From: tiverson@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Thor Iverson)
Subject: Re: Ratings & Rush (was Re:  What about Paul?)
Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:46:28 GMT

WARNING:  Not much Letterman content here--bail out now...

In article <1992Dec15.142011.7089@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams) writes:

> >>Limbaugh's ratings are about the same as Arsenio's but should decline
> >>now that the election is over.
>I doubt his tv show will last even as long as Morton Downey's.

His ratings are higher than Arsenio's.  By quite a bit, actually.

>I heard one claim that he had
>around 10 million radio listeners, BUT he is on "hundreds" of stations.
>Howard Stern gets a similar number of daily listeners these days, but HE 
>is only on TEN stations!!

Hmmm...I think you may want to discover the difference between "listeners"
and "reaches"--10 million people do not listen to Howard Stern daily, while
the Arbitrons for Rush's radio show are pretty well stabilized at those
numbers.

>I think that says something about just how
>"popular" your rush is.  BTW, the ONLY reason he is on all those stations
>is because they can carry him totally for FREE.

Totally untrue--if they had something that got higher Arbitrons, they
would replace Rush in an instant.

>Ha!  That jerk is no "watchdog".  

Might it be that you really don't have evidence supporting your "Rush is
nobody" claims, but merely want to vent some anger at his political views?
Nah, couldn't be...

>Exactly...  That is why he ultimately can't be very popular,
>(outside his core group of right-wing loonies that is :)

It's true that he is popular among right-wingers (loonies and all).
But they're an incredibly loyal group--much more so than even Letterman
fans.  And the number of people who identify themselves as "conservatives"
was, according to election night exit-polling (remember, this was during
the Clinton victory) well over 50%.  So there's your group of "loonies"...

>His "claims" are totally meaningless...  Besides, TS and NL are rated
>by a *totally* different system than syndicated shows.  I have also 
>NEVER seen that guy listed anywhere among the top-rated syndies.

You obviously read the wrong ratings lists.  And, while syndicated shows
and network programming are rated by different organizations, the numbers
are easily transferable--which is how one finds out that Dave is #1 among
college students but is occasionally #2 (behind Star Trek:  TNG) among
males in that group.

>That guy is so boring and narrow-minded, he even makes Morton Downey
>and Geraldo look interesting...

More objective comments about Rush's ratings vs. Dave's, right?

>No way!  He is absolutely the best and most popular "talk show" host.

Best?  Maybe.  I think so.  Most popular?  Well, up until Johnny retired,
that certainly wasn't true...

>Just about everyone in the industry would agree that Dave is by far the 
>most original and innovative one in the whole bunch.

"Just about everyone would agree that 'Stairway To Heaven' is the best
song ever..."
"Just about everyone would agree that Eddie Van Halen is the best
guitarist ever..."
"Just about everyone would agree that JFK was our greatest president..."

Don't you just hate it when people make assertions like this?  What's
your evidence?  Talked to a lot of industry types lately?  Look, I think
he _is_ the most original and innovative, but I certainly wouldn't say
"everyone" thinks so...

> >but I know far more people (even college-aged people) who can't stand him.
>Must be that awful "rush" crowd, eh?  :->

I would bet a large part of his audience have actually never heard of
Dave, or if they have, have never watched the show.  Why do you think
so few people go "Oh my God, I'm talking to David Letterman!!!" when
Dave calls/shows up on their doorstep?

>HA!  That is TOTALLY "laughable".  To even mention that nobody "rush" guy 
>in that same sentence with Dave is pure nonsense, and to say DAVE'S ratings 
>would be "lower" than that jerk is absoluteluy RIDICULOUS.  That guy is a
>big fat NOTHING compared to Dave...

More well-balanced commentary.  Switch "Dave" and "Rush" in that sentence,
and see how it sounds to you.

> >all three of the above appeal to a MUCH broader selection of 
> >people than Dave does.

>Are you KIDDING??  That ruch may be "broad", but compared to Dave he is a 
>ZERO.  Most people don't even know who he is!!  Dave "guest hosted" LONG
>before Jay, and unlike assenio he has had a successful show for TEN+ years.

Well, OK, _The 700 Club_, to take a relevant example, has been on far
longer than Dave.  So now Dave's a nothing compared to Pat Robertson,
right?

Look--I'm certainly no big fan of Rush Limbaugh's, but I find your little
tirade kinda silly.  Just say "I hate Rush Limbaugh" and be done with
it, don't drown us in faulty logic and irrational assertions.

Thor Iverson

P.S.  If you feel the need to flame me personally, wait until January
4th, as I will be off this system until then.  ;-)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.letterman