ad agencies are propping CNN up.
They're all libs.
They come out of their university education.
They're liberals.
They know CNN's a fellow traveler, and they're propping them up.
They're buying costs per thousand and sending the money to CNN.
They're not sending results-oriented clients there because there aren't going to be any results.
But they're sending costs per thousand clients there, and they purposely were leaving Fox out.
This happened to me when this program started.
Same exact thing.
Simply because at the time when I started 25 years ago, the rub on my, well, we're controversial and advertisers don't want any controversy.
And we found out it wasn't executives making this.
It's these media buyers that nobody knew, nobody ever run into.
They're in the basements of these businesses.
But I'm here to tell you that CNN is being propped up by ideological fellow travelers at these agencies who know full well what they're doing.
Well, then they have to be lying to their clients.
No, no, it's not how it's done.
I need to define terms.
Cost per thousand.
But what they're doing is taking the ad they place on CNN and then they're buying it saying it's not, it doesn't cost much because there isn't any audience.
They're buying it somewhere else.
They're telling the client, this ad's going to reach X number of people with this buy.
CNN, MSNBC, Oroncove.
They're packaging all kinds of different places to reach the audience.
But these ads are just ads that make impressions.
They're not results or not.
They're not ads that you can measure their success the moment they run.
There's not a phone number to call.
There's not a sale on.
There's nowhere the consumer goes to buy the product immediately.
Your image or brand type ad that simply costs per thousand.
You're just paying to get your company name, your image, whatever you want, in front of as many eyeballs as you can.
It's called cost per thousand.
And the way they don't just buy CNN, they'll package, maybe buy MSNBC at the same time, and then maybe buy a local station in New York or Washington.
They'll add that audience up and they'll tell the client, with this buy, we're reaching this many eyeballs.
Well, okay.
And another comment I wanted to make is I appreciate your MSNBC boycott.
Every time somebody opens their mouth and says Chris Matthews or MSNBC, you're talking about them.
You're giving them notice.
Well, it finally hit me that why should I assist that?
That's insanity that's on that network now, literal insanity.
It is.
It's gotten to the point, why promote it?
Why create Curiosity Tune-In?
So I just, I've banned MSNBC soundbites.
And just very rarely do we suspend the ban.
Now, newspaper advertising, that's a whole different ball.
There you're talking circulation.
There it does matter.
It really does matter.
Telling an advertiser how many people in the local community are going to see the ad.
So what newspapers have done is they've cast themselves as niche.
And they approach advertisers, niche advertisement.
I mean, media is so fragmented today.
Used to be three networks and PBS.
Now there's 200 plus or more.
It's a whole different advertising landscape.
And so a lot of it has become niche.
A lot of advertisers, a lot of TV networks will target a specific, very small audience and then try to sell advertisers in the fact that they're getting every eyeball in that audience.
It may only be 150,000, sci-fi network.
I don't know what the number is, has made it up.
But they're out there telling people, we're getting everybody who loves this, everybody watching here.
So if you want to reach a target-rich environment, disposable income, and then they price it accordingly, which makes it affordable.
So all kinds of ways around this, but you cannot discount and do not take out of the equation the fact that liberals are everywhere propping each other up.
Even advertising buyers.
We'll be back after this.
Yeah, you could say, you could say that Henry Ford invented global warming because Henry Ford made it possible to mass produce the automobile, which is the number one killer of the climate, right?
According to the convoluted view of the left.
Now, I got a couple emails about this advertising business.
I was running through that pretty quickly.
Let me just explain this cost per thousand thing because this is all inside baseball.
But people do wonder, like this guy said, well, if CNN didn't have any audience, how are they getting advertising?
The way it works, and do not, don't doubt me on this.
Liberals are everywhere and they fully understand what it takes to prop up the things they believe in.
They believe in CNN.
CNN is brave and courageous for soldiering on even though nobody watches.
They're sticking with the cause.
They're hammering Republicans.
They're promoting Obama.
They're paying a big price.
Nobody watches, but we need to keep them on the air.
Now, you can't go to the ABC widget company and say, I need a million dollars from you to buy a campaign on CNN.
The ABC widget guy is going to say, what?
I'm not throwing my money away.
Nobody's watching.
So what the media buyer will do will suggest a cost per thousand campaign, which is different from results-oriented.
Basically, when the commercial runs, there's no immediate evidence that it's resulting in higher sales.
Results-oriented does.
You know if it's working right then or not.
That's what we do here, in large part.
So what the media buyer will do in order to save CNN will take this million dollars theoretically and they'll spend some of it at CNN and some of it at MSNBC, and then they'll maybe buy some local show somewhere, and they'll just add up all the eyeballs.
And they'll tell the client with our brilliant buy, which includes CNN, which is highly prestigious to certain people, we got you on CNN.
We got you on MSNBC, and we're going to reach X number of people.
And with this million dollars, here's how many people will see your spot.
And the client says, cool.
He doesn't care where the eyeballs are as long as they are qualified eyeballs, people that might be interested in this product.
Now, some are more sophisticated and will probably say, look, I don't want you throwing my money away on CNN.
There's nobody watching it.
You might also have a manager who loves CNN and will not have a problem with some of his dollars going there.
It's, folks, it is really, it's easily done.
I got it.
I'm out of time here.
I wish I wasn't, but I am, I got it.
Okay, this is getting good.
Is it getting good with the White House and Doug Ilmendorf at the CBO on unemployment?
▲
Export Selection